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
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.
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 ... 1,621-1,640, 1,641-1,660, 1,661-1,680 ... 3,121-3,129 next last
To: whattajoke; general_re
Yeah, except that is not what I said. I said that Pangea doesn't work.
Actually, the Bible seems to indicate the possibility of a more closely knit continental system than we see today.
Non-drifting P L A C E M A R K E R
1,642
posted on
08/20/2003 11:36:25 AM PDT
by
PatrickHenry
(Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
To: DittoJed2
Actually, the Bible seems to indicate the possibility of a more closely knit continental system than we see today.
Well, yeah! and a super tiny little "world" that was capable of being completely flooded over, but not before one gentleman was able to scour every square inch collecting 2 of every single animal "kind." Or something.
To: whattajoke
No, there is a part in Genesis where it talks about the world being divided. This was during the time of Peleg if I am remembering correctly.
To: DittoJed2
Be advised, if you pick a single point and successfully defend it, that success will be marginalized and called meaningless. "But what about all this other stuff"
To: AndrewC
Be advised that is not what's happening here.
To: AndrewC
I've noticed that.
To: DittoJed2
I repeat, my previous message to you. Plus, excuses do not have to be made for things that are not happening.
To: DittoJed2
You are very observant!!
To: whattajoke
Computer models of how Pangea fit together ignore information concerning Central and South America. And, as I said, the way Pangea is usually drawn (at least) shrinks Africa. There are good articles online by creationists that do discuss continental drift. ALL of the suggestions are hypotheses both for the evolutionary side and against. Note, I am not arguing against Plate Techtonics, just against the particular evolutionary interpretation of them.
To: DittoJed2
SHOULD HAVE BEEN SPELLED TECTONICS, SORRY.
To: AndrewC
Be advised, if you pick a single point and successfully defend it, that success will be marginalized and called meaningless No fair, old chap - touchdown dances are for after you actually score ;)
1,652
posted on
08/20/2003 12:06:22 PM PDT
by
general_re
(A clear conscience is usually the sign of a bad memory.)
To: DittoJed2
Plate tectonics is a theory, not a hypothesis. Please be aware of this very important point, it makes a big difference to us fuddy duddy science guys.
There are numerous evidences supporting Pangea. Soil evidence, fossil evidence, mineral evidence, visual evidence, seismic evidence, genetic evidence, faunal evidence. I won't bore you with all that stuff, as you can simply put the phrases "xxx evidence pangea" in google and you'll be rewarded.
Since AndrewC has accused me (implicitly at least) of not focusing, can we return to your contention that "continents aren't on lily pads but there's lots of dirt beneath them?" I mean, that was a pretty important thing you said there and didn't return to.
To: whattajoke
A friend of mine did some studies of fossil trees in both South America and Africa (work done in 1930s to 1940s, unfortunately I don't have a reference.) What he got was a common sequence (actually several, depending on the family of tree) between both Africa and South America. We can call this sequence A. Then in Africa, there was a sequence B which clearly joined with A giving AB. In South America, there was another sequence C, clearly joined with A, giving AC. So for several types of trees we have a sequences lined up according to AAAAABBBBB and AAAAACCCCC. The AAAAA is common to both Africa and South America, the BBBBB and CCCCC belong to one continent only.
He used this to bolster continential drift before any mechanism was found.
1,654
posted on
08/20/2003 12:11:36 PM PDT
by
Doctor Stochastic
(Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
To: AndrewC
good pt ...
Be advised, if you pick a single point and successfully defend it, that success will be marginalized and called meaningless. "But what about all this other stuff"
funny !
evolution is a two toothed ozark spin - smile ...
down with thinking ---
up with lies !
1,655
posted on
08/20/2003 12:15:43 PM PDT
by
f.Christian
(evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
To: whattajoke
Plate techtonics IS a theory. Pangea is a hypothesis. The way it is typically drawn ignores information. The continents very well may have been together at one point, but it may not have been exactly in the shape that evolutionists propose. Shrinking Africa and ignoring other countries doesn't help the Pangea hypothesis.
As far as the lily-pad analogy goes, do you suggest that the continents are just free floating lily pads? I don't see where my statement was problematic.
To: whattajoke
The really explicit plate-tectonics deniers are those who throw up Dr. Walt Brown's Hydroplate Theory. (We've had a few such.) That abomination has the continents skidding around on cushions of subterranean water and banging into each other like bumper cars right after the flood. That is, they don't believe in slow tectonics, but they believe the same thing can happen incredibly fast if there's water down below.
Of course, anyone who thinks the earth is 6K old has some kind of a problem with plate tectonics. Most of them just don't know it.
To: VadeRetro
The little monkey island - thinking you inhabit - exhibit ... isn't the world God created !
1,658
posted on
08/20/2003 12:39:49 PM PDT
by
f.Christian
(evolution vs intelligent design ... science3000 ... designeduniverse.com --- * architecture * !)
To: general_re
No fair, old chap - touchdown dances are for after you actually score ;)Are you saying I'm that guy who runs a zillion yards and then fumbles the ball just before crossing the touchdown line?
To: VadeRetro
Of course, anyone who thinks the earth is 6K old has some kind of a problem with plate tectonics. Most of them just don't know itNo, just have a problem with the evolutionary interpretation of it. Here is an article by Baumgartner. Of course, you'll reject it too, but it gives another possibility for continental drift. Baumgartner also seems to believe that Pangea is correct. I can disagree here based on the above reasons (mainly missing land mass).
http://www.icr.org/research/jb/largescaletectonics.htm
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,621-1,640, 1,641-1,660, 1,661-1,680 ... 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson