[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Dinosaur Revolution Review
wasn't there a paper recently that showed how feathers of pigeons
(which clearly cover all the body, although they originate only on
parts of the skin, the pterylae) turn into an apparent feather-crest
when a bird carcass is flattened by sediment compression?
if fully feathered animals like pigeons show up "nearly naked" as
neo-fossil, I believe we should be very cautious claiming some
archosaur or other was NOT covered in thin filaments.
On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Neil Taylor <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> On 15/09/2011 01:49, Thomas R. Holtz, Jr. wrote:
>> On Wed, September 14, 2011 6:14 pm, Jura wrote:
>>> Not to get this thing started again, but do keep in mind that the
>>> of dinosaur skin impressions show that they were scaly. Filamentous
>>> integument is the exception, not the rule.
>> Let us keep in mind that what the data shows is that big sections of the
>> majority of dinosaur skin was scaly. But that they also show that when you
>> have relatively complete coverage of the individual (Psittacosaurus,
>> Juravenator, more to come soon) you get bodies which are mostly scaly but
>> with isolated patches/lines of filamentous integument.
> doesn't it actually show that big sections of dinosaur corpses were
> eventually buried and fossilized without feathers.
> I recall a number of experiments involving rolling corpses around showing
> that integument (hair/feathers) is easily stripped before final burial -
> plus, not all sediments are fine enough to record filaments, even if able
> to show scale imprints.
> Neil Taylor "Creo Imaginem Mente"