Yet somehow I find myself strangely not compelled to give "fluffy" a hug.
Posted on 09/17/2005 3:35:39 AM PDT by SeaLion
THE popular image of Tyrannosaurus rex and other killer dinosaurs may have to be changed as a scientific consensus emerges that many were covered with feathers.
Most predatory dinosaurs such as tyrannosaurs and velociraptors have usually been depicted in museums, films and books as covered in a thick hide of dull brown or green skin. The impression was of a killer stripped of adornment in the name of hunting efficiency.
This week, however, a leading expert on dinosaur evolution will tell the British Association, the principal conference of British scientists, that this image is wrong.
Gareth Dyke, a palaeontologist of University College Dublin, will tell the BA Festival of Science being held in the city that most such creatures were coated with delicate feathery plumage that could even have been multi-coloured. Fossil evidence that such dinosaurs were feathered is now “irrefutable”.
“The way these creatures are depicted can no longer be considered scientifically accurate,” he said. “All the evidence is that they looked more like birds than reptiles. Tyrannosaurs might have resembled giant chicks.”
The latest visualisation suggests that parts of Walking with Dinosaurs, the acclaimed BBC series, cannot be seen as scientifically valid. Similar criticisms might also be levelled at the Hollywood blockbuster Jurassic Park.
The Natural History Museum in London, which has a popular exhibition of robot dinosaurs, conceded this weekend that some of its permanent displays may have to be adapted to reflect the new findings.
The feather revelation follows a series of discoveries in fossil beds at Liaoning in northeast China where a volcanic eruption buried many dinosaurs alive. It also cut off the oxygen that would otherwise have rotted them away.
Some theropod (“beast-footed”) dinosaurs were preserved complete with feathery plumage. Theropod is the name given to predatory creatures that walked upright on two legs, balanced by a long tail.
The feathered finds include an early tyrannosaur, a likely ancestor of Tyrannosaurus rex, two small flying dinosaurs and five other predators. Feathers are thought to have evolved first to keep dinosaurs warm and only later as an aid to flight.
Such finds are significant in linking dinosaurs to modern birds. Most palaeontologists accept that birds are descended from dinosaurs but there is fierce debate over how this happened. At the Dublin conference, Dyke will present new evidence suggesting that dinosaurs evolved the ability to fly and that some even developed all four limbs into wings.
Evolutionists: consistent with basic ToE, but a 'course-correction' revision in order, perhaps?
Creationists: perhaps we can have revised illustrations in some of the comics, so that terrified cavemen are depicted fleeing from feathered dinosaurs? Artistic licence is permitted for colour of the plummage, that won't conflict with current scientific evidence. :-)
Cordially
Not earth-shattering, but interesting IMHO
Yet somehow I find myself strangely not compelled to give "fluffy" a hug.
What part of evolution would give them feathers in a warm, humid jungle-like climate?
It's important to note that the actual "theory of evolution" has to do with *how* things evolve and speciate (i.e., the actual biological processes), whereas the sorts of "course-corrections" described in this article don't affect the *theory*, it just adjusts the *history* of which evolutionary changes occurred when.
It's similar to how your mechanic's initial estimate of why your car has stopped running may be found to be wrong once he opens up the engine and looks inside, but that still doesn't count as a change in the science by which internal combustion engine operates, or the theories in physics (thermodynamics, gas laws, etc.) which are involved.
Likewise, many people mistake revisions to life's "history book" as being changes to the "theory of evolution" itself, when in most cases it isn't at all, nor do such discoveries (like feathered dinosaurs) require any change to the theory whatsoever.
At the risk of oversimplification, evolutionary theory deals with "how and why", whereas evolutionary histories deal with "where and when".
Rosie O'Donnell
No "flaccid plumage" there, eh?
Sorry, but I'm hitting "abuse" on that post. Barf.
First, not all dinosaurs lived in "humid, jungle-like climates". Earth has always had a wide range of climates, even when it was on the whole warmer or colder than it is now.
Second, ectotherms ("cold-blooded" animals, although that term is now out of favor) always have problems with regulating their temperatures. Anything that helps keep a more *steady* internal temperature is an advantage, since fluctuating temperatures cause all sorts of problems, biologically. Even in a warm climate an "adjustable insulation" like feathers would help increase heat retention when the temperature drops, and allow more heat out when the temperature rises.
Hug a 5 or 6 ton carnivorous chicken?
Nope. Neither would I. Of course, I don’t go into the woods to feed the bears or play with the cougars either.
LOL!
[well played, old chap!]...;))
marker
I think it is interesting that in the minds of the people in this article, there can be no middle ground. All dinosaurs are now warm-blooded and feathered. Not some. Not most. Not just the ones located in the volcano. All. And when the advocates for this position get to a reporter, this is not stated as a theory. It is stated as a fact, which of course, in scientific method, it is not.
I wonder if that means that the fossilized skin/scale prints we were shown for all those years are hoaxes.
Believe what you will, but this is a poor example of scientific method in action.
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.