"Astoundingly huge" dinosaur skeleton unearthed in Argentina

CBS News ^ | September 4, 2014 | Agata Blaszczak-Boxe

[EveningStar]

Scientists have unearthed the skeleton of a previously unknown, massive dinosaur species that may be the largest land animal ever found.

The specimen named Dreadnoughtus schrani is exceptionally complete, with about 70 percent of its bones recovered. Scientists believe the creature, which lived about 77 million years ago, measured 85 feet (26 meters) long and weighed about 65 tons, heavier than a Boeing 737.

[SunkenCiv]

There didn’t need to be any more CO2 then than now to support dinos’ food supply. The problem is, dinos need a lot of oxygen to support respiration — when the Chicxulub impact happened, oxygen levels fell, the food supply vanished, and the surface of the Earth lost sunlight for years, probably decades.

[Mastador1]

You know sometimes you’re no fun

[SunkenCiv]

Yeah, I’m a downer. :’)

[eartrumpet]

I guess mega is Latin for medium now.

[The Cajun]

If you read what I said, I was saying that we/I was taught way back (1960s) a bunch of "stuff", in the sciences, that has proved to be wrong or partially wrong.
That, I think, is kind of normal as knowledge progresses.

Just look what has been learned about T-Rex compared to what was thought and taught about it 50 years ago.
There are still debates as to if it was the apex predator or a scavenger or a combination of both and how fast it could really run and if the thing had feathers.

That being said, I like anomalies or the prospect of an anomaly that buck current scientific orthodoxy.
Most of the time an adequate explanation is given or "cobbled together" that will suffice and satisfy questions............But sometimes not :)

[Windflier]

I was taught way back (1960s) a bunch of "stuff", in the sciences, that has proved to be wrong or partially wrong. That, I think, is kind of normal as knowledge progresses.

Absolutely true. If it weren't for humans who dare to question 'settled science', all technological advancement would come to a halt.

Much of what the world accepts as the final and definitive answer on a given subject, is merely our best understanding of the thing at this moment in time. That understanding is always open for improvement, as new and better data are observed, collected, and analyzed.

There was a time (in the not too distant past) that heavier than air flight was thought to be impossible by the majority of scientists and engineers. It took a couple of doggedly determined 'heretic' brothers to prove that it is indeed possible.

Countless other examples of debunked sacred cows exist.

The point is, our understanding of the physical universe and what makes it tick, is always expanding and being refined. Theories long held as true, have fallen in the past, and they'll continue to do so into the distant future. We shouldn't be surprised to see it happening in our own time.

[Windflier]

Heresy in the sciences is a good thing

Not just a good thing, but it's an absolutely essential component of expanding our understanding of the universe.

[GeronL]

They might have lived in shallow marshes like hippo’s right?

[Windflier]

...what you're talking here is not "science heresy", it's not science period, it's make-believe fantasy.

Not really. We're merely asking a legitimate question --- how could animals so large exist on the surface of a planet with Earth's level of gravity?

Apparently, just asking the question provokes chuckles and accusations of believing in fantasy. Obviously, it's because "the science is settled", so anyone questioning the consensus is either uninformed, uneducated, or unintelligent. That's the sort of rigid, dogmatic mindset, that has allowed the global warming hoax to go on for as long as it has.

I'm not even saying that the answer to that question hasn't been found. What I'm saying is, that, advancement in our understanding of the natural world ceases when the door is slammed shut on inquiry and exploration.

I personally think that's a door that needs to be removed from its hinges and thrown on the junk pile.

[BroJoeK]

The Cajun: "I like anomalies or the prospect of an anomaly that buck current scientific orthodoxy."

Of course, that's precisely where serious scientists can make their reputations: by falsifying past orthodoxy and confirming new hypotheses -- scientifically.

But everybody who can write a book, or post on the internet is not necessarily a serious scientist.
And scientific theories which have been confirmed by innumerable tests, are not going to be overthrown just because somebody, somewhere, somehow reports an alleged anomaly.
It takes more than that -- a lot more.

In this particular example, of super-sized sauropods, we are dealing with 50 year old understandings about largest size limits -- which have since been challenged by new fossil evidence.
Does that mean everything we thought we knew about geological history is wrong, or is it just a misunderstanding about how large land-critters can get under ideal conditions?

I would spend a lot more time studying what we do know, before pronouncing judgment on what we don't.

[BroJoeK]

Windflier: "We're merely asking a legitimate question --- how could animals so large exist on the surface of a planet with Earth's level of gravity? "

Anybody can ask dumb-*ssed questions, and there are tons of questions which no scientist can answer with confidence.
Indeed there are questions which have no scientific answer, and just because you've stumbled on some of those, doesn't make you some kind of genius.

What would, would be careful study of the subject, research into all the relevant scientific literature, independent experiments with published results in peer-reviewed articles.

Never fear, much of this is already done, and is reported in the second book of post #33 above.
That would be a place to begin your education.

[Windflier]

Anybody can ask dumb-*ssed questions, and there are tons of questions which no scientist can answer with confidence. Indeed there are questions which have no scientific answer, and just because you've stumbled on some of those, doesn't make you some kind of genius.

So what are you saying -- that the riddle of how gigantic sauropod dinosaurs could exist on Earth (as we know it), has been solved with absolute certainty?

That IS the question we're asking here. How 'bout you set the professorial tone aside, and just tell us what you think.

[The Cajun]

I would spend a lot more time studying what we do know, before pronouncing judgment on what we don't.

Kind of a weird statement there Ace.
Of course study what we know, but what does "pronounces judgment of what we don't know" mean?
Can't we theorize and speculate about what we don't know, what lies beyond our knowledge or should we just stop, stick out our chest out and say, *that's all that needs to be known about a particular subject, nothing new need be added*.

As Windflier said about those two crackpots, the Wright brothers and I might add, Einstein, Galileo Galilei, Columbus and a host of others who went against the orthodoxy of their time.
I think the recently deceased Halton Arp belongs in that category also.
All *different* ideas and viewpoints are not all crackpottery, most may be and will be proven as such, but a few make the grade of advancing knowledge.

Loosen up Ace, you're wound up too tight, plus you seem rather *thick* in understanding what we are really saying.

I'm no expert on paleontology, just interested in the subject, don't think you're an expert either from reading the two little books you keep harping about.

[eartrumpet]

They might have lived in shallow marshes like hippo’s right?

Looking at the roughly scale picture in post 33, they have about the same amount of footprint on the ground as the 737 jet, plus the one more foot. Also have roughly the same clearance. A jet runway is very thick concrete to support the weight. Run a jet into a marshy area and the wheels sink and the belly rests on the surface, then suction holds it there.

I would think they lived on dry hard ground with no heavy rains to make mud, or deep water where they could wade and float a bit.

[SunkenCiv]

I did.

[BroJoeK]

“So what you’re saying...the riddle...has been solved with absolute certainty?”

I’m saying you could answer your own questions if you’d bother to crack a book and do some homework.
Instead, you want to sit in the back of the class and shoot spit-balls at the teacher.

Time for you to straighten up and fly right, or you’ll fail science, pal.

[BroJoeK]

“Can’t we theorize and speculate about what we don’t know...?”

Sure, speculate all you wish, nothing wrong with that.
But in this particular case, your uninformed speculations could be hugely improved if you bother to crack a book or two and study their lessons.
There you would discover which questions have been already answered, which are being worked on, and which can have no answers.

“...don’t think you’re an expert either from reading those two little books you keep harping about”.

I have merely pointed to places where you can BEGIN your woefully defective education, FRiend.

[Windflier]

I’m saying you could answer your own questions if you’d bother to crack a book and do some homework. Instead, you want to sit in the back of the class and shoot spit-balls at the teacher.

You're insulting, you know that?

You keep throwing textbooks at myself and others without taking any stance on the question at hand, yourself. If you know so much about this subject, why not do the civil thing, and just share what you know in conversation?

This is a discussion forum, not a paleontological symposium.

[BroJoeK]

“You’re insulting, you know that?”

Your “questions” are insulting, your attitude is insulting, your refusal to crack a book and learn something is most insulting of all.

Your stance of “science heretic” is total complete rubbish — you’re not “heretical”, just too lazy to learn, pal.

[The Cajun]

I have merely pointed to places where you can BEGIN your woefully defective education, FRiend.

ROTFLMAO!!!

Man, with your attitude, I'm still trying to figure out how to categorize you, nut-job or just plain a-hole.
Insulting, condescending, more interested in berating posters in a thread than stating facts to argue or prove your point.

Bet you're a real pip to be around in real life, get your ass kicked much???....... lolol!!!