"The inner or second of the three toes is fitted with a long, straight, murderous nail which can sever an arm or eviscerate an abdomen with ease. There are many records of natives being killed by this bird."
Posted on 06/17/2009 2:31:39 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
Bird wings clearly share ancestry with dinosaur "hands" or forelimbs. A school kid can see it in the bones. But paleontologists have long struggled to explain the so-called digit dilemma.
Here's the problem: The most primitive dinosaurs in the famous theropod group (that later included Tyrannosaurus rex) had five "fingers." Later theropods had three, just like the birds that evolved from them. But which digits? The theropod and bird digits failed to match up if you number the digits from 1 to 5 starting with the thumb. Theropods looked like they had digits 1, 2 and 3, while birds have digits 2, 3 and 4.
That mismatch failed to support the widely accepted evolutionary link between dinosaurs and birds.
Now, newly described fossilized hands from a beaked, plant-eating dinosaur, called Limusaurus inextricabilis, reveal a transitional step in the evolution of modern wings from dino digits. The finding could resolve a debate over which fingers ultimately became embedded in the wing.
"Limusaurus is another one of those discoveries that makes one excited to be a paleontologist," said Matthew Lamanna of the Carnegie Museum of Natural History in Pittsburgh, .. "The discovery of a toothless, plant-eating Jurassic ceratosaur, from Asia of all places, is something that nobody in our field ever expected."
The remains of the dinosaur were discovered in the Junggar Basin of Xinjiang, in northwestern China. The deposits date back some 159 million years.
"This new animal is fascinating in and of itself, and when placed into an evolutionary context it offers intriguing evidence about how the hand of birds evolved," said James Clark of George Washington University. ..
Jack Conrad, vertebrate paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, calls the finding a "spectacular discovery." Conrad was not involved in this current research.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
"The inner or second of the three toes is fitted with a long, straight, murderous nail which can sever an arm or eviscerate an abdomen with ease. There are many records of natives being killed by this bird."
Just to do the jobs that Americans won't do.
mine's bigger than yours...
You win! That’s HUGE.
You may enjoy this:
http://ix.cs.uoregon.edu/~kent/paleontology/new/index.html
That indeed is very cool.
Yes, as is anyone who uses electricity.
If they participate in this fraud, then yes, they are.
A fancy degree does not make a person godly. Godly acts, godly thoughts, make a person godly.
When Jesus calls us home, I know there won’t be any darwinists with me on that narrow road.
These are “deviants” participating in a “fraud”. Shouldn’t there be laws against that?
“Godly acts, godly thoughts, make a person godly.”
Who decides what is godly—other than God himself, that is?
????????????
No. Its nonesense when facts stare yoou in the face and you insist on using a personal distorted view of a theological and philosophical document as a science text.
The Inquisition made the same mistake with Galileo about the Geocentric versus Heliocentric Universe theories.
Religion and science are separate disciplines and one should not intrude upon the other.
So people who accept evolution are “deviants”?
I guess follwoing the same logic, people who believe the earth revolves around the sun instead of vice-versa, are also deviants since the Bible clearly states the sun revolves around the earth.
The Bible is pretty clear on theological issues. If you want scientific facts, you look at scientific research. If you believe a religious text holds the answer to every question, you have a lot in common with the Ayatollahs and the Inquisition.
Because I don't accept YOUR version of creation doesn't make me an atheist any more than your narrow view of the Bible makes you an accomplished theologian.
Apparently Rudman.
Chapter and verse, please?
Cordially,
Sez who? Since your statement is not a statement of science, but rather a philosophical statement about science, by what authority do you impose this epistemological obligation?
Cordially,
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.
