rotten news relay - sci.bio.paleontology - Re: Maybe it is not a mammal

Subject: Re: Maybe it is not a mammal
From: John Harshman
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 15:31 UTC
References: 1 2 3

Path: eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!nyheter.lysator.liu.se!newsfeed.endofthelinebbs.com!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr3.iad1.usenetexpress.com!69.80.99.23.MISMATCH!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 15:31:29 +0000
Date: Mon, 15 Jan 2024 07:31:29 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Subject: Re: Maybe it is not a mammal
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
References: <unrtec$eaj$1@reader1.panix.com> <e29a305a-8aa1-49eb-b8e2-d63ec2d18f93@gmail.com> <unvli4$cq9$9@reader1.panix.com>
From: john.harshman@gmail.com (John Harshman)
In-Reply-To: <unvli4$cq9$9@reader1.panix.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <aOadnZ-4fJ9M0jj4nZ2dnZfqlJxj4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 23
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-P0KGJWI7gzhj855uXrriSOwulYj0VESLgbV/1Y+P20omLj1HzUFUMNwpSlLCtYEVO+Gc1USeXp8gFky!rsDpr4etTkp9Nb3c37MxVB45N5+mM9yLiyyxhqXN3lu9K+LzMDj8D2rSkM/KIxujIv9AA2lj
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40

View all headers

On 1/13/24 7:48 PM, Popping Mad wrote:
>>>
>> You can't draw that conclusion from the study you cite. If you want, you
>> could coin a term "reptile-like mammal", but that isn't any more use
>> than the now-deprecated "mammal-like reptile". I'm surprised the nature
>> article uses it at all.
>
>
> You know I am just armchair speculating, but the evidence shows that it
> has broken from all mainstream mammals maybe even before the Placental
> split? That is pretty amazing and puts the platapus into its own
> classification.

This is not a surprise. Monotremes are not placentals and never have
been considered placentals. They're not therians either. But they're
still mammals. Nothing in that study is surprising.

> It would be like a last surviving non-Avian therapod making it to the
> present?

No, it would be like paleognaths surviving to the present, while you
make the claim that only neognaths are really birds.

Subject	Author
Re: Maybe it is not a mammal	John Harshman

You are fighting for survival in your own sweet and gentle way.

sci / sci.bio.paleontology / Re: Maybe it is not a mammal