Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
Biology
BiologyBotanyMicrobiologyEntomologyEvolutionPaleontology
Chemistry
General ChemistryAnalytical ChemistryElectrochemistryOrganic Synthesis
Earth Science
GeologyMineralogyOceanographyMeteorologyEarthquakes
Physics
General PhysicsResearchRelativityParticle PhysicsElectromagnetismFusionOpticsAcousticsNew Theories

Natural Science Forum / Biology / Paleontology / December 2005



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

New Archaeopteryx fossil

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
pbowles@aol.com - 04 Dec 2005 08:53 GMT
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8408

I'm surprised not to have seen any mention of this yet - reading the
article my impression is that the animal does indeed sound very similar
to Rahonavis. The importance of this discovery seems to be that
Archaeopteryx might be better described as simply an early feathered
dromoaeosaur rather than a bird.

Philip Bowles
John Harshman - 04 Dec 2005 15:39 GMT
> http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8408
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Archaeopteryx might be better described as simply an early feathered
> dromoaeosaur rather than a bird.

What's the difference? "Bird" isn't a technical term. As an informal
term, it usually means a flying theropod, and Archaeopteryx clearly
could fly. It's also not a dromaeosaur but either avialan or avian,
depending on which definition you like. The new specimen shows the genus
to be primitive in a few ways we were not previously sure of, but none
of this changes its phylogenetic position.
deowll - 07 Dec 2005 01:27 GMT
>> http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8408
>>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> to be primitive in a few ways we were not previously sure of, but none
> of this changes its phylogenetic position.

If it has feathers and uses them to fly...
John Harshman - 07 Dec 2005 04:56 GMT
>>>http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8408
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> If it has feathers and uses them to fly...

If that's the criterion, Archaeopteryx is a bird regardless of where its
hallux is. Some dromaeosaurs may be birds too, depending on just what
you mean by "fly". Then again, ostriches aren't birds.
deowll - 10 Dec 2005 05:20 GMT
>>>>http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8408
>>>>
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> hallux is. Some dromaeosaurs may be birds too, depending on just what
> you mean by "fly". Then again, ostriches aren't birds.

But grandpa could.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.