• early dog

    From erik simpson@eastside.erik@gmail.com to sci.bio.paleontology on Tue Dec 17 11:06:13 2024
    From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-54425-5

    The earliest dog relative found so for; a gorgonopsian ~270 Mya.
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From John Harshman@john.harshman@gmail.com to sci.bio.paleontology on Tue Dec 17 11:28:05 2024
    From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

    On 12/17/24 11:06 AM, erik simpson wrote:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-54425-5

    The earliest dog relative found so for; a gorgonopsian ~270 Mya.

    I can think of much earlier dog relatives. Isn't any fossil whatsoever a
    dog relative? Unless you're a fan of separate creation? There are even synapsids of much earlier date.
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From erik simpson@eastside.erik@gmail.com to sci.bio.paleontology on Tue Dec 17 14:11:11 2024
    From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

    On 12/17/24 11:28 AM, John Harshman wrote:
    On 12/17/24 11:06 AM, erik simpson wrote:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-54425-5

    The earliest dog relative found so for; a gorgonopsian ~270 Mya.

    I can think of much earlier dog relatives. Isn't any fossil whatsoever a
    dog relative? Unless you're a fan of separate creation? There are even synapsids of much earlier date.
    Sure, but this once looks more like a dog. (See some of the popular
    press pictures.)
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From x@x@x.org to sci.bio.paleontology on Mon Jan 27 02:25:52 2025
    From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

    On 12/17/24 11:06, erik simpson wrote:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-54425-5

    The earliest dog relative found so for; a gorgonopsian ~270 Mya.

    Isn't the word 'relative' unclear?

    Kind of like 'kind', 'species', or 'hybrid'?

    I am thinking that wolves, coyotes, and jackals can
    all cross and produce viable offspring, but foxes
    can not?

    Then there is some of the South American canids
    that are closer than foxes but more distant than
    say wolves from coyotes and jackals?

    What kind of kind is 'kind'?

    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From erik simpson@eastside.erik@gmail.com to sci.bio.paleontology on Mon Jan 27 20:46:23 2025
    From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

    On 1/27/25 2:25 AM, x wrote:
    On 12/17/24 11:06, erik simpson wrote:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-54425-5

    The earliest dog relative found so for; a gorgonopsian ~270 Mya.

    Isn't the word 'relative' unclear?

    Kind of like 'kind', 'species', or 'hybrid'?

    I am thinking that wolves, coyotes, and jackals can
    all cross and produce viable offspring, but foxes
    can not?

    Then there is some of the South American canids
    that are closer than foxes but more distant than
    say wolves from coyotes and jackals?

    What kind of kind is 'kind'?

    In this context, I was talking about a pretty silly time-travel TV
    serial of some time back. I mentioned it once in a episode that
    featured a gorgonopsian coming to the present through some sort of time portal. Some on else mentioned that one of the characters in the
    serialhad a pet therapsid. Therapsidae is a clade of paleozoic
    "mammals", containing among other things gorgonopsians which were the
    apex predators of the time. "Mammals" isn't a good fit for any of these animals, as they were remove from true mammals by hundreds of millions
    of years. Synapsid is a better term. I don't recall which of the many therapsids was the pet. For that matter we and all living mammals are
    also therapsids.
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From x@x@x.org to sci.bio.paleontology on Tue Jan 28 14:38:33 2025
    From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

    On 1/27/25 20:46, erik simpson wrote:
    On 1/27/25 2:25 AM, x wrote:
    On 12/17/24 11:06, erik simpson wrote:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-54425-5

    The earliest dog relative found so for; a gorgonopsian ~270 Mya.

    Isn't the word 'relative' unclear?

    Kind of like 'kind', 'species', or 'hybrid'?

    I am thinking that wolves, coyotes, and jackals can
    all cross and produce viable offspring, but foxes
    can not?

    Then there is some of the South American canids
    that are closer than foxes but more distant than
    say wolves from coyotes and jackals?

    What kind of kind is 'kind'?

    In this context, I was talking about a pretty silly time-travel TV
    serial of some time back.-a I mentioned it once in a episode that
    featured a gorgonopsian coming to the present through some sort of time portal.-a Some on else mentioned that one of the characters in the
    serialhad a pet therapsid.-a Therapsidae is a clade of paleozoic
    "mammals", containing among other things gorgonopsians which were the
    apex predators of the time.-a "Mammals" isn't a good fit for any of these animals, as they were remove from true mammals by hundreds of millions
    of years.-a Synapsid is a better term.-a I don't recall which of the many therapsids was the pet.-a For that matter we and all living mammals are
    also therapsids.

    Stragely enough, I near midnight just a few days ago looked up
    'George Herbert Walker' (1875-1953) on Wikipedia to try to make
    sense of some names a few years back,

    Then I noticed, 'Herbert George' is 'George Herbert' with the
    two names reversed.

    With that you might get 'H G Wells' the author of 'The Time
    Machine', 'The Sleeper Awakes', and 'The Man who could Work Miracles'.
    I am thinking you can still see that 1937 movie on Youtube.


    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2
  • From Ruben Safir@mrbrklyn@panix.com to sci.bio.paleontology on Mon May 26 00:15:50 2025
    From Newsgroup: sci.bio.paleontology

    erik simpson <eastside.erik@gmail.com> wrote:
    On 1/27/25 2:25 AM, x wrote:
    On 12/17/24 11:06, erik simpson wrote:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-024-54425-5

    The earliest dog relative found so for; a gorgonopsian ~270 Mya.

    Isn't the word 'relative' unclear?

    Kind of like 'kind', 'species', or 'hybrid'?

    I am thinking that wolves, coyotes, and jackals can
    all cross and produce viable offspring, but foxes
    can not?

    Then there is some of the South American canids
    that are closer than foxes but more distant than
    say wolves from coyotes and jackals?

    What kind of kind is 'kind'?

    In this context, I was talking about a pretty silly time-travel TV
    serial of some time back. I mentioned it once in a episode that
    featured a gorgonopsian coming to the present through some sort of time portal. Some on else mentioned that one of the characters in the
    serialhad a pet therapsid. Therapsidae is a clade of paleozoic
    "mammals", containing among other things gorgonopsians which were the
    apex predators of the time. "Mammals" isn't a good fit for any of these animals, as they were remove from true mammals by hundreds of millions
    of years. Synapsid is a better term. I don't recall which of the many therapsids was the pet. For that matter we and all living mammals are
    also therapsids.


    The Dark Lord of Acropolys? Jack Kirby was ahead of the curve
    --- Synchronet 3.21d-Linux NewsLink 1.2