Skip to comments.
Living dinosaurs
abc.net.au ^
| 9/30/2002
Posted on 10/01/2002 8:32:43 AM PDT by SteveH
News in Science
News in Science 30/9/2002 Living dinosaurs
[This is the print version of story http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s687677.htm]
If we are to believe the message of a new exhibit demonstrating the evolutionary transition from dinosaurs to birds, dinosaurs are not extinct.
Four life-sized reconstructions of ferocious-looking, smart-thinking, flesh-eating feathered dinosaurs – representing 125 million-year-old missing links between dinosaurs and birds – have landed at the Australian Museum in Sydney as part of the Chinese Dinosaurs exhibition.
"The birds we see flying around our backyards are actually living dinosaurs, descendants of prehistoric beasts we all once presumed became extinct 65 million years ago," said museum director, Professor Mike Archer.
"But feathers were evolving as dinosaur attributes long before they became valuable as flight structures," he said.
"Indeed fossils uncovered in the Liaoning Province of China have provided a whole sequence of missing links in the dinosaur to bird story."
 |
Model of Sinornithosaurus smillenii (pronounced 'sine-or-nith-oh-saw-rus mill-en-ee-eye) made by Alan Groves working with palaeontologists Drs Walter Boles and Sue Hand.
|
One of the earlier links is Sinosauropteryx prima. The creature is covered with what looks to be a fine fuzz but are really small barbs – a link between scales and feathers.
"It's a metre-long, meat-eating, ground-dwelling predator, closely related to the dinosaur in Jurassic Park II which ate the little girl on the beach," said Professor Archer.
He speculated these very early feathers were probably for insulation since this group was almost certainly warm blooded.
The Sinornithosaurus millenii (top picture) embodies a later link.
"This is a very vicious little predator about a metre long. But here the feathers are much larger – although they're not fully formed or capable of flight," said Professor Archer.
An interesting characteristic of the creature was its capacity to lift its arms over its head in a flapping motion. Professor Archer said scientists assumed its array of feathers had a purpose – to frighten predators, help capture prey, attract mates or threaten male competitors.
The next stage – the development of feathers for flight – is seen in creatures like the Archseopteryx, a smaller animal than Sinornithosaurus millenii with longer and assymetrical feathers.
While there has been some debate as to whether dinosaurs (unlike other groups of reptiles) are the ancestors of birds, Professor Archer believes since 1996 there has been no strong argument against the hypothesis.
"I don't know anyone who is still holding out on this one," he said. "Other than the creationists of course who don't want anything to be ancestral to birds."
Chinese Dinosaurs is open until February next year. The dino-bird exhibit is sponsored by The Australian Skeptics.
Anna Salleh - ABC Science Online
More Info?
British Natural History Museum Dino-Birds Exhibition
Missing link from fur to feathers – News in Science 27/4/2001
Dinosaur fossil with proto-feathers – News in Science 8/3/2001
Dinosaur-bird theory defended – News in Science 24/11/2000
|
© ABC 2002 | privacy
TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: birds; crevolist; dinosaurs; evolution; paleontology
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300, 301-320, 321-340 ... 601-602 next last
To: PatrickHenry
Start of the next 50 placemarker.
To: VadeRetro
piltdownpig signed up 2002-09-21. This account has been banned. What is this crap? It wasn’t too long ago that you guys were complaining about getting banned for a day and how the moderators are unfair and bias. Patrick, you even said farewell to everybody and came back – nobody (that I know of) gave you a hard time for this… Heck, I am glad you are back.
But now it’s different? Hmmm.
I understand having a little fun, it’s all part of this ‘game’, it keeps thinks lighthearted and it’s needed ‘more’ at times on these threads IMHO. But is unfair still unfair and bias still bias?
I might be off base here and might not have all the facts – I only get to pop in and out when time permits – but between the placemarkers and pictures you guys post, what is exactly the difference between your spam and ‘anyone’ else’s?
To: PatrickHenry
Sorry, the prior post was for you and Vade.
To: All
To: f.Christian
Have you heard the story going around about the bio prof in a well-known NorthEast university who is speaking about evolution and notices three guys snickering in the back of the room? "You guys must be fundamentalist Christians" snorts the professor. One of the three replies "No, we're math majors; like, we understand the laws of probability..."
17 posted on 9/27/02 11:07 AM Pacific by piltdownpig
To: Heartlander
Don't get banned, but, if you do, don't come back until somebody lets you back in. How hard is that?
To: Heartlander
"Total--only evolution...no competition"--- this is the evil--tyranny we are dealing with!
Personal attacks and no debating the issues/subject!
We need a civil rights revolution now---JUSTICE--FREEDOM--LIBERTY for the oppresssed!
Liberation now!
To: VadeRetro
Words that may soon come back to bite you…(how hard is up to you)
I hope that they don’t.
To: VadeRetro
I've seen what your friend JG is saying over at the LF about JR and the FR...real trashy/usual!
To: VadeRetro
For the older generation . . . Oy vey - no pleasing some people, is there? Something from Tin Pan Alley next time? I bet you're the guy who doesn't sit out on the porch to enjoy the view, or the weather, or whatever - you just sit out there so you can shake your fist at those durn neighborhood kids when they set a toe on the grass. Admit it ;)
You kids get the hell off my lawn! Durn kids - no respect for private property these days...
To: Heartlander
I might be off base here and might not have all the facts – I only get to pop in and out when time permits – but between the placemarkers and pictures you guys post, what is exactly the difference between your spam and ‘anyone’ else’s? If some pictures recur, it's because they're an obvious answer to some mantra being chanted. The pictures the C's squawked about on this thread the Confuciusornis wings, are the answer to protestations about some halfway point in a transition being impossible. It recurs a lot because dumb-dumbisms about not being able to get from function A to function B recur a lot and it's useful to show that, whether or not a creationist can ever understand how, we know it happens.
What are we supposed to do when creationists ignore the answers? Mostly, we have little choice but to answer you time after weary time. Some of you wear out our patience--you'll see a lot of stuff posted in blue being utterly ignored--but if you see the same answers, it's because the same old crew is born new on another thread and asking the same old questions.
To: VadeRetro
You're just a missionary here from the liberalatarian 'conservative' left...mainstream science right---PH/junior...ect too?
To: f.Christian
I've seen what your friend JG is saying over at the LF about JR and the FR...real trashy/usual! JG is a smart girl who I hope will be OK. She lacks the mean streak of the people who have gone after her, but I guess she'll learn.
TLBSHOW, on the other hand, is the precise stupid grotesque attack dog the liberal media loves to imagine as the typical right-winger.
To: VadeRetro
Medved is not a Creationist nor am I (depending on how ‘you’ define the word)
Chanting occurs on both sides and in regards to the ‘theory of common descent’ it is all opinion regardless if you like it or not. Data is data, what we ‘want’ to see from data is different from the data though…
To: f.Christian
You're just a missionary here from the liberalatarian 'conservative' left...mainstream science right---PH/junior...ect too? Gads! I'm being denounced! Did I stop clapping before everyone else?
To: Heartlander; VadeRetro
What is this crap? It wasn’t too long ago that you guys were complaining about getting banned for a day and how the moderators are unfair and bias. Patrick, you even said farewell to everybody and came back – nobody (that I know of) gave you a hard time for this… Heck, I am glad you are back. But now it’s different? Hmmm. It's very different. I left voluntarily, because of what I saw as biased activity on the part of the moderators. I returned when I saw that the moderators were willing -- sometimes at least -- to apply the rules to both sides of the debate. Medved, on the other hand was banned -- not by me, and not by the evolution side, but by the management of this website. Indeed, his behavior had been so flagrant that his apparent immunity from the rules of this website was one of my biggest concerns, and his banning was what encouraged me to return.
I might be off base here and might not have all the facts – I only get to pop in and out when time permits – but between the placemarkers and pictures you guys post, what is exactly the difference between your spam and ‘anyone’ else’s?
Placemarkers aren't spam. Surely you understand that. They're very brief, they don't consume Jim Robinson's resources (except trivially), and they're helpful to the poster to know where to begin reading when he returns to a thread. Medved's spam, as you must surely know, consisted of long essays, constantly repeated in thread after thread. He was warned about this conduct by the moderators, more than once, yet he persisted. His banning, as I understand it, was for re-posting a spam-essay that had just been deleted. He got himself banned, and the cause was his spam and his violation of the rules. Placemarkers are utterly trivial by comparison. No one has ever been told not to use them. I can't imagine that anyone ever would be.
Pictures also require almost no resources for this website -- just the code is posted. Your own computer retrieves the linked pic from wherever it's stored. Linked pics aren't stored on Jim Robinson's computers, and posting them doesn't abuse his resources. Also, unlike medved's spam essays (which do get stored on Jim Robinson's computers), I virtually never repeat a picture. So my conduct is entirely different from mdeved's. Vade's pics are substantive, directly on point, and are in response to questions about evolution. If a question is asked, it is only natural that the answer should be given. Otherwise, the only permitted response is "Trust me, evolution happens."
You and I often disagree, but you're not a disagreeable fellow, and I'm certain you're bright. So I'm sure you see the difference.
To: Heartlander
Medved is not a Creationist nor am I (depending on how ‘you’ define the word) I guess it depends on how you define words, yes.
To: VadeRetro
Two sides to every coin/story...ever try to read the version on the edges!
To: VadeRetro
Two sides to every coin/story...ever try to read the version on the edges(where fact/fiction is analyzed)!
To: f.Christian
Out for the night. Try to behave yourself!
To: PatrickHenry
Thank you for the polite response.
Maybe Medved can be creative and find a solution…
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 281-300, 301-320, 321-340 ... 601-602 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
