|
11-14 of 14 messages
|
Previous
Page 2 of 2
|
|
RE: Update on MI, Burton ban, cold blooded reptile
|
Reply
|
|
by earthguy on May 8, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I'm going to wax philisophic/scientific here for just a second. A true clade includes everything that decended from a common ancestor. Therefor birds and mammals are both TECHNICALLY in the reptile clade. Consider this if you will: crocodilians are more closely related to birds than they are to lizards. So I guess the answer is yes...there are warm blooded reptiles. Unless, of course, you are talking about the pseudoclade Reptilia. Ah...who cares? Did we really think that our politians had a clue anyway?
|
| |
|
RE: Update on MI, Burton ban, cold blooded reptile
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on May 8, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Funny, somebody just wrote their rant on the very subject we are discussing here, talk about coincidence:)
Z
==
http://media.www.anchorweb.org/media/storage/paper1224/news/2008/04/22/Opinions/The-BirdReptile.Connection-3341250.shtml
The Bird-Reptile Connection
By: Adam D. Bram, Anchor Staff
Issue date: 4/22/08 Section: Opinions
•
• Page 1 of 1
I've been hearing rumors and whisperings that the scientific community is considering reclassifying birds as reptiles. I haven't found any official documentation on this subject so I don't know how true this is. However, if there is any validity to these rumors, it will be the most ridiculous idea since the demotion of Pluto.
From what I've been told, the idea comes from the striking genetic similarity between birds and reptiles, compounded by new discoveries regarding their missing link, the dinosaurs. Change some genes around in a chicken embryo, and it'll grow reptilian scales, claws, and teeth.
Here is a newsflash: If you regard the theory of evolution as true, (and if you work in biology, you probably should at least assume that it is,) then of course birds came from reptiles, as did mammals. Reptiles came from amphibians, which in turn came from fish. So saying that a bird is a flying reptile is the same as saying a human being is a land-fish. Of course there will be similarities, perhaps moreso between the other vertebrates than us because mammals broke off from the reptiles earlier than birds did, but it's still a different classification.
Reptiles, by definition, are cold-blooded. Birds are warm-blooded, so by that alone they deserve a different classification. They also grow feathers, which no other official classification does. Sure, their feet are still scaled, but the scale structure is different than most reptiles.
Now, I say "official" classification because here is one thing that I've always maintained which does need changing. Dinosaurs, having evolved from reptiles and into birds, were truly unlike anything before or since. Most were warm-blooded, and even those that weren't did not have reptilian physiology. Specifically, their legs were straight underneath their bodies as opposed to a reptile/amphibian's sideways sprawl. Some of them even had feathers. For the longest time, they were classified as reptiles. But that just doesn't seem correct based on what we know about them. Were they birds then? No, still not quite right. Instead of lumping birds and dinosaurs under the blanket of "Reptile," they should each have their own classification.
The taxonomy of "Dinosauria" should be as separate to "Reptilia" as "Mammalia," "Amphibia," "Pisces (fish)," and yes, "Aves (birds)." Sure, they are quite similar to reptiles and birds, but they have too much of both to be one or the other. Any prominent member of the scientific community thinking of reclassifying birds as reptiles should consider this alternative: just make dinosaurs independent.
Adam D. Bram is a theatre major and a staff writer/cartoonist at the Anchor. He has been a dinosaur nut since the age of 3 and urges anyone who doubts evolution to look at a velociraptor skeleton next to that of a hawk. The first PG-13 rated movie he saw in theatres was "Jurassic Park."
|
| |
|
RE: Update on MI, Burton ban, cold blooded reptile
|
Reply
|
|
by tigers9 on May 8, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
And here is a photo proof dinosaurs were warm blooded
http://www.rexano.org//ReptilePages/hot_dinosaur.htm
Z
|
| |
|
RE: Update on MI, Burton ban, cold blooded reptile
|
Reply
|
|
by Chance on May 9, 2008
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hah, excellent proof there Z. And that article is pretty timely. However, his logic isn't very sound. He's arguing that if we group Aves and Reptilia together, we might as well group Mammalia and Reptilia together with the fishes as well since, if you go back far enough, we're all related. Although that is true, he's really stretching the logic.
Considering the modern science of taxonomy - what then would be the point of distinguishing boas from pythons from elapids from viperids from colubrids, etc etc etc? They're all just snakes right? Well, the reason we do is to try to make evolutionary lineages clear. Grouping Aves and Reptilia under the same lineage doesn't diminish either clade, and in my humble opinion makes them even more remarkable. That one lineage could branch off and differentiate into animals ranging from blind snakes and Komodo dragons to ostriches and hummingbirds is phenomenal to consider.
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to this topic.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Check our help page for help using
, or send questions, comments, or suggestions to the
Manager.
|
