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

Skip to comments.

New Dinosaur Species Found in India
AP ^ | August 13, 2003 | RAMOLA TALWAR BADAM

Posted on 08/13/2003 9:02:05 PM PDT by nwrep

New Dinosaur Species Found in India
2 hours, 55 minutes ago
Add Top Stories - AP to My Yahoo!

By RAMOLA TALWAR BADAM, Associated Press Writer

BOMBAY, India - U.S. and Indian scientists said Wednesday they have discovered a new carnivorous dinosaur species in India after finding bones in the western part of the country.

Photo
AP Photo


Missed Tech Tuesday?
Check out the powerful new PDA crop, plus the best buys for any budget


The new dinosaur species was named Rajasaurus narmadensis, or "Regal reptile from the Narmada," after the Narmada River region where the bones were found.

The dinosaurs were between 25-30 feet long, had a horn above their skulls, were relatively heavy and walked on two legs, scientists said. They preyed on long-necked herbivorous dinosaurs on the Indian subcontinent during the Cretaceous Period at the end of the dinosaur age, 65 million years ago.

"It's fabulous to be able to see this dinosaur which lived as the age of dinosaurs came to a close," said Paul Sereno, a paleontologist at the University of Chicago. "It was a significant predator that was related to species on continental Africa, Madagascar and South America."

Working with Indian scientists, Sereno and paleontologist Jeff Wilson of the University of Michigan reconstructed the dinosaur skull in a project funded partly by the National Geographic (news - web sites) Society.

A model of the assembled skull was presented Wednesday by the American scientists to their counterparts from Punjab University in northern India and the Geological Survey of India during a Bombay news conference.

Scientists said they hope the discovery will help explain the extinction of the dinosaurs and the shifting of the continents — how India separated from Africa, Madagascar, Australia and Antarctica and collided with Asia.

The dinosaur bones were discovered during the past 18 years by Indian scientists Suresh Srivastava of the Geological Survey of India and Ashok Sahni, a paleontologist at Punjab University.

When the bones were examined, "we realized we had a partial skeleton of an undiscovered species," Sereno said.

The scientists said they believe the Rajasaurus roamed the Southern Hemisphere land masses of present-day Madagascar, Africa and South America.

"People don't realize dinosaurs are the only large-bodied animal that lived, evolved and died at a time when all continents were united," Sereno said.

The cause of the dinosaurs' extinction is still debated by scientists. The Rajasaurus discovery may provide crucial clues, Sereno said.

India has seen quite a few paleontological discoveries recently.

In 1997, villagers discovered about 300 fossilized dinosaur eggs in Pisdura, 440 miles northeast of Bombay, that Indian scientists said were laid by four-legged, long-necked vegetarian creatures.

Indian scientists said the dinosaur embryos in the eggs may have suffocated during volcanic eruptions.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: acanthostega; antarctica; australia; catastrophism; crevolist; dino; dinosaurs; godsgravesglyphs; ichthyostega; india; madagascar; narmadabasin; narmadensis; paleontology; rajasaurus; rino
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,121-1,1401,141-1,1601,161-1,180 ... 3,121-3,129 next last
To: whattajoke
If you save lots of pennies, they add up to dollars and those dollars add up to hundreds of dollars. Think about it and good night.

Nice play on words but you still have lots of pennies and no dollar bills.

1,141 posted on 08/18/2003 7:47:19 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1134 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
touche, but that's only because copper is not alive. That tiny little nuance makes a big difference, as you are well aware.
1,142 posted on 08/18/2003 7:49:38 PM PDT by whattajoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1141 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; AndrewC; Physicist; betty boop; Phaedrus; RadioAstronomer; Aric2000; Da_Shrimp
Er, since y’all have been talking about gravity …

Recently, Freeper betty boop speculated on the possibility of an extra time dimension. That is to say, in addition to the 4 dimension view which includes a time dimension, what if there were an additional, 5th dimension of time?

As soon as she mentioned it, it rang true to my Spirit and all sorts of pieces started falling together.

Extra time dimensions have previously been shunned by physics basically because instead of the time dimension in 4D being a line - this occurs before that - from the viewpoint of an extra dimension, that timeline becomes a plane and past, present, future are all accessible. This means that cause and effect can be inverted to effect and cause thus unsettling the most fundamental concept of causation.

Nevertheless, it rings true because....

Dark matter which represents 23% of the mass of the universe is like ordinary matter (Higgs boson/field theory, etc.) which represents 4% in that they are both characterized by positive gravity. Dark matter is a more extreme manifestation in space, e.g. black holes and massive neutrinos (if any.) Dark Matters: New Telescope to seek elusive matter and energy.

On the other hand, dark energy which represents 73% of the mass of the universe is characterized by negative gravity and thus, acceleration.

And much like there is a duality between particle and wave - there is a "duality" between gravity (field) and space/time.

In fact, one should view gravity as a warping of space/time that causes objects to orbit and spin into the space/time indentation caused by higher, positive gravity. Conversely, viewed as an indentation of space/time a certain escape velocity is necessary to free ordinary matter from the indentation. In black holes, not even light has sufficient escape velocity.

When we look at gravity as space/time then Einstein's desire to transmute the "base wood" of matter into the "pure marble" of geometry becomes accessible.

In the space "vacuum" which accounts for 73% of the mass of the universe, gravity (space/time) is negative, causing acceleration and strongly suggesting something else factoring into the balance. betty boop's extra time dimension fits that speculation to a "T". Constraints on extra time dimensions

Moreover, it potentially utterly solves the mysteries of non-locality, superposition and absence of dark energy in local space.

Concerning non-locality, since time would be a plane instead of a line, superluminal activity would be expected. With regard to superposition (Schrodinger's cat) all states would exist from the aspect of the extra time dimension, the determination of one being currently relevant only in the 4D block. Moreover, because the 4D plane of time is accessible by the extra time dimension - not only present and future events in the 4D block become malleable, but past as well - though, of course, none would notice such a change in 4D.

Finally, gravity (which represents space/time) would be the necessary coupling between the 4D block and the extra time dimension. Where activity is sparse, i.e. the "vacuum" of space, gravity would locate towards the extra time dimension, appearing negative in 4D, a space/time "outdent" which causes acceleration.

And for Grandpierre, Menas Kafatos and Robert Nadeau and others who seek an integrative science, the extra time dimension potentially hosts consciousness and resolves any issue concerning a renewing of the cycle of the evolution of consciousness, i.e. top down and also bottom up concurrently.

And because an extra time dimension yields our familiar 4D spacetime as a block --- and hence, the time dimension therein as a plane rather than a line --- it also potentially explains virtually all psychic phenomenon - remote healing, near death experiences, precognition, retrocognition, extrasensory perception, extra body experiences, etc.

And if all of that were not enough, it also reconciles very nicely with Scripture, including how there can be both predestination and free will!

Just some “food for thought” …

1,143 posted on 08/18/2003 7:51:00 PM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1026 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
It's been an evo insider joke for years that the DU-ers, to discredit conservatism, were behind a lot of the creo posts. Interesting that there may be some basis to this.

I always attributed it to my paranoia. But, think of the caricature (a former FReeper) posted of Pres. Bush kicking Darwin. I can easily see that used in D*m propaganda.

Planting inflammatory cr@p here, to quote it back later as typical FR (and by extension GOP) attitudes or manners, is not beyond the ethics of power-mad l*b*r*ls

1,144 posted on 08/18/2003 7:51:59 PM PDT by Virginia-American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 746 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Cause most certainly is necessary. Except for the Judeo-Christian God.

You do not observe things that just were. Except for the Judeo-Christian God.

Things have beginning. Except for the Judeo-Christian God.

His eternal pre-existence is accepted by faith. I have never stated differently. I am willing to admit a final decision based on faith. Evolutionists believe that which they have never observed by faith as well, faith in the theory. But they won't admit so. Instead, they postulate theory after theory to try to explain away God. Whatever, guys. Whatever.

... Which caused infinately complex creatures such as man with infinately complex parts such as eyeballs.

I'd have written off your misspelling as a typo had you not done it twice... In one sentence. Is it possible to have an "infinitely complex" part of a larger "infinitely complex" organism? I'm sure Star Trek tackled this conundrum at at some point, but I can't seem to wrap my brain around it right now. And btw, your claim that man and/or his eyeballs are somehow "infinitely complex" means absolutely nothing if you don't define how or why something is, "infinitely complex."


Got me on the spelling. What I mean by INFINITE complexity, is that scientists are forever finding out that things are even more complex than they had observed. They are also irreducibly complex, which Michael Behe deals with extensively in Darwin's Black Box.

Nobody observed the big bang. Nobody has observed macroevolution.

Or the murder of Niclole Brown Simpson. So?

So, it is a hypothesis.

the best science can come up with are a handful of disputed examples of transitional species.

Disputed by whom? A fractionally tiny band of American christian bible literalists? Trust me, you are not on their radar. A "handful?" You must have the palm capacity of a small city.


By scientists. You have transitions WITHIN species, but not jumps to totally different KINDs (which I defined much earlier on this thread).

You only have what Creationists acknowledge- microevolution (variation within species or kind) not macroevolution (huge change of kind to kind).

Please define "kind." If you save lots of pennies, they add up to dollars and those dollars add up to hundreds of dollars. Think about it and good night.

The thing is, you don't save a lot of pennies with what is observed. You LOSE information, not GAIN information in DNA mutation. An ape would have to GAIN information it doesn't have to know what to do to become a human being. Instead, whenever we see DNA change, it is because information has been lost. You may have a genetic variation that allows a species to adapt to environment, but you don't have a variation that allows that species to jump into a different KIND of creature altogether (i.e., you see variations amongst species of cats but you do not see an ape suddenly getting added information to let it turn into a human.) Your bank is bankrupt.
1,145 posted on 08/18/2003 7:57:13 PM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1134 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
YES, so!!

Strawman cometh again.

You must have gotten a great deal on the straw, because you sure are making a lot of them.
1,146 posted on 08/18/2003 7:59:25 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1137 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
touche, but that's only because copper is not alive.

Well, E.coli is alive and billions of them don't make dollar bills. I don't think that jillions of them would make an elephant either. Now give me an unlimited amount of E.coli a few pieces of laboratory ware, a few reagents and I feel confident I could make something resembling a dollar bill.

1,147 posted on 08/18/2003 8:01:04 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1142 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
Men can't spell. Women can't add.

If you can't spell or add, you're a West Virginian.

1,148 posted on 08/18/2003 8:01:17 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1122 | View Replies]

To: whattajoke
Fine. Have yours removed. Our eyes are made for our environment. Degeneration is a result of the fall. I recently read about the so-called bad design of our eyes. The results are in. God did good.
1,149 posted on 08/18/2003 8:02:22 PM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1139 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
I can spell, just not in a hurry and just not the word "infinite".
1,150 posted on 08/18/2003 8:03:02 PM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1148 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
This is a hypothesis.

No, it's a theory. It makes extensively detailed, quantitative predictions that have been tested and borne out in every particular by observation.

This is not proof it happened.

That's true. It's not logically possible to prove any theory by observation. All you can ever do is test its predictions, and the best you can ever say is that it has passed all of its tests. That is the case with the Big Bang.

Demanding to know the cause of the big bang demands the evolutionist to put his money where his mouth is.

Please try again to digest what I posted. At the Big Bang time (as we define it) folds back upon itself; all possible directions point towards the future. Causes, by definition, are necessarily prior to effects. At the instant of the Big Bang, there's mathematically no such "prior" time. It's actually very simple.

Excuse if I am a bit incredulous.

I excuse you on the grounds of your ignorance. These things do sound incredible to someone who is unfamiliar with the evidence. Fortunately, that is correctible to someone with an open mind.

You don't have a plant turning into an animal or a horse turning into a kitty cat.

And it's a good thing, too, because such an event would utterly refute the entire edifice of evolution. Anyone with the most cursory understanding of evolution understands this.

1,151 posted on 08/18/2003 8:03:48 PM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1104 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
On second thought, you may be on to something. Maybe that is why Bob KKK Byrd has everything named after himself. He meant to name it after someone else but all he ever learned to spell was his name!
1,152 posted on 08/18/2003 8:03:58 PM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1148 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Your credentials exceed Behe's? I'm impressed.
1,153 posted on 08/18/2003 8:05:10 PM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1146 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
I was using the kitty cat as an absurd illustration of species jumping to species. I realize that Evolutionists look at something with a little tighter reign than that. However, DNA mutation is usually harmful to a species and does not result in its become an entirely different KIND of animal. Evolution believes we sprang from molten rock over millions of years of time. This is a hypothesis *defined : a tentative assumption made in order to draw out and test its logical or empirical consequences. Science assumes billions of years. Science assumes evolution. It hypothesizes how this occurred and then looks for the evidence.
1,154 posted on 08/18/2003 8:10:09 PM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1151 | View Replies]

To: Virginia-American
But, think of the caricature (a former FReeper) posted of Pres. Bush kicking Darwin. I can easily see that used in D*m propaganda.

I think the creationist label is a slam on Bush that people like Gary Trudeau love to perpetuate. He's an Ivy-Leaguer with a fine mind, if verbally a bit prone to ... Bushisms.

There's no question he's very religious, but I think (sure hope, anyway) that he's not the kind to reject science for theology.

1,155 posted on 08/18/2003 8:11:33 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1144 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
Your credentials exceed Behe's? I'm impressed.

Argument from scientific authority? Creationists should never never never never never never do that. If scientific authority means anything, we've got you thousands to one.

1,156 posted on 08/18/2003 8:13:02 PM PDT by VadeRetro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1153 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
No, but Behe is a SMALL minority in the science community, and I mean SMALL minority.

Most scientists look at Behe as a joke, and I have to say that I agree with them.

Irreducibly Complex? Come on, give me a fricking break.

When you are ignorant of the cause, to say Goddidit is the ultimate in laziness.

Behe was lazy, pure and simple, or ignorant, take your pick.
1,157 posted on 08/18/2003 8:14:40 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1153 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Argued that because earlier he questioned my credentials.
1,158 posted on 08/18/2003 8:14:51 PM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1156 | View Replies]

To: Aric2000
Argument from Majority opinion is invalid. Likewise, your unsubstantiated assertions are abundant. Behe is a scientist who has spent much time studying the complexity of the universe. Evolution can't explain what Behe witnessed. So, you call him ignorant and lazy. You are showing when an evolutionist doesn't like the evidence then he discounts it outright and starts attacking the person instead. Behe's work stands. You can reject it, but your rebuttal is extremely weak.
1,159 posted on 08/18/2003 8:20:34 PM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1157 | View Replies]

To: DittoJed2
Science assumes evolution. It hypothesizes how this occurred and then looks for the evidence.

In a word, WRONG.

Science looks at the evidence it has collected, comes up with a hypothesis to fit the evidence, then looks for evidence that the hypothesis predicts.

When science indeed finds the evidence that the hypothesis predicts, the Hypothesis becomes a theory.

So, evolution was put together by scientists who were looking at evidence, then, once they had come up with the hypothesis, they looked for evidence that the theory predicted.

So far, evolution has passed EVERY muster, including every strawman that you have brought up throughout this thread.

Evolution makes predictions, until you can come up with SCIENTIFICALLY verifiable and repeatable evidence to prove it wrong, evolution will remain where it is.

So far, EVERY strawman that you have brought out has been blown to bits, you've got straw scattered all over the thread. I could layer a good sized barn with the amount of straw that has been shredded from your strawmen.

1,160 posted on 08/18/2003 8:20:50 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1154 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,121-1,1401,141-1,1601,161-1,180 ... 3,121-3,129 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