[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Microraptor also ate fish
> Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2013 21:57:31 -0700
> Tim Williams wrote-
> > > I never said Microraptor couldn't or didn't hunt, just that no food item
> > > in its stomach could ever
> > > support this over scavenging in any particular case. Thus no ingested
> > > food item could support
> > > a particular behavior for Microraptor, be it climbing or catching fish.
> > An ingested food item can corroborate an ecomorphogical hypothesis.
> > _Microraptor_ has been interpreted as a climbing animal. When an
> > arboreal bird turned up in its abdominal cavity, this discovery was
> > consistent with that interpretation. The discovery of fish remains is
> > consistent with _Microraptor_ hunting aquatic prey as well. I think
> > this interpretation is more parsimonious than scavenging, based on the
> > behavior of many modern predatory mammals and birds.
> Consistency does not equal corroboration when there is an alternative the
> evidence is equally consistent with.
> You would have to demonstrate hunting is more parsimonious in both cases, and
> that hunting arboreal birds in trees is more parsimonious than doing so on
> the ground in the first case. My cats have caught their share of arboreal
> birds (mostly juncos, robins and starlings) in my life, and every time I've
> seen it, the bird's been on the ground.
I've been to my share of aquariums which house mudskippers, and every time i
looked in, the fish were out of the water.
If you aren't willing to entertain the possibility that _Microraptor_ can pluck
fish from the surface of a body of water (or a puddle), then perhaps you would
be willing to entertain the possibility that _Microraptor_ is getting its fish
from the trees it glides to & fro from?