Quote:
|
Originally Posted by notsofast
I have not even begun to research your claims here and am readily identifying gaps and reverse evolution and temporal discontinuity. Why do you solidly claim a "nice gradualistic change in character state" for these features? Here is just one contradiction from your post several days ago (after some research, other conflicts with regard to gradualism will be shown):
The lack of a robust, carinate sternum, ossified uncinate processes, a basal sternocostal morphology, the incipient nature of the acrocoracoid and acromion process, and lack of a triosseal canal system indicating that the supracoracoideus and pectoralis major were still fairly generalized comparative to Pygostylia, suggests that Archaeopteryx was not a skilled aerialist
|
Gaps? Reverse evolution? Temporal discontinuity?
What gaps? And moreover, I suggested one instance of character reversal, in the pectoral girdle of some Allosauroidea. Temporal discontinuity...that is even better...where?
As for your quote, yes, that refers to Archaeopteryx lithographica, and the fact that the most par-avian of Maniraptora had more derived pectoral architecture either underscores their phylogenetic affinities, or, argues for their being more derived than the urvogel, and neoflightless. You have not identified any internal inconsistency in my post, and your mere off-handed response will not adequately fill in for hard data. The simple fact of the matter is that Theropoda have furculae, and sterna, and in some, they are indeed as robust or more so, than those of Avialae proper. You have yet to demonsrate how they do not, or how there is not gradual morphologic change in these features leading to the avian condition.
Vindex Urvogel