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.

[Alamo-Girl]

Rats, that should have read:

Aristarchus first proposed orbits in 150 B.C. but it was not taken seriously until Copernicus.

[Alamo-Girl]

To keep these dates in perspective, the Qumran (Dead Sea Scroll) fragments were copied 200-150 B.C. The date of the text from which they were copied is unknown.

Noah was Enoch's grandson and lived about 2350 B.C. (there are various dating methods)

[Right Wing Professor]

So presumably the writer of Enoch must have been familiar with Greek philosophy. I suppose that's not too much of a stretch if it's dated at 200 BC; at the time, the Eastern Mediterranean was hellenized, and people traveled pretty freely.

Chaps. 72-82 The Astronomical Book, like the Book of Watchers, may date from the third century BCE; the oldest copy of it seems to have been made not long after 200 BCE. Sizable portions of the text are preserved on four copies, written in Aramaic, from Qumran cave 4. The Aramaic original appears to have been much different and much longer than the Ethiopic text, adding far more astronomical details."      - James C. Vanderkam

And further

King argues that 1 Enoch is an unmistakable product of Hellenistic civilization (although its roots are firmly embedded in Mesopotamian and Persian tradition).

"A world view so encyclopaediac that it embraced the geography of heaven and earth, astronomy, meteorology, medicine was no part of Jewish tradition - but was familiar to educated Greeks, but attempting to emulate and surpass Greek wisdom, by having an integrating divine plan for destiny, elaborated through an angelic host with which Enoch is in communication through his mystical travels."

[PatrickHenry]

Aristarchus first proposed orbits in 150 B.C. but it was not taken seriously until Copernicus.

There was also that amazingly complicated system of Ptolemy, with epicycles (which assumed a motionless earth). I think the reason that notion the earth might be orbiting the sun wasn't taken seriously was suggested in that website about Aristotle in one of my earlier posts. If we were in orbit (the thinking went), our position would shift greatly every six months, so we should (they thought) be able to see the apparent positions of the "fixed" stars shifting as our viewpoint changed. As we now know, the closest stars do indeed undergo a parallax shift, but it's tiny, and it requires a good telescope and photographic records to reveal this.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for the link and the excerpts!!!

It appears the concept of orbits had just been proposed (150 B.C.) without much success towards the end of the time frame the Qumran scrolls were copied (200-150 B.C.)

Do you find any of the other astronomical observations in Enoch curious given its antiquity?

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you so much for the additional insight!

Do you find any of the other astronomical observations in Enoch curious, given its antiquity?

[PatrickHenry]

ARISTARCHUS OF SAMOS (fl. 320 - 250 BC) was very interesting. Yes, he proposed the heliocentric system. Those guys were brilliant!

[PatrickHenry]

Do you find any of the other astronomical observations in Enoch curious, given its antiquity?

If he dates around the 2nd century BC, I don't find anything he said to be unique to him. Perhaps I'm missing something.

[Right Wing Professor]

I read through it briefly. There were a lot of passages about stars that I glanced at but didn't carefully examine. Let me read it carefully and get back to you. My cousin's a fairly well known archaeologist, so I guess this stuff's in the blood.

There seems to be somewhat of a mystery about when orbits were really proposed. Ptolemy clearly used the idea, which says no later than 150 BC, but I gather it's not clear how much older the idea was. I'm at work at the moment, and most of my history books are at home.

I did find this at NASA.

http://image.gsfc.nasa.gov/poetry/ask/a11846.html

[Alamo-Girl]

Thank you for your post!

I don't find anything he said to be unique to him. Perhaps I'm missing something.

The book of Enoch was copied in Aramaic language in 200-150 B.C. (presumably it was previously written in Aramaic or translated from Hebrew.)

The most recent date, 150 B.C. would correspond to the first proposal of orbits by the Greeks. Much earlier, the moon is proposed to be reflecting sunlight.

The main Jewish/Greek philosopher of the earlier period was Philo. And I believe he would have either written in Hebrew or Greek.

On top of the relatively new Greek ideas of reflected light and orbits, Enoch also includes several other curious statements (from my post above):

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

And then there is a reference to the end of all that there is (and beginning) which sounds like a singularity: in chapter 18 a place with no measure and no content, a pit "where the heavens come together." He records that the angel explained [v. 14] "this is the ultimate end of heaven and earth; it is the prison house for the stars and the powers of heaven…"

It is curious to me that the very new Greek astronomy was likely written in Aramaic prior to its being copied at Qumran. There is precious little time at the 150 B.C. mark to get the orbit information from Greece to an original Aramaic manuscript to Qumran to be copied.

Of course, the first question in evaluating such a text is whether the peculiar information could have been known to the original scribe of Enoch and the next, how?

[Alamo-Girl]

Wow! Thank you so much for the link on your cousin's books!!!

And thank you for the scoop on the history of predicting solar eclipses!

I look forward to any light you can shed on the antiquity of Enoch. Hugs!

[Alamo-Girl]

This is great fun, but - alas - I must go do my daily chores and such. Hope to see y'all later on tonight or tomorrow!

[PatrickHenry]

The book of Enoch was copied in Aramaic language in 200-150 B.C. (presumably it was previously written in Aramaic or translated from Hebrew.)

We need to look at the larger historical context. Alexander liberated Israel from the Persian empire around 300 BC, and from that point forward (well before the Enoch copy) the Jews traveled freely in the Greek world and many became culturally Hellenized. It's not remarkable that the ideas of one culture could have influenced the other. As for traveling around, the distances weren't all that great. A few days by ship. Not a big deal. I don't see any great historical paradox here.

[f.Christian]

The non separation of state and religion is called fascism ... we see the atheist - liberal AYATOLLA variety here !

Sharia science - politics ... evolution (( iran -- ussc - mullahs )) !

Sharia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Sharia or Shariah is the body of religious law governing the Sunni and Shia branch of Islam. Islam draws no distinction between religious and secular life, and hence Sharia covers not only religious rituals and the administration of the faith, but every aspect of day-to-day life.

History and Background

The authority of Sharia is drawn from two major and two lesser sources. The first major source is specific guidance laid down in the Qur'an, and the second source is the Sunnah, literally the 'Way', i.e. the way that Muhammad (the Prophet of Islam) lived his life. (The compilation of all what Muhammad said, did, or approved of is called the Hadith.) A lesser source of authority is Qiyas, which is the extension by analogy of existing Sharia law to new situations.

Finally Sharia law can be based on ijma, or consensus. Justification for this final approach is drawn from the Hadith where Muhammad states; "My nation cannot agree on an error." The umma, or community of Muslims, comes together with each applying his or ijtihad, or independent thought and judgement, to achieve this consensus. The role of ulema, i.e. scholars, is critical, since they are the ones who studies the Islamic law and therefore are the ones with authority to represent it.

The comprehensive nature of Sharia law is due to the belief that the law must provide all that is necessary for a person's spiritual and physical well-being. All possible actions of a Muslim are divided (in principle) into five categories: obligatory, meritorious, permissible, reprehensible, and forbidden. Fundamental to the obligations of every muslim are the Five Pillars of Islam.

In theory, there is no conflict between the process as outlined by Muhammad and very progressive and consultative political movements, e.g. green parties.

In fact, the latter even defined Four Pillars of the Green Party, to some degree in imitation of Islam's Five Pillars, and in admiration of the idea of a * consensus-driven process * of the whole community coming to some well-reasoned conclusion compatible with science and scholarship.

* In practice, however, there is often incredible tension between conservative, liberal or secular forces: *

Practice of Sharia

Most countries of the Middle East and north Africa maintain a dual system of secular courts and religious courts, in which the religious courts mainly regulate marriage and inheritance. Saudi Arabia and Iran maintain only religious courts for all aspects of jurisprudence. Sharia is also used in Sudan, Libya and for a time in modern Afghanistan. Some states in northern Nigeria have reintroduced Sharia courts.

For detailed information you can consult the Sharia News Watch http://groups.yahoo.com/group/shariawatch/ , that provides a regular update of newsquotes on the Sharia (or: shari'ah, syariah, or shariat), the news items are organized per country.

In practice these have most often meant the re-introduction of spectacular and gruesome punishments (such as amputation of one/both hand(s) for theft, or stoning for adultery) without respecting the much tougher rules of evidence and testimony (including the necessity of four eyewitnesses, with women's testimony counting less than that of a man). Such measures are usually introduced to gain support of local ulema who are often community leaders in rural areas. Their examples are not always humane or even reasonable. Muslim scholars tend to agree that Muhammad himself would not run courts along these lines in an otherwise secular society, nor introduce these punishments into societies rich enough to afford prisons and rehabilitation, cohesive enough to prevent those accused from being killed by outraged victims and communities.

Like Jewish law and Christian canon law, Islamic law has no one, set meaning for all time and places. In the hands of moderates, religious law can be moderate, even liberal. In the hands of post-Englightenment readers of philosophy, religious law is relegated to ritual (as opposed to law in a civil sense), or even to just being history.

* In the hands of zealots, it becomes legally enforced against all people of a faith, and even against all people that come under their control.*

Islamic law to American Muslims in Boston is a very different thing than Islamic law to religious Muslims in Saudi Arabia, Gaza, or Pakistan. Both are following Islamic law, yet it varies as much as individual Muslims vary. (As is true for Jews and Christians, etc.)

my comments ...

The founding fathers established govt to perpetuate religious liberty NOT persecution ... how does separation of religion and politics mean God also --- only if you are an atheist nazi liberal zealot does that make sense !

We need separation of state and liberals --- ATHEISM - zombies - tyranny !

[jennyp]

PMFJI...

[DJ2:] Which proves my point made earlier. Darwinism has no foundation for placing value upon human life.
[B666:] Nor does it try to do so. You are still arguing against your own strawman.
[DJ2:] No I'm not. You may claim that Darwinism doesn't try to place value on human life, but it can not be neutral. There are repercussions to thought systems. That means EVERY though system. Nothing operates in a vacuum and nothing is without effect on how people think. Darwinian evolution makes humans no more valuable than a bacteria. There are implications to when you tell people they are no better than animals, and repercussions to a system of belief without moral foundation.

Ah, we're finally getting somewhere! IMO this kind of argument is why Morton's Demon is so welcomed by many creationists. You (rightly IMO) want there to be a secure moral code that all people can be persuaded to obey, because the alternative is perpetual chaos, war, & degradation on several levels from the personal to the political. But you (wrongly IMO) don't think that the natural world provides any objective reason to be moral, therefore any morality based on an appeal to the facts of the natural world can be persuasive.

Do I have your position essentially correct so far?

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

Crown Publisher's published a book in 1979 called, "The Lost Books of The Bible", that includes the gospels of Peter and Nicodemus and the 2 accounts of Christ's infancy. I'm hunting around for an electronic copy.

Supposedly, the gospels of Peter and Nicodemus would've been included in the canon except that Iranaeus insisted that, "...just as there are 4 winds, there must be 4 Gospels, for the Holy Spirit, the inspiration for all divine writing, is embodied in the wind." (from "Adversus haereses" translated by Solomon J. Schepps)

The Gospel of Thomas was rejected as heresy. The accounts of Christ's infancy were excluded because they didn't portray Him in a good light.

There is also a Gospel of the Birth of Mary, but I don't have any explanation as to why it was left out.

If I find this anywhere I'll post it.

[f.Christian]

Not to detract from them, but a lot of the credit goes to the Admin Mod who canned als.


2,209 posted on 08/22/2003 7:39 PM PDT by Virginia-American


evo abortion placenta afterbirth placemaker !

[DittoJed2]

Close. I know there is a moral code, it was set down by God in Scripture. Second, there needs to be this code, because without it all of morality would be based upon man's fault subjective opinions of how things should be. Without the ten commandments, I seriously doubt our legal system would look a thing like it does today. In Darwinism, there is no higher authority than majority rule. Therefore, if you are an American living in America, you recognize the law "do not murder". It is your preference that murder not occur. If you are a tribesman in certain tribes around the world, however, murder is not only okay it causes the entire tribe to come out and celebrate.

This is illustrated in an old missions video called "Peace Child". It is the story of missionaries who went to tribespeople in the SW Pacific that had largely been cut off from others for centuries. They came to their camp facing the greatest dangers to share the gospel with these tribespeople. The tribespeople immediately welcomed them but it was pretty much a ruse because they were actually hoping to kill them. They had done exactly that, some time earlier, when a tribesman from a neighboring tribe had made friends with them. They acted friendly towards this tribesman until they received his full and total trust. Then, they gave a celebration for their friend and in the midst of the celebration came up upon him and brutally murdered him. I think they shrunk his head after that.

Well, these missionaries came upon this tribe and risked their lives to bring them the gospel. They learned the language and began from creation, teaching them week after week about God, His love, and the History of the Old and New Testaments. At the climactic point in time, however, the missionaries were stunned by the reaction of the people to the story. When it got to the point where Judas betrayed Christ, the tribespeople began cheering and celebrating. Judas, embodied the chiefly treasured attribute that the tribespeople loved- treachery. It was only later, when a tribe chieftan gave up his son to the neighboring tribe to raise as their own as a sacrifice of peace (as long as the child would live, the tribes vowed peace) that the missionaries were able to find common ground for the tribesmen to accept the gospel and for lives to be changed.

So, no. I do not believe that there is some inherent law within nature that gives man the impetus to act morally. But there is a law that God has given (which to a certain extent is seen in nature but ignored) that does give a foundation for moral beliefs and actions. Darwinism can't do that. It can only give majority opinion rules that may change not only from society to society but from house to house (and nobody can have authority to say different opinions regarding morality are right and wrong). God is an authority higher than any earthy authority and His law stands as an unmoveable guide to write and wrong that has rational, spiritual, and emotional basis.

[DittoJed2]

Morton's demon is not welcomed by creationists. We have a higher authority than the ever changing scientific arena. Of anything, it is evolution that suffers from Morton's demon because if anything even smacks of the miraculous, they feverishly have to run about trying to find naturalistic explanations to it. The common sense observations that we are not here by chance go unnoticed by the superior acting scientist who believes that within his finite mind he can solve mysteries without use such antiquated notions as a supernatural God. Well, the Bible has a word for such people- fools. I didn't write the book, but I know that I know that it is right and contrary to making me feel superior it humbles me to know how fearfully and wonderfully made I am.

You see Jenny, people like Morton are interpreting disagreements with their worldview as acting preaching something that makes them feel superior- and yet, I have seen so much belittling of creationist and I.D. scientists, even on this thread, that it is very apparent that the superiority freaks are the evolutionists. The Talk Origins website is a prime example. Can creationists step over the line a bit sometimes in their attacks on evolution? Yes. But never so much as the Darwin Thumping evolutionist who absolutely refuses to consider that he could be wrong or to admit that his whole system of belief is ultimately one of faith.

[Virginia-American]

Specifically, they did what you are constantly saying creationists do in partially quoting someone from the other side. The full article was there and available through search on AIG, however, they made it sound as if AIG was conceding something. AIG was not.

AiG did not reference Chapman's monograph. It stated,

The closest thing to the claim which launched our pursuit of this whole trail is where Slijper states, ‘Thus, at Ayukawa Whaling Station (Japan), a Sperm Whale was brought in in 1956, with a 5-inch tibia projecting into a 5½-inch “bump”,

even though other sources (like Chapman) say the limbs can be 4 feet long.

Here is a discussion of whale evolution and embryonic growth: See esp., page 452 Note that whale embryos have hind limb buds, which disappear before birth. It makes sense that ocasionally the mechanism that causes them to disappear fails, leaving the adult with tibia, metatarsals, etc.

Why no photos today of whales with legs hanging off of them?

The TO article has photos of the bones. Chapman's article is not on-line, I don't know if it included photos or not. I can't find any on line.

We know that there are bones within a whale that help with reproduction. Why could this bone not be just an overgrowth of that bone? Oh, I know, because some evolutionist museum journal said so.

Evo or not, I'm reasonably confident that Chapman and colleagues could tell a pelvic bone from a leg bone. They are very different shapes.

The question remains, why do whales have the genes necessary for hind limbs if they were 'designed' for the water?