Message from @Σ5
Discord ID: 494096440704892929
I've got a zoology degree from NZ so I know my native species quite well
tuatara scull
clearly a diapsid
(diapsid means it has 2 temporal holes on each side)
Yes
I know
komoto dragon
it lost the bottom bridge of the bottom apsid
Yeah I know, this change was also present in transition species from lizard to mammals
true
As well as a change in gait
And tooth changes
turtles are strictly anapsids but they evolved from diapsids
the 2 apsids closed
in the fossil records of turtles we see signs of one of the apsids
But you can't use a single retained feature to classify the species as being one thing or the other
You can use them to trace origins
wich is the point i made
You said birds are reptiles, that's not true. Birds are birds, birds evolved from dinos, but they are birds.
yes
they are also reptiles
They are reptiles in the same way we are
false
not in phylogenic clasifification
it was a few more branches earlier where you get mamals and a goup that has reptiles
Read the whole thing
"while the Linnaean system is more useful for understanding how animals live."
im guessing your going to point to that
yes i agree
in ways
but that was never my point
it literaly says what i was saying
It also says what I was saying
false
well yes