Feathers On Reptiles Predating Dinosaurs

Weedhopper writes: "This is a news item in reference to an article in the latest issue of Science about a reptile with feathers that predates archeopteryx by 75 million years - predating most dinosaurs in fact. Though I am suspicious of any claim that a particular biological structure is too complex to have evolved twice, the case may be that birds may not have descended from dinosaurs as is commonly believed."

Comments

Re:feathers on reptiles predating dinosaurs

[Black Parrot]

> Its really open to interpretation on whether or not it had feathers at all.

Some scientists are scoffing at the idea. See e.g. the report at ABC News -

"Those are not feathers," said Chris Brochu, a paleontologist at the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago. "None of the evidence they cite are preserved well enough to be convincing."
Hans-Dieter Sues, a paleontologist at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, Canada, says he studied the Longisquama fossil in his laboratory for months two years ago and he is sure the mysterious appendages are scales, not feathers.
"The structures are solid and they have overlap with adjoining scales. They're definitely not feathers," he says. "These scientists are trying to show that birds may not have evolved from dinosaurs - that's clearly their agenda."

Of course, both sides of an argument can have an agenda. I think it will take several months for a basic consensus to shake out, and of course the basic dinosaur -&gt bird question was already controversial before this, and will likely remain so.

One claim by one of the dinosaur != bird crowd really annoys me, though -

Jones says the sequence of bird-like dinosaurs appearing after the earliest known bird has never made sense to him. "It's like saying your grandmother was born after you died," he says.

No, it's more like apes appearing after the earliest known hominid.

--