Uncle Davey wrote:
> news:892cb437.0402271151.6f4f0c9d@posting.google.com...
>
>>branchofjesse@hotmail.com (Jerzy Jakubowski) wrote in message
>
> news:<b9b3de8.0402270454.ef64794@posting.google.com>...
>
>>>It's jolly funny that we can find eight toothed hoatzins from 150
>>>million years ago and not find eight Australopithecines from 1.5
>>>million years ago.
>>>
>>>Uncle Davey
>>
>>Come off it Davey! You know that this is a load of bollocks!
>>Since when did hoatzins have long bony tails? Not to mention the whole
>>suite of other features Archaeopteryx shares with dinosaurs, as well
>>as the suite of features it shares with modern birds.
>>
>>You can't use as an argument "I don't know therefore it isn't true".
>>Learn something.
>>
>>RF
>>
>
>
> So is this fossil a bird or is it a reptile?
Archaeopteryx, Archy for short, is an archosaur. Archy is also a
dinosaur in particular a theropod. The question is, is Archy a bird?
That depends on the definition of bird you use, IMO Archy is a very
primitive bird.
>
> If hoatzins don't have bony tails now, then that's not a big issue. Within
> cats and dogs, tail length differs greatly.
Modern birds, neornithes, have greatly reduced the number of caudal
vertebrae and generally the remaining caudal vertebrae are fused into
the pygostyle. Archy and some of his close relatives retained long bony
tails but they are all extinct now.
>
> Kindly explain to me the evolution of the feather, and what the drivers were
> behind that evolution when skin flaps were fine for pteradactyls and still
> are for chiroptera, which handle flight better than many birds.
>
Feathers are modified reptilian scales. The original adaptive benefit of
feathers is unknown but was probably for either warmth or display.
There remains a great deal of debate over how flight appeared in Aves.
It could have been a result of a fast running/leaping lifestyle or it
could have been an adaptation to an arboreal lifestyle.
BTW pterosaurs is the correct term for the group of flying reptiles that
pterodactyl is one genus of.
Ken
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 |
| 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 |
| 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 |
| 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 | 140 | 141 | 142 | 143 | 144 | 145 | 146 | 147 | 148 | 149 |
| 150 | 151 | 152 | 153 | 154 | 155 | 156 | 157 | 158 | 159 | 160 | 161 | 162 | 163 | 164 | 165 | 166 | 167 | 168 | 169 | 170 | 171 | 172 | 173 | 174 | 175 | 176 | 177 | 178 | 179 |
| 180 | 181 |
|