Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Beautiful" Squirrel-Tail Dinosaur Fossil Upends Feather Theory
National Geographic ^ | 7-2-2012 | Christine Dell'Amore

Posted on 07/03/2012 4:40:01 AM PDT by Renfield

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

"Probably all dinosaurs were feathered," scientist concludes.

Photograph courtesy H. Tischlinger, Jura Museum Eichstätt

1 posted on 07/03/2012 4:40:16 AM PDT by Renfield
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

Ping


2 posted on 07/03/2012 4:41:09 AM PDT by Renfield (Turning apples into venison since 1999!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: shibumi

“The hatchling had a large skull, short hind limbs, and long, hairlike plumage on its midsection, back, and tail....”

Norwegian Blue ping.

[I’ve been pining for the Fnords]


3 posted on 07/03/2012 4:47:58 AM PDT by Salamander (I wanna hurt you just to hear you screaming my name.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salamander

Beautiful plumage!


4 posted on 07/03/2012 4:51:30 AM PDT by 6SJ7 (Meh.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 6SJ7

If he weren’t embedded in that rock, why, he’d just fly away.

Fwooooooooooom!


5 posted on 07/03/2012 4:54:50 AM PDT by Salamander (I wanna hurt you just to hear you screaming my name.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Salamander

I want to see Jurassic Park with feathered dinosaurs.

:-)


6 posted on 07/03/2012 5:05:35 AM PDT by Marie ("The last time Democrats gloated this hard after a health care victory, they lost 60 House seats.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Marie

And Unicorns!!!

[well, *something* had to have eaten them all]

;D


7 posted on 07/03/2012 5:10:42 AM PDT by Salamander (I wanna hurt you just to hear you screaming my name.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Marie
I want to see Jurassic Park with feathered dinosaurs.

That's the sad thing about the Jurassic Park trilogy ...there will come a time when it will be horribly dated, both in terms of the CGI used as well as the information given. On the CGI - there are some movies that I marveled at when I was a kid, and grimaced when I watched them again as an adult. On the information - we saw gray T-Rexs and Velociraptors, when apparently they were feathered and multi-colored.

8 posted on 07/03/2012 5:17:19 AM PDT by spetznaz (Nuclear-tipped Ballistic Missiles: The Ultimate Phallic Symbol)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

Somebody please post the saber toothed squirrel from Ice Age.


9 posted on 07/03/2012 5:19:51 AM PDT by Mercat (Necessity is the argument of tyrants. John Milton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

How many times are these people going to be completely wrong before it becomes evident that they don’t know what they are talking about?


10 posted on 07/03/2012 5:20:03 AM PDT by Shadowfax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spetznaz

I don’t know why people assume they were brightly colored. Most birds are shades of white, grey, brown and black. They need to be camouflaged, too. I have a roadrunner who hangs out in the back yard every morning. He’s black, brown and white.

If he weren’t, it’d be much more difficult for him to hunt.

We notice the cardinal because it’s so noticeable. We make a note of it because it’s unusual.

Show me an owl or an eagle with red and blue feathers.

Some may have been, but I can’t see it being the norm.


11 posted on 07/03/2012 5:27:43 AM PDT by Marie ("The last time Democrats gloated this hard after a health care victory, they lost 60 House seats.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

12 posted on 07/03/2012 5:29:44 AM PDT by Renfield (Turning apples into venison since 1999!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Shadowfax

How many times will someone on FR equate formulation of new theories based on more recent evidence as being “completely wrong”?


13 posted on 07/03/2012 5:36:50 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Renfield; ApplegateRanch; StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; decimon; 1010RD; 21twelve; ...

 GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach
Thanks Renfield. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.


14 posted on 07/03/2012 5:36:56 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Renfield

It makes me wonder about Quetzalcoatl, the Aztec “feathered serpent” god.


15 posted on 07/03/2012 5:37:27 AM PDT by PapaBear3625 (If I can't be persuasive, I at least hope to be fun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
How many times will someone on FR equate formulation of new theories based on more recent evidence as being “completely wrong”?

It's a reaction to the "We now know" phenomenon. By that I mean the media's habit of saying "It was once believed that [X]. However, we now know [Y]." The truth is, everything we once believed was at that time something that, at the time, we now 'knew.' In other words, that thing we now 'know' isn't something we really know... it's just an updated best guess.

16 posted on 07/03/2012 5:43:28 AM PDT by Oberon (Big Brutha Be Watchin'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

If you have a “new theory” that is consistently contradicted by new and existing evidence, it’s not much of a theory.

I’d qualify it as a fantasy.


17 posted on 07/03/2012 5:45:37 AM PDT by Shadowfax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

“Norweigian Blue”


18 posted on 07/03/2012 5:47:00 AM PDT by Tallguy (It's all 'Fun and Games' until somebody loses an eye!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv
How many times will someone on FR equate formulation of new theories based on more recent evidence as being “completely wrong”?

It's a reaction to the "We now know" phenomenon. By that I mean the media's habit of saying "It was once believed that [X]. However, we now know [Y]." The truth is, everything we once believed was at that time something that, at the time, we now 'knew.' In other words, that thing we now 'know' isn't something we really know... it's just an updated best guess.

19 posted on 07/03/2012 5:48:33 AM PDT by Oberon (Big Brutha Be Watchin'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Renfield

If it’s a young dinosaur, and they have feathers, wouldn’t this be like the downy fuzz you find on chicks?


20 posted on 07/03/2012 5:48:37 AM PDT by Thorliveshere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-67 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson