Neuquenraptor argentinus was a fierce meat-eater in the Late Cretaceous period
Posted on 02/26/2005 8:13:45 AM PST by DannyTN
South American Dinosaur Find Modifies Theories 02/23/2005
A deinonychus-like dinosaur has been found in Argentina. Representatives of this group, including velociraptor, had previously only been known in the northern hemisphere and Asia. Since South America was supposedly on another land mass at the time, “The new discovery demonstrates that Cretaceous theropod faunas from the southern continents shared greater similarity with those of the northern landmasses than previously thought.” The new species, named Neugquenraptor, was reported in Nature1 this week; see also the summary on BBC News which says the bones are “probably implying a much more ancient evolutionary history” for this group of dinosaurs.
The discoverers invoke “convergent evolution” (homoplasy) in their phylogenetic classification of this species, stating that it’s a common problem:
As prompted elsewhere, homoplasy is a common problem in coelurosaurian phylogeny. In this regard, the arctometatarsalian metatarsus shows a complex evolutionary history [sic], and the basal position of Neuquenraptor provides useful information to test the monophyly of arctometatarsalian theropods. Our analysis is consistent with recent interpretations that evolutionary transitions [sic] between the arctometatarsal and non-arctometatarsal foot occurred multiple times both in basal Coelurosauria (for example, Tyrannosauridae, Ornithomimidae) and maniraptorans (for example, alvarezsaurids, some oviraptorosaurs, derived troodontids and basal dromaeosaurids). The arctometatarsalian condition thus constitutes one of the homoplastic features [sic] most frequently evolved [sic] between Coelurosauria. (Emphasis added in all quotes.)
“Convergent evolution” is a cop-out term, a non-explanation, that hides the ignorance of Darwin Party members behind jargon. We see it all the time, whether talking about plants, vertebrates, bacteria, or what have you: the magic wand of convergence does the miracles. Does it explain how similar features in very different groups converged on the same solutions? No: it multiplies the improbability that these groups would all get the same lucky mutations to develop similar structures and functions independently. This new find also pushes back the origin of this group of dinosaurs much farther back in their timescale, giving the Darwinists less time to evolve these mobile, agile hunters from their presumably less-capable ancestors. The BBC News states, “Neuquenraptor argentinus is slightly different from its Northern Hemisphere relatives, having had several million years of isolated evolution.” Can they tell this from a few foot bones? The story, like a weak fence, is breaking down; don’t fall for linguistic tricks to whitewash the rotting timbers.
Next headline on: Dinosaurs • Fossils • Evolutionary Theory.
PaleoPing.
Neuquenraptor argentinus was a fierce meat-eater in the Late Cretaceous period
I still can't figure out why there are still monkeys and apes if we "evolved" from them, and why nothing has evolved in the last 2-3000 years at all.
Plus, if these things evolved in step with their changing habitat, why are all these various species becomming extinct? Shouldn't they be evolving and adapting?
Sigh.
Want to join the debate, might want to bother educating yourself. We didn't evolve from current monkees and apes. We had a common ancestor.
If a deity created all species in a week for the benefit of mankind, why even bother creating millions of species that go extinct?
you wrote:"I still can't figure out why there are still monkeys and apes if we "evolved" from them, and why nothing has evolved in the last 2-3000 years at all."
well we evolved from the common ancestors of men and apes and monkeys.....if your going to dis evolution at least find a workable argument....
evolution takes thousands of years and how do you know evolution has stopped for the past few thousand years.
you know Catholics(of which I confess to being a lapsed Catholic), have a more enligtened view of evolution...especially after how they brutalized the Galileo's of the world....read this:
http://www.catholic.net/rcc/Periodicals/Issues/Darwin.html
We didn't evolve from today's existing ape species, we share a common ancestor. That ancestor has gone extinct. No biologist has said we evolved from chimps, or gorillas, or any other extant species. What would be needed is a subpopulation of an ape species getting cut off from the main population. This could happen geographically or from a genetic change that made reproduction fucntionally impossible between the 2 populations. The end result would be two populations, one the original species, the second the new species. Both could therefore exist at the same time. Evolution is not about the entire species evolving into a new species, but smaller populations within the species being reproductively isolated and diverging enough to become new species. As for nothing having evolved in the last 2-3K years, 2-3k is a drop in the bucket of geological time. Things have evolved in that time though, so the point is beside the point.
We didn't actually evolve from them - the primates evolved from a common ancestor - like branches on family tres. Some evolved into chimpanzees, some into humans. In evolutionary terms 2-3 thousand years isn't very long.
There has indeed been evolution within the last 2,000 to 3,000 years. Monkeys and apes learned to dress, shave with care, and become lawyers and presstitutes.
You wrote:
"There has indeed been evolution within the last 2,000 to 3,000 years. Monkeys and apes learned to dress, shave with care, and become lawyers and presstitutes"
yes indeed.....I believe this phenomenon is addressed in "The Origin of Sleeze-cies"
Disease bacteria evolve rapidly to become resistant to drugs used to kill them. Natural selection is evolution.
Yes, a coommon ancestor that if you saw i today, you would call it a monkey or an Ape.
Proving we didn't evolve at all.
Another fine "meso" ping, for that matter. ;')
The monkeys say that if man evolved hopefully it was not from them.
SARS & HIV come to mind, Unless you care to tell me which one of Noah's family members carried them on the ark
Plus there wasn't any of these 2000 years ago, Or even 200
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.