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 ... 421-440, 441-460, 461-480 ... 601-602 next last
To: f.Christian
Ummm.... Next time try a private school.
A Democracy -- One man one vote.
A Constitutional Republic -- The People elect representatives for limited terms that are to exercise their will.
In a Democracy, Al Gore would have been elected President in 2002. Thank God the constitution places LIMITS on democracy.
But this is all off topic.
Back to science. Perhaps tomorrow we can start a thread on string theory!
To: Northeast
What the left is doing...
is using the media(bias) and the schools(evolution) to...
via a brainwashed 'majority'/elections...
invalidate the constitution-republic and the intent of the founders...
civil liberty--freedom--choice--limited govt.!
Especially religous liberty!
I see a big awakening happening!
To: Northeast
Doh, Scratch 2002. Add 2000!
To: Northeast
When you have a supreme court appointed...
by a popularly elected president---
I wouldn't necessarily call that a republic!
Bananna(evolution) republic for the past 100 years!
To: f.Christian
Ah, so now we come to the crux of the matter. You have a problem with the Supreme Court striking down the un-constitutional actions of the Florida Court during the last election?
Do I have that right?
And you object to the way our Constitution mandates those SC Justices be appointed?
Before you respond, read your last post to me carefully. Let me fix it for you so it's a bit more readable:
When you have a supreme court appointed by a popularly elected president I wouldn't necessarily call that a republic!
Bananna(evolution) republic for the past 100 years!
Apologies to folks discussing fossils, I truely didn't mean for the thread to go here. But... well ...
To: Northeast
You want to be a mind reader...know it all too?
Not doing a very good job reading my mind!
To: Northeast
String Theory… My older brother is really intrigued by this theory and it makes for great discussions around the holidays. (when we are all able to get together)
On a side note… (relationship to the string theory)
The ID theory has been around for a long time and before the ‘blind watchmaker’, ID was usually compared with a musical instrument rather than some deity winding an object and letting it run its course…
“Granted, if the universe is like a clockwork (cf. the design arguments of the British natural theologians), then it would be inappropriate for God, who presumably is a consummate designer, to intervene periodically to adjust the clock. Instead of periodically giving the universe the gift of "clock-winding and clock-setting," God should simply have created a universe that never needed winding or setting. But what if instead the universe is like a musical instrument (cf. the design arguments of the Church Fathers, like Gregory of Nazianzus, who compared the universe to a lute -- in this respect I much prefer the design arguments of the early Church to the design arguments of the British natural theologians)? Then it is entirely appropriate for God to interact with the universe by introducing design (or in this analogy, by skillfully playing a musical instrument). Change the metaphor from a clockwork to a musical instrument, and the charge of "withholding gifts" dissolves. So long as there are consummate pianists and composers, player-pianos will always remain inferior to real pianos. The incompleteness of the real piano taken by itself is therefore irrelevant here. Musical instruments require a musician to complete them. Thus, if the universe is more like a musical instrument than a clock, it is appropriate for a designer to interact with it in ways that affect its physical state.”
Link
To: f.Christian
Nope, not reading your mind. Reading your posts. Told you once, I'll tell ya again. Post what you mean. If I couldn't make your post out, chances are you didn't make much sense.
To: Northeast
Evolution...Atheism-dehumanism---
TYRANNY(pc-religion/rhetoric)...
Then came the SPLIT SCHIZOPHRENIA/ZOMBIE/BRAVE-NWO1984 LIBERAL NEO-America---the post-modern age of switch-flip-spin-DEFORMITY-cancer...Atheist secular materialists through ATHEISM/evolution CHANGED-REMOVED the foundations...demolished the wall(separation of state/religion)--trampled the TRUTH-GOD...built a satanic temple/SWAMP-MALARIA/RELIGION(cult of darwin-marx-satan) over them---made these absolutes subordinate--relative and calling/CHANGING---REDACTING all the... residuals---technology/science === TO evolution via schlock/sMUCK IDEOLOGY/lies/bias...to substantiate/justify their efforts--claims...social engineering--PC--atheism...anti-God/Truth RELIGION(USSC monopoly)--and declared a crusade/WAR--JIHAD--INTOLERANCE/TYRANNY(breaking the establishment clause)...against God--man--society/SCIENCE!!
To: Heartlander
Yeah, I'm trying to wrap by brain around strings. Just when I had finally figured out Feynman's QED (Less the math, but I get the Theory), I have to move up to strings, Calabi-Yau digrams, multiple dimensions, etc.
I'll take my time. I'm no Physicist, but understanding the basic principles is a satisfaction unto itself.
Too bad so many folks can accept physics and say "Yeah, that's science" and look at evolution theory and say "Nope, the Bible says."
Regards
To: f.Christian
made/redacting these absolutes...misplaced word!
To: SteveH
So...I should or shouldn't have eaten this Archeopterix.
I hope I shouldn't have kept it. Aw...they'll catch another one. The eggs were great, though.
To: gore3000
Ape-ancestry rejectionism? Tough! That's the way it happened. Outed by heartlander...'vape'retro!
To: VadeRetro
Hi V.R.
watched a program last year...non christian...
They relayed the discovery of the reality..that our DNA should have degraded long ago..degraded away into nothing.
Now the DNA as a whole does not degrade as a unit..but the componets which make up the Helix..they degrade..its an absolute fact.
What keeps our genome intact considering all the variable energies and sources which can generate the degradation..ie Ultraviloet radiation etc.
The discovered that our human DNA has a unit which travels along the helix like a monorail..and [RE-WRITES THE DNA] like a computer program..self correcting endlessly.
The self actuating reality got them to studying cell activation.
From study on children in the womb they discovered activity of the DNA which blew them away...
Cells would activate..regionally..or in distant quadrants..instantaniouslly...
The the same cells would sit idle ..while identical cells which activate identical growth in one region of the body ..would activate and generate an entirely different growth reality.
Like a program was written..
They mused about apes...it seems apes should be able to go on line and chat just like us..but the programming does not activate at required intervals.
All the goods are there for apes to talk..but they do not..the programming in them has limits set.
they went looking into cell growth of plants..insects..etc..found the same activation cycling..yet ..limitations..like windows 95 to window 2000xp..similar foundation..yet differing functions result from defined program written.
So it seems we are infact..just learning about all that is going on down here concerning living things.
Here are some of the most specialized scientists..completely blown away by the data..and struggling to come to terms with it...
These were not christians..and they would not sign off on evolution either...they see something which reveals precision...and here they are in wounder like children.
To: PatrickHenry
Placemarker.
To: Heartlander
You are an agnostic. . I am a Christian. You straddle the fence with God - I straddle the fence with science. But regardless, we both know that science cannot have all the answers for our lives. I'm Catholic, but I'm also an evolutionist. There is nothing anti-Christian about accepting the validity of science for describing the universe. Certainly science cannot answer what happens to us after we die or the ultimate "why are we here," but for matters temporal, including the descent of modern species, science, and especially evolutionary biology, have some pretty good answers and plenty of evidence on its side.
456
posted on
10/04/2002 2:38:06 AM PDT
by
Junior
To: Northeast
Amen, brother!
457
posted on
10/04/2002 2:45:37 AM PDT
by
Junior
To: Heartlander
You [VadeRetro] are an agnostic. . I am a Christian. You straddle the fence with God - I straddle the fence with science. But regardless, we both know that science cannot have all the answers for our lives. I don't think it's really tit for tat. Fence-straddling about religious matters is usually because of the absence of evidence to support theological doctrines. Religion is, after, totally a matter of faith.
But in matters of science, the evidence exists. It's all verifiable. There can't be any fence-straddling about that. The only disagreements possible would be as to various scientific theories which purport to account for the evidence, and that's why we have experiments -- to weed out the bad theories.
When it comes to evolution, how does one account for the mountains of evidence (fossils, biochemistry, DNA, geology), all of which shows that when species are arranged chronologically and according to form and genetic similarity, we have a "tree" of common descent. If you're straddling the fence on that, why? And if evolution is on one side of that fence, what's on the other side?
To: PatrickHenry; VadeRetro; Gumlegs; longshadow; general_re
Where's LBB? Usually by this time of the morning these crevo threads are 60+ posts longer just from his efforts alone...
459
posted on
10/04/2002 5:48:02 AM PDT
by
Junior
To: Junior
Where's LBB? Usually by this time of the morning these crevo threads are 60+ posts longer just from his efforts alone... He's not banned. I just checked. (gore3000 signed up 2000-05-10.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 421-440, 441-460, 461-480 ... 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
