2 hours, 55 minutes ago
 |
Add Top Stories - AP to My Yahoo! |
Posted on 08/13/2003 9:02:05 PM PDT by nwrep
|
2 hours, 55 minutes ago
|
|
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.
Amazing!!!
PatrickHenry, if there is a debate semi-related to evolution - you will be there doing a silly victory dance.
I am not taking any side on the evolutionist rap but tyrants, murders, and all kinds of cretins have tried to hide behind religion – but that does not make them Christians or Muslims or actual followers of a religion. The problem here is man’s nature, not religion. Evil men do bad things like kill people, pervert governments, and pervert religions. Remember, the worst mass-murders (Stalin and Mao) did it NOT in the name of any religion. Hitler DID NOT use Christianity as the basis for the holocaust (he used genetic and economic issues as the justification)
As I understand it, Tim McVeigh was a member of Christian Identity which is a neo-Nazi organization, not a bible study group.
Well. I have heard this rap before. Hitler used symbols from many different sources. He knew if he could co-opt Christianity for his own purposes – it would help him control the masses. There is nothing in Hitler’s life to make anybody with an open mind believe he was a Christian. Misuse of Christian symbols and concepts does not make one a Christian. Hitler followed Norse Mythology to a greater extent than Christianity – but I guess bringing that point out would ruin the anti-Christian spin.
He took the bible, interpreted it the way he wanted to, and then took that mess and turned it into a political goal.
I agree – except it was political from the getgo – Hitler started from the position of politics and twisted Christian symbols to help meet his political goals. That makes him NOT a Christian. (HINT: A Christian is one that follows the teachings of Jesus Christ. I have seen no evidence that Hitler followed the teachings of Jesus Christ)
He was a plagarer(spelling) and took from ANYWHERE that would help him, that included religion, science, philosophy, etc ad nauseum. He was a very intelligent and educated man, but he was also one of the nuttiest fruitcakes that ever lived.
I totally agree. That is what makes the man Hitler so intriguing.
Golly. Go to a thread that is even slight related to evolution and one can find the usual suspects. The only reason I stopped by the thread is I wanted to figure out how a thread about a new type of dinosaur could stay at the top of the list so long.
Blimey.
"Ere's me 'ead me arse is following" bookmark.
I believe you, but others use ridicule to suppress those with which they do not agree. In their zeal to get me, one of those got slapped down. That person is still trying. Let him, I will not be silenced by such.
Oh, by the way, what do you think of the 4 hip bones that accompany the single fossil example of the ambulocetus? At least they appear to be 4 different ones, there cannot be less than three. post 2352
I have a hard time taking links to "Star Destroyer" seriously. I have seen this spin before and it is clearly spin. Whoever wrote it started out with a conclusion and looked through history to support his pre-defined conclusions. It reads more like twisting, distorting, and spinning than true study of the facts. Read the FAQ – this guy has got an ax to grind – he does not want his Children “indoctrinated” into Christianity. There may be some “facts” in his statements but this guy has a closed mind and he clearly is not trying to find the “truth” – all he is doing is trying to prove his anti-Christian opinions are valid. This is spin, nothing more, nothing less. Spin often contains facts – but facts woven into spin are of little value.
True. And very nice. I meant no disrespect to you.
I tried being polite a few times but it's not my nature to suffer fools gladly. She'll either come back or she won't.
I don't agree with a single thing DittoJed2 has said, but she has defended her corner with spirit, which is praiseworthy, no?
This is where I disagree with you. She simply spammed the thread. She didn't dialogue or debate, she didn't read the links provided or didn't understand them, she accepted nothing that Ichy* posted, and she didn't challenge anything in any useful, instructive, or informative way. IMO, for a real dialogue/debate, you must listen to the other side's arguments and address them; dismissing them with a vague handwave wastes everybody's time.
*Ichneumon has some of the most instructive posts around and I am glad to learn from him/her.
I agree with that last point. If Hitler was a Christian than Marilyn Manson is the pope.
Expect some here to soon be referring to Pope Manson.
...and her and others jumping us.
It's a debate. It's not a tea party. If that offends anyone's delicate sensibilities, they should find another hobby. It's true that it shouldn't go overboard and everyone should attempt to be well-mannered, but continual whimpering about who was less genteel to whom first (or most) via some personal double-standard scorecard bespeaks of an unhealthy obsession.
If you think this is bad, you should see how rough professional "peer review" can get. Science, like the judicial system, is intentionally an adversarial system. You make your best case, then in effect everyone does their best to try to prove you a liar or an incompetent. If your work survives the onslaught, it's considered solid. If not, you slink out of the arena and vow to do better next time. People who propose "alternative" paradigms to mainstream science need to come to terms with that, and stop whining about how they're being abused when someone points out, "wait, that makes no sense and you don't understand the field you're trying to overturn".
Fine record "you"(collective) have.
On the whole, I approve of "our" (collective) record more than I do "yours" (collective). Furthermore, to my view our side has a lot fewer crybabies who fit the classic idiom, "can dish it out but can't take it".
It started out with the "medved" charge.
Oh, for PETE'S SAKE. First, one would have to be incredibly hypersensitive to find fault with that post. Even DittoJed2 took it as a compliment when she learned who Medved was. Second, it was an "inside" comment that DittoJed2 wouldn't have even realized was directed at her (nor known what it meant) until someone (*cough*) made a big bloody deal about it as if it were a deadly sin, which it was not. Finally, what in the heck is so supposedly wrong with pointing out that someone's views remind regulars of someone else's views? RELAX, please.
Additionally, it didn't "start" with that. Several posts earlier DittoJed2 had written:
I don't find evolutionists "amusing". I find them pathetically sad. I also find them angering because they willfully distort the record in text books to get kids to believe the lie of evolution while suppressing anything that even sounds like creation.So the namecalling didn't start with the Medved post (which was not actually namecalling anyway), it started with DittoJed2 calling evolutionists willful liars. But hey, I guess that got scored via the *other* side of the double-standard, and thus didn't rise to the level of uncivil...
I have saved this thread. It is an object lesson in belittling, the epitome.
See post #478 if you want to see the epitome of belittling, namecalling, and hypocrisy -- by a creationist.
I have heard that some religionists have adopted the bizarre tactic of claiming that atheism is a religion, but as we can see, it doesn't come anywhere near the proper definition, so I can only imagine that they are either lying or deliberately quoting "loose" secondary definitions (ie- meant for colloquial uses such as "football is his religion").
Now the truth:
Religion: 4. A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.
(American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition)
This Cat pursues his atheism with zeal and conscientious devotion – just imagine all the hours he spends compiling this anti-Christian spin
See, this is what it is all about. Spin - Distortion - ANYTHING to support his predetermined conclusion. Atheism fits the description of a religion. This man is a propagandist.
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.
