Figure: Major stages in the evolution of modern avian skeletal design and function. Many skeletal innovations of critical functional importance for flight arose for other purposes among early theropods, including (1) the hollowing of all long bones of the skeleton (Theropoda) and removal of pedal digit I from its role in weight support; (2) evolution of a rotary wrist joint to efficiently deploy a large grasping manus; (3) expansion of the coracoid and sternum for increased pectoral musculature and plumulaceous feathers for insulation; (4) the presence of vaned feathers arranged as primaries, secondaries, and rectrices for display or brooding or both; (5) shortening of the trunk and increased stiffness of the distal tail for balance and maneuverability. Archaeopteryx remains a pivotal taxon, documenting (6) the acquisition of basic flight and perching function before the close of the Jurassic (laterally facing shoulder joint, split propulsion-lift wing with asymmetric feathers, and reversed hallux). Key refinements of powered flight and perching in later birds include (7) the deep thorax with strut-shaped coracoid and pygostyle; (8) the triosseal canal for the tendon of the principal wing rotator (the supracoracoideus muscle), alular feathers for control of airflow at slow speeds, rectriceal fan for maneuverability and braking during landing, and fully opposable hallux for advanced perching; and (9) the elastic furcula and deep sternal keel for massive aerobic pectoral musculature. Ornithothoracine birds diverged early as Enantiornithes (“opposite birds”), which prevailed as the predominant avians during the Cretaceous, and Euornithes (“true birds”), which underwent an explosive radiation toward the close of the Cretaceous that gave rise to all living avians (Neornithes, or “new birds”).
In two of his most influential books, (Alfred Russell) Wallace discussed the evolutionary origin of birds. Based on the evidence available at that time, the ornithologist Wallace pointed out that extant birds may be the descendants of extinct dinosaurs, but he did not elaborate on this topic. This ‘‘dinobird-hypothesis’’ was proposed for the first time by the Victorian naturalist Thomas H. Huxley, who published several original papers on this topic. Today, it is widely accepted that birds, or ‘‘avian dinosaurs’’, descended from, and in fact are, theropods that survived the Cretaceous/Paleogene mass extinction event 65 million years ago. Small predatory dinosaurs are the evolutionary ancestors of extant members of the Aves, a class of homoeothermic vertebrates that comprises ca. 10,000 extant species. Like Wallace, Ernst Mayr was a remarkable ornithologist who discovered and described numerous species of birds. However, in his influential book "What Evolution Is", Mayr summarized evidence against Huxley’s ‘‘dinobird hypothesis’’ in its ‘‘evolved’’ version. In this article, we have shown that Mayr’s writings do not reflect the current understanding of bird origins, and conclude that these feathered vertebrates are in fact a group of highly modified theropods that evolved during the Mesozoic from small, feathered dinosaur ancestors.
Well, there's one theory about the cassowary - a large flightless bird native to Australia, which carries a large crest (known as a "casque") on its head is that it acts as a resonating chamber. Cassowaries have an extremely low frequency call, one that humans can only barely hear, so this helps amplify the sound. And if anyone has any doubt that birds have descended from dinosaurs, one look at the cassowary will definitely convince you!What do you suppose was the purpose of the enormous crest carried on the skull?
Why not?Illustrations of Tyrannosaurus' with feathers have no place in this world.
That's what they said when tyrannosaurus was depicted to be standing with it's body horizontal, rather than vertical.Illustrations of Tyrannosaurus' with feathers have no place in this world.
Oops...Illustrations of Tyrannosaurus' with feathers have no place in this world.
Why not?
Quite so, a bit like Putin in a tutu. Cute from a distance, but nasty up close.Because they look stupid.
Quite so, a bit like Putin in a tutu. Cute from a distance, but nasty up close.
Not sure if serious.I can accept dinosaurs being related to roosters, but I can't accept them looking like them.
Not sure if serious.
I can't change the fact of whether or not dinosaurs had feathers, but if they did, it kinda destroys the ravenous, reptilian, destructive image they have.
I think a 10 meter feathered beast with big ass teeth still classifies as scary as 🤬 in my book.
Try being attacked by a bird the size of a human. Scary stuff. And I could not run away because I had a crutch to walk with.
A crocodile is a dinosaur, pure and simple, exactly like it was millions of years ago. Right?Well yeah, but not in the same way as something that looks more like a crocodile.
The Cretaceous ended with a large mass extinction, the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event, in which many groups, including non-avian dinosaurs, pterosaurs and large marine reptiles, died out. The end of the Cretaceous is defined by the K–Pg boundary, a geologic signature associated with the mass extinction which lies between the Mesozoic and Cenozoic eras.I must admit, I don't quite get why birds aren't descended from pterosaurs.
So in a nutshell, all pterosaurs died out in the mass extinction event and there were only a few dinosaurs left, to become birds, right?
It was only avian dinosaurs that survived. i.e. Birds.
And what is the difference between a flying dinosaur and a pterosaur?
Of course, I'm not suggesting that pterosaurs are flying dinosaurs, in a layman's kind of way. I'm just genuinely unsure how they differ.
And what is the difference between a flying dinosaur and a pterosaur?
Of course, I'm not suggesting that pterosaurs are flying dinosaurs, in a layman's kind of way. I'm just genuinely unsure how they differ.