|
Post by richard on Apr 29, 2008 22:00:41 GMT
For a moment I misread the title of the thread - Chicken sex ;D so... why did you come?
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on May 2, 2008 22:01:26 GMT
Fluffy allosaurs and leaellynasaura ?
Questionable yes, but really no more so then scales.
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on May 2, 2008 23:12:16 GMT
Fluffy allosaurs and leaellynasaura ? Questionable yes, but really no more so then scales. The presence of 'fuzz' in ornithischians was considered a possibility after the discovery of a Psittacosaurus with filaments on the tail. free PDF! www.springerlink.com/content/d9lyhnnphxe6l57k/fulltext.pdfOh and the 'reasoning' for giving those species 'fuzz' is because they are 'polar' dinos. I'm using a lot of inverted commas recently! I should cut down!
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on May 2, 2008 23:17:51 GMT
...thus: and unfortunately:
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on May 4, 2008 15:02:20 GMT
I just looked back at the tree that piltdown was talking about, and not only does it make sense....if you really read into it, it could almost sound logical..... Think about evolution, and where groups split off....... First, crocodilians. We know they split off from other reptiles early on, and have very different biologic systems and bodies from other modern reptiles. In many ways modern crocodilians are more like what we believe "mammal like reptile" would have like. Crocodilians can maintain temps, and a higher metab under certian conditions, and are the only "reptile" with a "complex" brain. I would not be supprised that they share more in common at a base genetic level with a mammal, specifically a more basalar mammal like an opossum, then other modern reptiles. The currrent general consesnsus is that crocs are closer to birds/dinosaurs then any other living "reptile" Second, Lizards. It is though that lizards split off EARLY, and Iguanids, like the anole are a highly advanced modern group. This would appear to back that up. (I am not an evolutionary biologist, so, I could be wrong here) but I would expect lizards to be quite different in this regard then crocodilians, as I would expect them to be quite distinct from dinosauria and birds. All of this speculation makes me wonder where turtles lay on this list ? I would expect them to be closer to crocodilians, or, more probably, mammals, if anything. If dinosaurs, OR birds were closer in relation to lizards, I would expect them to lay somewhere nearby. Instead, they are lumped together, as, given our fossil findings, suggest. And finally, getting down to the chicken and the T.rex - Of course they would be neck and neck. EVEN IF you are one who think dinos share a distant relative with birds, you know, whatever became archeopteryx, then those are STILL, at least as we know it, the closest related things on that board. One think to remember about modern mammals when comparing them to species like "reptiles" (a clumped group of this and that, really) is that the alligators and the crocodiles are quite distinct creatures. They look similar and are often "clumped" I have heard it said that crocodiles and alligators share less in common with one anothers "direct" genetics then we share with a cow, mostly due to how long ago the 2 groups split off from each other. Granted, being that these are new ways to interpert data, I think one thing EVERYONE needs to keep in mind is that its all interpertation. RAW data, no matter what it comes from is just that. Learning to understand what it means is a whole other story..... Jumping to conclusions is what gave us the word "dinosaur" to begin with
|
|
|
Post by richard on May 5, 2008 3:32:03 GMT
...thus: and unfortunately: *vomits*
|
|