this theory of yours has been rejected after decades of study on pterosaurs
this theory of yours has been rejected after decades of study on pterosaurs
NON-IGS
that 'thumb' might look quite big compared to the feet, but it is tiny in comparison to its wings, it's more likely to damage that little 'thumb' having to carry big heavy wings like that around. you don't know that it was quadrapedal, that pic you showed could have been the foot and wing prints of an injured pterosaur that had to walk in that position, have you considered that?
trix u need to look more into the differences of homology and convergence
NON-IGS
this diagram actually says its a finger not a thumb lol. but either way that finger is obviously huge
NON-IGS
look at the key. it shows that the green bones are the fingers. and that finger is indeed massive
NON-IGS
it's more related to bats because of that little bone? not the absence of a beak or a long neck (many, many bones) but because of that one little bone? birds normally have three but that has four and it would make that much difference?
how do kangaroos factor in?
Bookmarks