Ancient 'Godzilla' Crocodile Discovered
SenseOfHumor writes "Paleontologists have discovered a huge crocodile which was a predator of large sea creatures. A Jurassic-age crocodile had the massive jaws and jagged teeth needed to hunt large sea prey, paleontologists say. The crocodile, nicknamed Godzilla, was nearly four metres long with a short snout like a T. rex, four fins and a vertical, fishlike tail." Photos and drawings are available at National Geographic, and more science at ScienceDaily.
seriously, I read Slashdot for the comments. I heard about this probably 36 hours ago from National Geographic (who will be featuring it in their December issue). For almost any news on slashdot I have another site I read it on first. But I have been reading slashdot for probably 2 years (and posting for a few weeks now) because I think the comments posted here and the moderation system is far more valueable then just news reports. I'm fine with dupes, slow news, and bad editors as long as there is a good amount of intelligent commentors.
Computers allow humans to make mistakes at the fastest speeds known, with the possible exception of tequila and handguns
While there is no consensus on how the chemical reactions leading to initial living organisms occured, we have a fairly complete picture of the steps involved. Recent research shows that the odds of life forming on earth 40 billion years ago are very plausible. Some gaps remain but nothing drastic enough to negate the current scientific knowledge of the field.
Darwin's evolution has been proven time and again. I'm not even going to bother backing it. Just use Google or better go to your library and read the relevant literature. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming, crushing and undisputable. And if that wasn't enough, recent research documented (using scientific method as opposed to religious mythology) that evolution still occurs within cohorts of fruit fly populations.
Just give it up. If you have a strong set of beliefs keep them that way. Don't try to attach some pseudoscientific labels to them. Instead of being an enlightened spiritualist you'll be viewed as a dumb fundamentalist. Is that what you want?
"People should actually research things before condemning them."
Precisely.
Your pizza just the way you ought to have it.
Y'think? Let's see some quotes from TFA:
"The researchers don't yet know what events triggered the relatively sudden emergence of the large crocodile..."
Sounds like more data that evolution can't really explain.
"Unlike the crocodiles we know today, Dakosaurus andiniensis lived entirely in the water, and had fins instead of legs."
What part of the skull did the researches base *that* conclusion on?
" Pol used sophisticated software to map the features of those bones and determine its lineage. "
Oooohh, "sophisticated software." I trust we'll hear more about the science of how they "determined its lineage". I'm a software engineer and "sophisticated software" doesn't impress me... I want to know what this software actually did.
"It measured 13 feet from nose to tail."
Still interested in how they concluded that based on the skull. I'm assuming there must be more fossil elsewhere, but curiously none of the "technical" diagrams include more than its head. Some of the "artists concept" drawings show a little more as the thing supposedly jumps out of the water, but I've seen no technical diagrams of anything but the head which leaves me wondering where this 13-feet figure is coming from.
Then we have this:
""The most perplexing thing about the animal is that its head shape does not appear to be well suited to a fast swimming crocodilian, because rather than being streamlined, it is somewhat high and flattened from side to side," said Clark, who was not involved with the research."
So rather than contemplate other explanations (maybe it wasn't so closely related to a croc? maybe it wasn't even aquatic--sometimes mammals can actually find there way into water and die, y'know), we automatically assume this is some groundbreaking discovery? Maybe it's so weird it's wrong?
Or how about:
""If you went to a crocodile worker and said, Let's say you had a chance to evolve something new out of this group, what would you do? And you gave them a pad and a pencil, the last thing they would draw would be a skull that looks like Dakosaurus."
So this thing basically contradicts everything we think we know about crocs, but dang it, evolution is right so this is just amazing, isn't it?
This one is choice:
"It's a beautiful example of the unpredictable nature of evolution, and the variety of things that dinosaur-age crocodiles did."
And here I was thinking that science was supposed to be falsifiable, testable, and actually be a useful predictor? And here they're celebrating just how unpredictable it is? I'm glad other theories are a little more relaible. I'd hate to be walking into my house and suddenly find gravity reverse itself and hit my head on the ceiling. *
Color me unimpressed.
* Note: If gravity did reverse itself, would you be prepared? How would you keep the coins in your pocket? I have the answer: Nudity! (This poorly-quoted quote is left as an exercise for the reader to discover its source).