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

Skip to comments.

Fossil find prompts rethink on dinosaur feathers
Yahoo (Reuters) ^ | 3/15/2006 | Patricia Reaney

Posted on 03/15/2006 12:23:34 PM PST by The_Victor

LONDON (Reuters) - A newly discovered, perfectly preserved fossil of a 150 million-year-old dinosaur found in southern Germany may force scientists to rethink how and when feathers evolved.

The nearly complete remains of the chicken-size dinosaur named Juravenator, which is described in the journal Nature on Wednesday, were preserved in limestone. But unlike other members of the group of two-legged meat-eating predators known as coelurosaurs, it had no feathers.

"It is an absolutely new dinosaur that was not known before," said Ursula Gohlich, a palaeontologist at the University of Munich in Germany.

Remains of small dinosaurs from the Late Jurassic period are rare finds. The new fossil is nearly complete, apart from a missing part of its long tail, and shows soft tissue and an imprint of the skin but no feathers.

"Scientists had thought that all representatives of the group coelurosaurs should have feathers," Gohlich told Reuters.

"Now we have a little dinosaur that belongs to coelurosaurs that does not show feathers. This is a problem."

COMPLEX EVOLUTION

Feathers were thought to have evolved very early within coelurosaurs. All members of the group were thought to be feathered.

But Gohlich and Luis Chiappe, of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County in California, believe the evolution of feathers may be more complex than previously thought.

Feathers may have evolved early but then were replaced by scales in some creatures because they were not needed.

"Another possibility perhaps is that some representatives of coelurosaurs were not entirely covered with feathers, only certain areas," said Gohlich.

The newly discovered Juravenator was very young so may not have lived long enough to develop feathers. But Gohlich said that despite its age, she would have expected it to have had feathers.

"We think that feathers evolved. We have several fossils that support this theory. But our fossil asks some questions," she added.

The oldest known bird, Archaeopteryx, was also found in southern Germany. It too lived about 150 million years ago and had feathers but it is uncertain whether they were used to fly or to keep warm.

Xing Xu, of the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing, said whatever the explanation, the discovery of Juravenator has enriched knowledge of early feather evolution. It could also indicate where future research could be concentrated.

"Juravenator may complicate the picture, but it makes it more complete and realistic," he said in a commentary in the journal.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: crevolist; evolution
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 last
To: gomaaa
Despite the simplicity of the formulas, any physics student who has studied the APPLICATION of the field in any detail could probably relate some tales of horror about hours spent banging one's head with a copy of "Classical Electrodyamics" by John David Jackson. The devil, as they say, is in the details. Part of the beauty of Evolution is its simplicity. Through natural selection, a VERY simple concept, the entire field of biology can be illuminated. The details, however, can sometimes make one want to bang one's head with a copy of "The Origin of Species".

Part of the beauty of argument by analogy is it's simplicity in expressing the similarities of complex issues, but, as you say, the devil is in the details, and can somtimes make one want to bang one's head with a copy of Logic orCritique of pure reason.

The only similarity you've shown is that both contain complex information within a framework of simplicity. Something that can be said, and expressed, of virtually anything.

81 posted on 03/15/2006 4:20:15 PM PST by csense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: gomaaa; MineralMan
Marsupial weirdness:

At Talk Origins, they describe how embryonic marsupials develop an egg shell which is then resorbed, and how some are born with a caruncle (like an egg tooth).

Makes evolutionary sense.

82 posted on 03/15/2006 4:28:38 PM PST by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%; longshadow; PatrickHenry
One possibility is that feathers evolved more than once. I think this is highly likely

Weren't pterodactyls furry? I believe they were archosaurs, so they aren't closely related to mammals.

83 posted on 03/15/2006 5:42:12 PM PST by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy; Junior
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1504547/posts

It says a grad student was quoted in a University press release as saying it was a meat eater. If the scientific paper on this find claims that based solely on the footprint, and no other information was relied upon to support a claim that they can tell it definitively was a meat-eater, then I think you have a beef.

But I doubt the actual paper makes that claim; it may say they suspect it was a meat-eater, or that they concluded it it was a meat-eater based on other corroborative evidence.

And a further review of the thread you cited indicates exactly what I suspected, regarding the meat-eating claim, we see that "Junior" already advised you:

Three-toed dinosaurs discovered to date have been carnivores.

Ergo, the conclusion about it being a meat-eater was based on additional information about three-toed dinosaurs, and not just from the footprint of the this single beast. The article may not have included this tidbit, but that's why science isn't done based on lay press accounts written from University press releases.

As I suspected; your comments in that case and mine in this case aren't at all the same. Have a nice day. This conversation is over.

84 posted on 03/15/2006 5:59:34 PM PST by longshadow (FReeper #405, entering his ninth year of ignoring nitwits, nutcases, and recycled newbies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: calex59
just a guy who wants the truth to be told.

You sure repeat (or originate?) large numbers of false claims for a self-professed truth teller! Like over here for instance where you falsely claimed that non-evolutionists exposed the Archaeoraptor fossil fraud.

In fact that post is full to the brim of wildly counter-factual, yet still arrogant and self righteous, claims. One -- that "Lucy" has "proven to be a chimp" -- was such an embarrassing whopper that you got corrected by a creationist! You realize how rarely that happens?

85 posted on 03/15/2006 7:31:20 PM PST by Stultis (I don't worry about the war turning into "Vietnam" in Iraq; I worry about it doing so in Congress.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Bingo Jerry

Maybe because we were made in His image, and blessed with a large amount of intelligence.


86 posted on 03/15/2006 7:47:45 PM PST by vpintheak (Liberal = The antithesis of Freedom and Patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Potowmack

I for one, am a very intelligent crappy long distance runner. All my time in the Army still couldn't get me to be good at it.


87 posted on 03/15/2006 7:48:57 PM PST by vpintheak (Liberal = The antithesis of Freedom and Patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: From many - one.

Just for interest sake only, who or what is the cream?


88 posted on 03/15/2006 7:52:10 PM PST by vpintheak (Liberal = The antithesis of Freedom and Patriotism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: The_Victor

Feathers first evolved in pillows. It was only later that they were first installed on giant lizards. But they kept falling off so finally they were evolved onto birds.


89 posted on 03/15/2006 8:21:52 PM PST by festus (The constitution may be flawed but its a whole lot better than what we have now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak

Dunno. Cockroaches may outlast us, they're pretty sturdy.


90 posted on 03/16/2006 4:14:12 AM PST by From many - one.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: gomaaa
..."Classical Electrodyamics" by John David Jackson...

The mere mention provides flashbacks of horror and foggy memories of 3am studying frustration. Somebody, somewhere needs to write a better graduate level physics E&M book. Jackson is a good reference but a horrible learning book (the very difficult problems had little relation to the text; almost no examples). I can't believe that someone hasn't stepped up to the plate and replaced or supplemented this text (but then, writing intro grad level physics books is not very lucrative considering the time expenditure per profit ratio. Writing high-level material with that breadth is tough to do - it could take a decade or more, I imagine, to put such a text together.)

91 posted on 03/16/2006 6:40:28 AM PST by Quark2005 (Confidence follows from consilience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: csense; Getready
The only similarity you've shown is that both contain complex information within a framework of simplicity. Something that can be said, and expressed, of virtually anything.

But that's my point (sort of). ANY scientific theory operates in this fashion. The post I was responding to (by Getready) suggested that making a theory more complex in order to account for new evidence was a BAD thing. I was trying to point out that not only is this NOT bad, it is the way science has worked since Kepler. A simple theory (in this case about the motion of the planets) requiring a great deal of difficult observations and precise mathematics to apply and prove. (Try observing and predicting the motions of the planets without a telescope OR calculus.)

ALL scientific theores "contain complex information within a framework of simplicity." That's the way it works.
92 posted on 03/16/2006 6:42:56 AM PST by gomaaa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: Rightwing Conspiratr1
ET is just a bunch of goofballs sitting around telling each other stories. They get grants to do it.

Biologists have, on <sarc>rare occasion</sarc>, been known to actually do careful testing and research using real data, too.

93 posted on 03/16/2006 6:50:35 AM PST by Quark2005 (Confidence follows from consilience.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Virginia-American
There is evidence that some pterosaurs had hair or something very similar to hair.

But the real research is being done here.

;)

94 posted on 03/16/2006 7:43:16 PM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: <1/1,000,000th%
Can't resist posting from their arch-enemies

What's next? Are pterosaurs actually elephants with hang gliders?

95 posted on 03/16/2006 7:59:35 PM PST by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Virginia-American

LOL!


96 posted on 03/17/2006 10:16:46 AM PST by <1/1,000,000th%
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-96 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