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.

[Right Wing Professor]

In contrast, Germany, Spain and Italy are far more religious, and yet all three have been fascist in the last 60 years. There seems to be little correlation between religiosity and democracy.

No, all three included evolutionist whackos who paraded under the banner of religiosity. Today, all three countries have a very low percentage of bible-believing Christians in their borders. In fact, a little research into the countries reveals their declining religiosity

Unattributed waffle removed. Here's a real citation.

Percent of population attneding church weekly;

Sweden    4
Finland   4
Denmark   5
Norway    5
Germany   14
Spain     25
Italy     45

Clearly the Scandinavian countries have a far lower level of church attendance than the hitherto fascist Germany, italy and Spain. The claim that religion and democracy are positively correlated is simply unfounded.

[DittoJed2]

Careful you don't sit on your umbrella.

[Ichneumon]

Sure doesn't sound like Christianity to me.

Because you're looking at the wrong paragraphs:

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."

-- Adolf Hitler, "Mein Kampf", Vol. I Chap. II.

[DittoJed2]

Where did the rules for democracy come from in Scandinavian countries?

[Right Wing Professor]

Hitler invoked evolution when it was useful to do so, and God when it was useful to do so.

[js1138]

Again, I did not call Evolutionists Nazis. I simply said the Nazis were evolutionists and were not being inconsistent with Evolutionary philosophy for being such.

While you were getting your 106 percent (presumably not in math) did you by any chance study propaganda techniques? Read the sentence I just quoted and tell me what its intent is.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for the passages and for your analysis!

I'm looking for some authenticating source to help ascertain the significance of a quote from the 1 Enoch book of astronomy which was found at Qumran (Dead Sea Scrolls.)

The fragment 4Q208 has a paleographic age of 200 B.C. and was carbon-dated, calibrated 166-102 BC and 186-92 BC. Radiocarbon dating of scrolls

The verse in question reads:

“And I saw another thing regarding lightening: how some stars arise and become lightening and cannot dwell with the rest.” 1 Enoch 44

The text describes a travel through heaven where the angels are describing things to Enoch. This particular passage sounds like a supernova to me (possibly stellar evolution since he speaks of a star arising and then turning to lightening.)

But Right Wing Professor proposed it might be a description of a shooting star.

Links provided by RWP and PH have shown that the ancients saw meteor showers as omens or predictors of weather: for instance.

RadioAstronomer has promised to do some checking tonight.

The question is, if 1 Enoch is a fabrication, where did an ancient before 200 B.C. (the DSS texts are copies) get the idea that a shooting star was a star dying?

More background: the book of Enoch is quoted in Jude and a hundred passages in the New Testament are rooted in its phrasing. The Essenes of Qumran were anti-Hellenistic though they would have been under the Greek influence before heading to the wilderness. Before that the Jews had been in exile in Babylonia. The language of 1 Enoch at Qumran is Aramaic though the scholars believe the original from which the copies were made may have been both Aramaic and Hebrew, like the book of Daniel

[CobaltBlue]

Telling us you made a 106 in your undergraduate history class isn't as impressive as citing actual sources to support your argument. I made an A a year ago in a graduate level history class on the history of the Nazi party taught at George Mason University by Dr. Peter Black, Senior Historian, Center for Advanced Holocaust Studies at the Holocaust Museum, and I say you're wrong.

My credentials outweigh your credentials, nyah nyah.

But if you're a real historian, you can quote actual sources to support your argument, maybe even real footnotes from papers you've written, in Chicago Manual of Style format.

[Junior]

Well, those pics were taken in winter, it's been hot this summer.

Define hot.

--[Gerry, who lives in the "Heart of Dixie" wherein temperatures approach the triple digits with 100 percent humidity -- used to keep the yankees away, but then they went and invented air conditioning]

[DittoJed2]

And who was his "creator"? Read the sentence right before your quotation:

Eternal Nature inexorably avenges the infringement of her commands.

Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.

Hitler believed in "providence" and "evolution." Not, Christianity. He used Religiosity (specifically Roman Catholocism) to get the cooperation of the people but then began to jail the religious. Again, his belief was not Christian.

[js1138]

To the evolutionists on this thread, are you each pro-life? If so, how do you justify a pro-life belief in an anti-biblical system?

Are you arguing that no one in the history of the world except fundamentalist Christians ever loved their children?

[Aric2000]

It is NOT an anti-biblical system, it is science.

Science is NOT anti anything. It is neutral as far as religion, politics etc are concerned.

It is only interested in explanations.

YOU as a human being are responsible for the use that your knowledge is put to.

If you choose to see evolution as Anti-bible, there is nothing that I can say that will disuade you from such a ridiculous notion.

It just tells me that you are clueless as to what science is attempting to do.

And as far as being anti-abortion or proabortion, I am anti-abortion. Why? If I used evolution as a reason, this is what I would say.

Each living being is the culmination of BILLIONS of evolution, and the destruction of such a life is a catastrophy of major proportions, to destroy what took BILLIONS of years to develop is wrong.

Now, as unscientific as that statement was, and how silly it sounded, it would still make the case of using evolution for an anti-abortion stand.

Now, as far as my personal belief is concerned, I am anti-abortion, why that is, is not something that you would understand nor want to, nor would I tell you if you actually were.

[DittoJed2]

If I thought it would matter, I would. By the way, I said that was my undergraduate degree. I also have a Masters of History from a large secular university, and a Masters in theology from a widely respected mainstream seminary, so I've done a little study in my day.

[Doctor Stochastic]

Is that a description of how The Stars Fell on Alabama?

[PatrickHenry]

I didn't start this Hitler stuff, but as long as some creationist was foolish to bring it up ...

Actually, Hitler was a creationist:

For it was by the Will of God that men were made of a certain bodily shape, were given their natures and their faculties. Whoever destroys His work wages war against God's Creation and God's Will.
-- Adolph Hitler, noted creationist

Source: Book 2, Chapter 10, Mein Kampf by Adolf Hitler.
Discussed at Adolf Hitler's Religion.

[CobaltBlue]

He used Religiosity (specifically Roman Catholocism) to get the cooperation of the people but then began to jail the religious.

In what sense did Hitler "use" Roman Catholicism?

[DittoJed2]

I am not dismissing science. I am dismissing evolution. You confuse the two and make the two sound inseparable. You could still have science without evolution. And, strangely, you could have evolution without science.

[Right Wing Professor]

Where did the rules for democracy come from in Scandinavian countries?

Almost certainly not from their religion, which was nominally Lutheran. Luther, if you'll remember, sided with the German princes against the peasants.

Quoting the great man himself.

First they have sworn to their true and gracious rulers to be submissive and obedient, in accord with God's command (Matt. xxii. 21), "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's," and (Rom. xiii. 1), "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers." But since they have deliberately an sacrilegiously abandoned their obedience, and in addition have dared to oppose their lords, they have thereby forfeited body an soul, as perfidious, perjured, lying, disobedient wretches and scoundrels are wont to do. Wherefore St. Paul judges them, saying (Rom. xiii. 2.), "And they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation." The peasants will incur this sentence, sooner or later; for God wills that fidelity and allegiance shall be sacredly kept.

[Aric2000]

Yes, you could have science without evolution.

But there would NOT be evolution without the scientific process.

The scientific evidence existed first, so without science, and the scientific evidence that came from it, there would be NO theory of evolution.

So no, without science, there would be no Theory of Evolution.

[CobaltBlue]

Oh, dear, I guess I need to haul out my big guns, Juris Doctorate (J.D.) and Master of Laws (LL.M.). Not as impressive as a Ph.D., but since neither of us have one of those, I guess that makes us about even.

Now, what about sources for your argument? Or do you intend to rely on your 106 as proof?