New Dinosaur Species Found in India

AP ^ | August 13, 2003 | RAMOLA TALWAR BADAM

[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.

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.

[Aric2000]

I hope you don't mind if I believe that you and your book have a credibility problem when it comes to science.

At least your understanding of it.

Evolution is science, and since it occurred on earth, there is NO reason that it could not have happened on another planet as well.

We shall see, you and I may not live to see it, but I am hoping that within my lifetime, some sort of contact will be made.

It's gonna happen, again, it's just a matter of time.

[Right Wing Professor]

Naturalism is not a religion. In fact, I warrant you are a naturalist about 95% of the time, and I'm sure you don't think of yourself as an apostate.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for the article!

Indeed, I note the use of the word lightening! Great catch! It appears some of the ancients drew a relationship between lightening (as in weather) and meteor showers.

I'm still looking for any indication that an ancient prior to 1 Enoch associated lightening with the death of a star.

[DittoJed2]

I disagree Da_Shrimp. The fossil record is always painted as the evolutionist's friend, but in reality, there are some very serious problems with it for Evolution. One question that I asked earlier is where did the dinosaurs come from? I don't recall anyone answering that, because they all the sudden seem to appear, like the Cambrian explosion. There are many other problems with the central basis for Darwin's theory. Some are detailed Here

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Couldn't Iraneus have called for seven gospels in analogy with the seven cardinal virtures, seven deadlyly sins, seven days of he week, seven (ancient) planets, seven (ancient) metals, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, seven seas, Seven Ways from Sundown, Seven Voyages of Sinbad, etc.?

Think, "Holy hand grenade of Antioch".

[biblewonk]

We shall see, you and I may not live to see it, but I am hoping that within my lifetime, some sort of contact will be made.

It's gonna happen, again, it's just a matter of time.

Oh how I know that longing feeling of desiring it to finally happen. I used to be a major evolutionist and still am a lover of astronomy. I remember gazing at the stars after watching Battlescar Galictica just longing to see one of them move. I wanted to know that there was some hope and evolution was my hope.

I now consider all of that to be dung conpared to knowing Jesus.

[biblewonk]

Those are about the only chances of ever finding the remains of a bacterium since we'll never travel beyond them. That's a lot of hope to place in such an insignificant thing. "Look I think I found a 1 micron piece of evidence that I don't have to worry about my sins or God!!! I can just die in peace, OH BOY!!"

[Junior]

I think I see your problem: you treat everything as a religion, not just Christianity. At least, that's the way your post comes across. Remember, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...

[DittoJed2]

New Testament theology, which takes all of the Bible and synthecizes it into the basics, can not be used to justify attrocities. Kings, like Charlemagne (sp?) used his political power to force conversions to Christianity, but he did not get such conversion by force from Scripture. The Bible, may be misused, certainly. But, it is the utter distortion of Scripture not the offshoot or natural implication of Scripture that produces such acts.

Darwinism was a much more natural fit for some of the worst attrocities in history. It didn't overtly go out and promote things such as Racism but, many of its early followers like Huxley did- based upon Darwinian thinking.

[Junior]

Finding evidence of extraterrestrial life has nothing to do with your being a sinner. You are reinforcing my belief that you see everything as religion, however...

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for the heads up, RWP! DittoJed2 is not among those of us who signed on to the agreement of the willing and thus I suggest ignoring such lines of argument altogether.

DittoJed2, those of us who are among the willing agree that we cannot read one another's minds and thus will not attribute beliefs and motives. More specifically, we agree not to accuse someone of being a Marxist, a Nazi, etc. because they believe in evolution.

The accusation leads to flame wars - always. The counter argument against the Church likewise leads to flame wars - always, and in-fighting as science threads become doctrinal show-downs between denominations, particularly Catholics v. Protestants. To that end, we also agree that we will never demand another Freeper disavow a belief or swear to a belief he does not hold.

Therefore, to keep the peace on science threads, we eschew all such arguments. I strongly recommend to all on this thread not to engage in any such discussion!

[DittoJed2]

Finding extraterrestrial life would not threaten the Bible account. I don't believe it exists, but it wouldn't bother me if it did.

And, yes, for Christians, it is impossible to separate a religious point of view from how we view the rest of the world. This shouldn't come as a surprise, nor should it be used as a weapon- for you too, Junior, have presuppositions that make up your World view and color how you see everything you look at. You may not call it a religion, but it has religious implications.

[balrog666]

Remember, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...

You talkin' Freud or Clinton?

[biblewonk]

I think I see your problem: you treat everything as a religion, not just Christianity. At least, that's the way your post comes across. Remember, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...

There is nothing I see that doesn't remind me of God, I'll certainly give you that. I play a game with my kids, I used to anyway, called "What does that remind you of from the bible". I think Paul and John the Baptist saw things that way too. "So Paul, other than all that religious stuff, what else is on yer mind dude?".

[Aric2000]

Well, you will excuse me if I take the word of 99% of scientists that understand that evolution is science.

You will also excuse me if I think that your credibility in making that judgement is questionable to say the least.

You will also excuse me if I find your motivation in saying that, not only questionable, but extremely telling of what is and what is not right in your world.

But to say that it somehow has credibility over what is and what is not science, is extremely laughable.

We are done, you are using the same old refuted arguments, the same old silly links, the same old traditional strawmen, and I for one am tired of watching them get trampled again, and again, and again, every time some newby comes in here thinking that they have all the answers.

Then when trounced, begins with the hitler, mussolini socialism things again. As soon as you started with that old silliness, the conversation was over as far as most of us are concerned. And now it is over as far as I am concerned.

Bring some ACTUAL science to the discussion and we can discuss it, debate evidence etc, we can discuss it, but as soon as you start claiming that science is somehow responsible for "IDEAS" that are vile to say the least, then the conversation ends until you can figure out what a real discussion based on REAL evidence looks like.

[DittoJed2]

Alamo, show me where I accused a single person of any of these things. As a historian, I can point to Nazism as having sprung in part from Darwinian philosophy. I have been careful not to say that these people are Nazi's or the like. I'm drawing out implications of what a Darwinian worldview brings out and it should be fair game if I am able to back it up with facts. I accused nobody here of being a Nazi.

As for the Protestant/Catholic thing, I've also been careful to try to stay away from it too. I had specific links and issues presented to me, which I addressed. If you look at the record, you will see this is correct. But I do have a Masters in History as well, and when someone is going to distort the record about Church history, I'm going to defend it.

[Da_Shrimp]

One question that I asked earlier is where did the dinosaurs come from?

And one question I asked you is why dinosaur fossils are never, ever found alongside modern mammal fossils. Creationism has never been able to explain this one, simple fact.

[Shryke]

The word trinity is not in the bible. Neither are the terms UFO's, alien life forms, Extra terresterials, etc. But all the concepts are there. I no longer jump when people demand bible quotes after 15 years of watching bible verses that I so lovingly study trampled under foot.

I am even MORE confused now. From your above statement, the bible addresses concepts relating to extra-terrestrials without using that term (or the Trinity, UFOs, etc). How can the bible mention life from other plantes and then say there is no other life out there?

Additionally, I am not asking you to quote from the bible if you don't wish to. I'm only attempting to learn a bit more about the bible. Let me know if you wish to cease.

[Da_Shrimp]

New Testament theology, which takes all of the Bible and synthecizes it into the basics, can not be used to justify attrocities

Nonetheless, it has been used. If the Bible did not exist, then the atrocities done in its name would not have happened. Human nature being what it is, another excuse would have been used, for sure.

[DittoJed2]

Well, you will excuse me if I take the word of 99% of scientists that understand that evolution is science.
Source?????

You will also excuse me if I think that your credibility in making that judgement is questionable to say the least.
And your credibility is what????

You will also excuse me if I find your motivation in saying that, not only questionable, but extremely telling of what is and what is not right in your world.
And you will excuse me if I don't care what you think my 'motivation' is.

But to say that it somehow has credibility over what is and what is not science, is extremely laughable.

We are done, you are using the same old refuted arguments, the same old silly links, the same old traditional strawmen, and I for one am tired of watching them get trampled again, and again, and again, every time some newby comes in here thinking that they have all the answers.


Then stop talking to me.

Then when trounced, begins with the hitler, mussolini socialism things again. As soon as you started with that old silliness, the conversation was over as far as most of us are concerned. And now it is over as far as I am concerned.


The historical record stands. Sorry, it threatens you.

Bring some ACTUAL science to the discussion and we can discuss it, debate evidence etc, we can discuss it, but as soon as you start claiming that science is somehow responsible for "IDEAS" that are vile to say the least, then the conversation ends until you can figure out what a real discussion based on REAL evidence looks like.
Aric, you of all people on this thread have not really debated evidence but have thrown out a lot of unsubstantiated assertions about the evidence, about creationists, etc., Others on this thread have tried to bring forward evidence, which I found uncompelling, yet respect them for trying.

I am not, by the way, a "newbie" to F.R. or even to these kind of threads. I don't chime in very frequently, true. But I have made comments before. I had no delusion that I would sway a single evolutionist on this thread. None whatsoever. But, I came on the thread to cause people to realize that the "evidence" is not as universally accepted and proven as the evolutionists would have us believe. You don't have to talk to me anymore. That's fine, and it is your choice.