Posted on 10/06/2004 2:08:54 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
Ancestors of the fearsome Tyrannosaurus rex were clothed in delicate feathers, a fossil discovered in China suggests. The find may come as a surprise to people used to images of Tyrannosaurus as a scaly monster. But many palaeontologists have been predicting just such a find ever since the first evidence of a dinosaur with a feathery coat came from the same site in Liaoning in 1995.
The 130 million-year-old fossil is the oldest member recorded from the tyrannosauroid family, and the first in the group with a feather-like covering. The discovery of its skull and other fragments is reported today in Nature1.
The new dinosaur has been christened Dilong paradoxus. Dilong means Emperor dragon. "We added paradoxus to its name because it's so counter-intuitive to think of feathers and a Tyrannosaurus together," says team member Mark Norell at the American Museum of Natural History in New York city.
Evidence of these so-called protofeathers is usually difficult to find because feathers decay when they are exposed to oxygen. But at Liaoning, the specimens appear to have been buried extremely quickly under fine-grained volcanic ash, helping to preserve the soft, feathery outlines.
"Dilong is an exciting find because it's so complete," says palaeontologist Thomas Holtz of the University of Maryland in College Park, "and the feathers are the icing on the cake."
Holtz hopes that the new evidence will convince the scientific community that feathers evolved on dinosaurs long before the appearance of birds. Until now, some palaeontologists have been dubious that feathered tyrannosauroids existed.
Feathered and petite
The jackal-sized Dilong was far smaller than T. rex, which roamed the Earth some 65 million years later. But Dilong shares many of its characteristics.
The meateater probably had a broad, square skull and powerful jaws, says Holtz. But while the forelimbs of T. rex had dwindled until they were almost useless, Dilong would have been able to clutch food in its hands and bring it to its mouth.
Dilong's protofeathers are not what we would recognise as feathers today, but are their evolutionary precursors. Rather than having a central shaft and barbs, they are single flexible filaments that would have covered the dinosaur's body like hair.
The protofeathers would most likely have been used for insulation rather than flight, Norell says. The giant T. rex had probably lost the featherlike features of its predecessors because, with its much larger size, it would have had more difficulty losing heat than keeping it. Tyrannosaurus chicks may have had a downy cover, though.
However, the discovery of feathered dinosaurs at Liaoning is trickling down into popular culture. The first Jurassic Park film featured mainly scaly reptiles, Norell says, "But from what I've seen of the first shots of Jurassic Park IV, all the dinosaurs now have feathers."
[From PH:] The article has a small sketch, but no pics. The footnote in the article is this: Xu X., et al. Nature, 431. 680 - 684 (2004). And in the original artice there's a link to the Letter in Nature.
This article lends support to what you are saying: A Who’s Who of evolutionists
Regarding Junior's statement that Creationism is a plot by Satan, DannyTN had an interesting response on this thread: Link
I'd really like to see a citation or a source or some kind of data to back that assertion up. If that's true, then why has the Catholic church stated that evolution is compatible with Catholic doctrine? Or are ALL Catholics also athiest???
I wish you hadn't done that. I tremble to contemplate the firestorm you may have kindled.
You should be careful lighting a match after that kind of post. Could cause an explosion.
Referring to #76
I had never even considered that. I would have assumed feathers ruffled the same way hair raises. Of course I don't know much about either.
The third column shows, presumably, atheistic evolutionists. Those numbers are swamped by the middle column.
This definition of theistic evolution sounds like crock pot creationism to me. Poofism slowed down.
So there isn't a column for theists who think creation doesn't need daemons to keep pushing the arrow in flight?
Not all polls are brilliantly constructed. People with the specific belief you mentioned would have answered, somehow, and they'd be found in column 2 or 3, depending on which answer they felt closer to.
Anyway, regardless of defects in the poll questions, there are a whole lot of people who accept evolution without being atheists. (Notwithstanding the Jack Chick worldview.)
Oh c'mon, your Polly can't be that miserable...can he?!
That's what I thought you meant...to have him stuffed...sometimes he deserves it!
If it sounded unreasonable, I'm sure he meant that maybe God will morph some dust into a bird for him.
"I'd really like to see a citation or a source or some kind of data to back that assertion up. If that's true, then why has the Catholic church stated that evolution is compatible with Catholic doctrine? Or are ALL Catholics also athiest???"
YOU look it up! ALL the prominent evolutionists are atheists? Why the shock? You'd have to be one since you would be denying what the Bible says.
I'm not Catholic,. Never will be a Catholic so I don't pay attention to what your pope says. I'm Bible based. You will have to ask a fellow Catholic why they believe in evolution or if your church validates and then ask them why.
Ya gotta know when to hold, know when to fold ...
And...it was of course warm blodded.
Probably not. Your cat evolved as a predator and if allowed to roam the neighbohood will kill birds today, if still young and agile.
"Probably not. Your cat evolved as a predator and if allowed to roam the neighbohood will kill birds today, if still young and agile."
LOL!
Always "evolving" - hey, just like your theories of evolution! Funny thing about truth ... it DOES NOT "evolve".
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.