Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Newfound Dinosaur a Transitional Creature
Las Vegas Sun (AP) ^ | May 04, 2005 | Malcolm Ritter

Posted on 05/04/2005 12:32:23 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan

Caught in the act of evolution, the odd-looking, feathered dinosaur was becoming more vegetarian, moving away from its meat-eating ancestors.

It had the built-for-speed legs of meat-eaters, but was developing the bigger belly of plant-eaters. It had already lost the serrated teeth needed for tearing flesh. Those were replaced with the smaller, duller vegetarian variety.

(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: crevolist; dinosaurs; evolution; godsgravesglyphs; paleontology; transitionalfossil
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 741-755 next last
To: Modernman
So, unless a reptile turns into a fish, there is no evidence of transition

A reptile to a fish... wouldn't that be retrolution?

61 posted on 05/04/2005 1:32:20 PM PDT by 70times7 (An open mind is a cesspool of thought)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
Devil must have put transitional fossils in the ground again to confuse everyone evolutionists.
62 posted on 05/04/2005 1:32:26 PM PDT by Amish with an attitude (An armed society is a polite society)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mike182d
You creationists love moving the goalposts.

I guess I'll speak as someone in the middle... The missing link of modern evolutionary theory is macroevolution. No one doubts the fact of microevolution- changes within a species. What is missing is proof of macroevolution- one species changing to another.

Changes within a species only prove microevolution, something no one doubts..
63 posted on 05/04/2005 1:33:07 PM PDT by mnehring (http://www.mlearningworld.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Bringbackthedraft
Sorta like a CSI investigation? Every piece of the puzzle is gathered.

Kinda understand your point, but we know exactly what humans look like, skin color, hair color , what we consume etc. How can anyone come too a positve conclusion of what color a dinosaur was, what exactly it ate, from bones? This is all theory, and speculation. Far from facts. IMO. But then again, I am far from being a scientist, and I'm sure there is much I don't know lol. Fill me in on this stuff please, I enjoy learning new things :) Jeff

64 posted on 05/04/2005 1:34:41 PM PDT by MississippyMuddy (No peace, without FREEDOM!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: CAPTAINSUPERMARVELMAN
"I wouldn't be surprised if this so-called finding is already years old and has been established as fakes"

Do you have any idea how many thousands and thousands of supposed fakes you're talking about? Scientists would have to have a factory to produce the number of fakes you claim. Here's my favorite fake, a whale with legs: Fossil bones of walking, swimming whale

65 posted on 05/04/2005 1:34:50 PM PDT by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan
Devil must have put transitional fossils in the ground again to confuse everyone. (Sarcasm)

Caught in the act of evolution, the odd-looking, feathered dinosaur was becoming more vegetarian, moving away from its meat-eating ancestors.

Nah, the Darwinians do that.

"Bizarre" New Dinosaur Shows Evolution to Plant Eating, Study Says

The newly discovered creature was likely cloaked in hairlike feathers and walked on two legs

OHH My aching back.

66 posted on 05/04/2005 1:35:05 PM PDT by AndrewC (Darwinian logic -- It is just-so if it is just-so)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FormerLib
The critter shows a shift in diet and you claim that's a transition? Hell, I've had several of that manner of evolutionary transition during my lifetime then, all accomplished by remaining fulling human.

It isn't the shift in diet that signifies transition. It is the physical changes in body structure to accommodate the change in diet that is significant.

67 posted on 05/04/2005 1:35:46 PM PDT by Antonello
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: mnehrling

"Becoming vegetarian? Isn't this called an omnivore?"

Not exactly --- but I had the same thought and looked up the definition.

"Omnivores" --- the most common example people humans and bears BTW --- have a pretty unique set of both meat-eating (front, tearing) teeth and plant eating (back, flat grinders).

This guy, in contrast, had flat teeth all around --- but possessed the BODY of a preditor --- legs, eyes-in-front (compare and contrast wolf vs. deer).

There are lean, mean, pointy-tooth machines just like this guy (sharing other family traits) earlier.

And fat wide-eyed flat-toothed guys (but still with same family traits) after.

Hence, "transitional" vs. settled omnivore.

Not the whole puzzle, but certainly "some evidence."


68 posted on 05/04/2005 1:35:58 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: narby

"An overwhelming majority of all dinosaurs — between 80 to 90 percent — are known by researchers on the basis of just one partial skeleton; sometimes just a few mere bones that have been flattened, over the ages, like pancakes."

This was in an article about the same find - amazing to find out so much from so little, don't you think?


69 posted on 05/04/2005 1:36:59 PM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan

There goes my attempt at being funny... I'll leave that to DFU from now on...


70 posted on 05/04/2005 1:38:08 PM PDT by mnehring (http://www.mlearningworld.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: mike182d

"If evolution is true, there is no such thing as a "species" as every creature is a variation of the same thing. Basically, every creature becomes transitional. Speciation becomes nothing more than a man-made convention intended to categorize everything he sees into nice, neat, organized packages."

Biologists agree with you.

"Species" is --- more or less --- an artificial convention.

The working definition is: can they naturally procreate? If so, same species.

But then there are "wolphins" and "ligers" and whatnot.

So, yeah, it is (somewhat) artificial. The categorization just helps people get their mind around things.


71 posted on 05/04/2005 1:39:00 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Actually, I really like this one:

right here

If you understand DNA at all, the evidence of evolution is so nailed that all the dinosaur bones in the world are merely icing on the cake.

The cool thing is that Darwin came up with the theory so long ago, yet it predicted the DNA discoveries perfectly.

Bingo, Darwin wins. There's really no question except in the eyes of those who will not see.

72 posted on 05/04/2005 1:39:40 PM PDT by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Caught in the act of evolution, the odd-looking, feathered dinosaur was becoming more vegetarian, moving away from its meat-eating ancestors

That one pictured looks like it eats just about anything... and I'm not sure, but I think bolo ties are evidence of devolution... wait... are we talking about the one on the right or the left?

73 posted on 05/04/2005 1:39:50 PM PDT by 70times7 (An open mind is a cesspool of thought)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: 70times7
A reptile to a fish... wouldn't that be retrolution?

You assume that reptiles are somehow "more evolved" than fish. In the highly unlikely case that a reptile evolved into a fish, that process would still fall under evolution.

74 posted on 05/04/2005 1:40:16 PM PDT by Modernman ("Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: FastCoyote

actually, a province in china has a factory just for such a thing, according to the book China, Inc. They were the ones who produced the first "feathered dinosaur transitional form" proof that was reported in either national geographic or nature, a few years ago.


75 posted on 05/04/2005 1:41:46 PM PDT by timtoews5292004
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
amazing to find out so much from so little, don't you think?

From the article: The scientists dubbed it Falcarius utahensis. Bones from hundreds or maybe thousands of these dinosaurs were discovered at a two-acre dig site south of the town of Green River. Nobody knows why they gathered there or what killed them, Kirkland said.

Now, did you just not read it? Or what?

76 posted on 05/04/2005 1:43:28 PM PDT by narby
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Modernman
You assume that reptiles are somehow "more evolved" than fish. In the highly unlikely case that a reptile evolved into a fish, that process would still fall under evolution

Ok, but if one species evolved to two would it be dilution?

77 posted on 05/04/2005 1:43:38 PM PDT by 70times7 (An open mind is a cesspool of thought)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
That's what I was wondering - are they saying they are surprised because this particular dinosaur apparently was a herbivore? Or are they surprised it lived in Utah? Or are they surprised it existed? Humans and other animals eat plants and meat so I'm not sure what the big story is here.

They're surprised because it lived in Utah and it was monogamous.

78 posted on 05/04/2005 1:44:48 PM PDT by Gumlegs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: timtoews5292004

Got a citation for a 'fake transitional factory' in China beyond innuendo or speculation?


79 posted on 05/04/2005 1:45:02 PM PDT by Dimensio (http://angryflower.com/bobsqu.gif <-- required reading before you use your next apostrophe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: timtoews5292004

You are correct about China.

But I doubt the Mormons in Utah where this comes from would do the same thing.

Plus, this is hundreds of these guys found, so the chance of a plant-eating-head on the the meat-eater-body mistake is pretty slim.


80 posted on 05/04/2005 1:45:52 PM PDT by MeanWestTexan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 741-755 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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