[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Caudipteryx suffered from osteoarthritis

On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 7:59 AM, Robert Schenck <schenck.rob@gmail.com> wrote:
> Right, which is pretty much beyond 'old fashioned' and down-right
> anti-biological. I've gotten the impression that many ornithologists,
> even if they accept the evolutionary relationship between dinosaurs
> and birds, will still never give it up that Birds are Dinosaurs.  Its
> not the craziest thing in some ways, sort like saying 'Humans
> descended from amphibians, but Human's are not Amphibians (HANA)' ( of
> course amphibian has a loose meaning, while dinosaur has a strict
> one).

Not the best example, since, when converted to a clade, "Amphibia" is
restricted to the lissamphibian total group or the lissamphibian crown
group (depending on the author). It isn't ever used as a synonym for
"Tetrapoda" (or "Apo-Tetrapoda"). Your general point holds, though --
there's a lot of resistance to phylogenetic nomenclature.

T. Michael Keesey