Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Does evidence of transitional forms exist ? (Hominid and other)
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 295 of 301 (335407)
07-26-2006 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 293 by pop
07-26-2006 7:33 AM


Re: transitional forms
Interestingly what Martin, et al. specifically say is
Martin, et al., 1980 writes:
In the dentition, Archaeopteryx has unserrated teeth with constricted
bases and expanded roots like those of other Mesozoic birds. This latter, derived
feature is also shared by most fossil and recent crocodilians. The dental structure
provides additional support for Walker's (1972) hypothesis of a "sister group" rela-
tionship between birds and crocodiles, with both groups sharing a common pseu-
dosuchian origin.
From THE ORIGIN OF BIRDS: STRUCTURE OF THE TARSUS AND TEETH.
So while the teeth may not resemble theropod teeth they do resemble the dentition of other extant reptiles, the fact that the avian dentition is derived hardly refutes the other theropod like features of Archaeopteryx. So is your objection specifically to grouping Archaeopteryx with theropods?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 293 by pop, posted 07-26-2006 7:33 AM pop has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 297 by pop, posted 07-26-2006 10:12 AM Wounded King has replied

Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 298 of 301 (335424)
07-26-2006 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 297 by pop
07-26-2006 10:12 AM


Re: transitional forms
There were no crocodiles with crocodilian teeth when archeopteryx was extant? Seriously? Care to provide any evidence of that quite substantial claim?
Be that as it may though the fact that a bird like transitional has feature like a bird and not like a reptile does not make it less transitional if it still has distinctly reptilian features.
The fact that avians have a derived form of dentition distinct from the theropods just means that dentition is not one of the reptilian features archaeopteryx displays.
Any way in the same time of the archaeopteryx there was living a bird called confuciusornis it has no teeth at all and modern birds anatomy.
This is totally irrelevant unless you are using a twisted concept of transitionals, which seems to be looking like the case. No one is claiming that all moderns birds are descended from archaeopteryx so why should a contemporaneous bird with modern anatomy be considered detrimental to Archaeopteryx's position as a transitional?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by pop, posted 07-26-2006 10:12 AM pop has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by pop, posted 07-26-2006 11:25 AM Wounded King has replied

Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 300 of 301 (335445)
07-26-2006 11:44 AM
Reply to: Message 299 by pop
07-26-2006 11:25 AM


Re: transitional forms
SO THE IDEA OF THE IDEA THAT THE ARCHAEOPTERYX IS THEPRIMITIVE ANCESTOR OF BIRDS IS WRONG.
Just as well that idea has no relevance to its status as a transitional fossil then.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by pop, posted 07-26-2006 11:25 AM pop has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024