Slashdot Mirror
Evidence Dinosaurs Are Like Giant Chicks
ZeroExistenZ writes "timesonline reports the new "irrefutable" fossil evidence of dino's resembling "giant chicks" more then reptiles as formerly accepted. Gareth Dyke: "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.""
Infallible?
Ah, you must be thinking of religion.
Scientific ideas change all the time.
I'm sure people get the two confused all the time.
No feathers in Jurassic Park.
Hollywood movies are made to generate profit. They are usually not made to be very scientifically accurate. And in this case, it seems that even the scientists themselves aren't all that sure about what they're talking about.
Cyric Zndovzny at your service.
A: The egg... it was a mutant egg layed by a prehistoric proto-chicken, but it hatched into the 1st chicken. Of course what we decide is a chicken and what is a prehistoric proto-chicken is up for debate.
final fantasy fans rejoice as they find out that chocobos may in fact have existed.
Agreed. It was the "then" that irked me. Such hideous grammar really cripples credibility. When I read something like this, my mind says "Dolt. Move along, nothing to see here."
"Would it kill you to put down the toilet seat?" -- Maya Angelou
There's an old saying: "Ontogeny recapitulated Phylogeny" (or, "baby/fetal X usually looks like X's evolutionary ancestor" - since it's easier for a mutation to successfully edit the adult form than the infant form without causing something else to break).
So if dinosaurs and birds are related, one would expect there to be a lot of similarities to baby birds to down is not surprising. However, I'm not convinced about the immediate leap to a theory of multi-coloured down when chicks are usually mono-unicolour.
when science says "I may be wrong". Intelligent design - needed because of the conrtoversy in evolution. Crackpot theories on climate variability because it is so comlpex, you can't say anyone is right (though that doesn't mean that you can't say someone is wrong).
If you want arrogance, talk to arts majors.
Now imagine a 50 foot chicken...and you're the bug.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Sorry, but jurassic parks dinos look NOTHING like birds. They look exactly like the illustrations in books of the 60s
... well.
You are a fucking moron. Jurassic Park is a book. It does not have any pictures in it.
What Hollywood made from it
This is why America is dropping like a rock in the sciences, maths, and literacy rates, as compared to other industrialized nations. How about, "If you don't like it, fight against the apathy and ignorance"?
[
But not with feathers, which is what this scientist says was the case.
It isn't SNOO-SNOO. It's "snusnus" - sort of like "69"
Having feathers does not imply that one is able to fly. See, for example, the early offspring of every avian species; also penguins, emus, and the dearly departed dodo. Only a very small portion of the feathers on a bird's body are used for flight. The rest are used for insulation and waterproofing. It's probable that this was the advantage of feathers on these early reptiles.
We know that feathers, scales, and fur are all made of the same materials and share other traits (for example, they all grow toward the back of the body). It is not surprising that baby birds appear fuzzy; down is essentially hair arranged in a branching formation. It's likely that the first "feathers" were very heavy and resembled scales more directly than what we call "feathers" today. These would not have any inherent lifting power, because a) they would be heavy enough to negate any possibility of manipulating airflow, mainly due to the fact that they would rely on a solid shaft, and b) they would be grown in place of regular scales, instead of protruding in a wing formation. Also, c) most dinosaurs would be too heavy to be lifted in the first place. Pterosaurs and birds share the flight adaptation of having hollow bones. How long do you think it took for that to develop?
It is hardly a hop, skip, and a jump from having feathers to being able to soar across the prehistoric sky.
A strain of paranoid prevention can be worse than the disease, whate'er the intention.
At least science's founding principles--followed or not--are specifically anti-dogmatic, stressing tests and challenges to existing and proposed theory.
In contrast, most religions codify "Pray as we say or shut up." Sometimes with s/shut up/be burned as a heretic/ig
I don't get it. That 'utter bashing' doesn't look like thorough refuting at all. Those are the words of someone who just didn't like what they heard. They didn't like the idea that someone might think about what he said.
The difference between spam and poop is that you don't have to dig through septic tanks looking for real food. -- Me