Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

myccrider

(484 posts)
18. Birds definitely existed before the asteroid hit,
Tue May 3, 2022, 05:04 PM
May 2022

with the same basic features that we recognize as ‘birds’ today, eg feathers, beaks instead of teeth, loss of tails, wishbones, powered flight, loss of ‘fingers’ on the end of wings, etc. There’s vigorous debate among paleontologists and evolutionary biologists about exactly where to draw the (artificial) line between flying/gliding dinosaurs and fully avian dinosaurs. All extant pre-asteroid. The only branch that survived the strike and its aftermath were the neothornithes (iirc), who already were pretty much what we call birds today, just different species. (wish there were an "I’m being pedantic" smilie, maybe the ‘teacher’ covers that. )

I’m not trying to be quibbly, this is just an area of interest to me. And, yes, there have been further evolutionary changes (penguins! hummingbirds! maybe flightless birds, raptors?).

Here’s an overview paper, if you’re interested. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982215009458

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

And If you could see the building boom montanacowboy May 2022 #1
We have only inhabited this planet for a short time. MineralMan May 2022 #4
I agree with the sentiment but... myccrider May 2022 #15
Now, though, they are definitely birds. MineralMan May 2022 #16
Birds definitely existed before the asteroid hit, myccrider May 2022 #18
At least give Malthus credit for the theory. hedda_foil May 2022 #2
Yes. Reading Malthus was part of the reason I decided not to MineralMan May 2022 #5
I am so with you on this brother ... a highly trenchant analysis ... Hugh_Lebowski May 2022 #3
Yup. I started thinking in the early 60s. MineralMan May 2022 #6
Yes. We will not decide to eliminate ourselves. MineralMan May 2022 #7
I think the realization that petroleum and natural gas are running out, globally Hugh_Lebowski May 2022 #9
Well, I'm 76 years old, almost 77. MineralMan May 2022 #14
I have a hard time imagining what a different economic system would look like. CrispyQ May 2022 #22
Modern climate change is certainly to be blamed on human activity EX500rider May 2022 #8
Do you have a citation for this? Hugh_Lebowski May 2022 #10
Several theories on how EX500rider May 2022 #11
Our disagreement here hinges on the definition of the term 'sea levels' Hugh_Lebowski May 2022 #12
I attended a small public school in Texas in the 1970's hamsterjill May 2022 #13
In some cases it's a status thing too, that you can afford to have so many children. -nt CrispyQ May 2022 #23
This is a problem that will correct itself Dukkha May 2022 #17
Lifestyles are a big part of it too. hunter May 2022 #19
+1 llmart May 2022 #21
If a pandemic, and asteroid, or WWIII doesn't do it, climate change will. marie999 May 2022 #20
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Global Climate Change Is ...»Reply #18