Slashdot Mirror
More Antarctic Dinosaurs
RockDoctor writes "The highly respected palaeontology journal Acta Palaeontologica Polonica has published its December number for free access on the Web, with the headline paper concerning new discoveries of dinosaurs from Antarctica. (Paper here, PDF.) The first major part of these discoveries was made in 1991, when isolated bones of a sauropod (a relative of the Apatosaurus, formerly known as Brontosaurus) were found associated with a theropod (ancestor or cousin of Tyrannosaurus rex). The sauropod has been named Glacialisaurus hammeri (the reason for the genus name is obvious, and Professor Hammer led the field expeditions under 'extremely difficult conditions'). The herbivore was some 25 ft. long and weighed 4 to 6 tons; at the time of life, the area was between 55 and 65 degrees south, suggesting a climate similar to the Falkland Islands or Tierra del Fuego."
There is an image of the thing on this blog if you are interested. http://thedragonstales.blogspot.com/2007/12/hail-glacialisaurus-hammeri.html
According to wikipedia, the apatosaurus had been known well before the brontosaurus ever came around. When the paleontologist who discovered the brontosaurus assembled it, he concluded that it was different from the apatosaurus and named it accordingly. Upon further study, they discovered that they were the same type of dinosaur, and since the apatosaurus was already established when the brontosaurus came around, they decided to use that name and just make "brontosaurus" a synonym.
ahm, how so? The Antarctic used to be in a warmer region so it should have all sorts of remnants on it.
Hang on there, don't post half a sentence..
:)
The species Brontosaurus excelsus was named by its discoverer Othniel Charles Marsh, in 1879 and the designation persisted as an official term in the general public's literature until at least 1974, though it was recognized as a species of a previously-named genus, Apatosaurus, in 1903..
which backs up what I just said (though I was born in 1975 so in England we must have been slow to change books).
We shall both be right
liqbase
You make a very good point. Statistically it is unlikely that today's global temperature is "normal" for our epoch, and that normal baseline almost certainly has changed in the past 10's of millions of years and will continue to change on that same timescale into the future.
That said, the discussion and concern about "global warming" has nothing to do with what's "normal" for the planet. The concern is for effects that occur too quickly for our societies to adapt without massive disruption and accompanying economic collapse, famine, and war that might accompany such.
The planet doesn't care, and will be fine in the long run. It's we humans, and our civilization, that worry about survival.
Also, dinosaurs are cool.
A speaker at last month's conference on "South Atlantic Petroleum Systems", where Antarctica was the "elephant seal in the room which no one mentioned", summarised the prospectivity of Antarctica thus : "Don't drill on an Archean shield (East Antarctica); don't drill in an active volcanic island arc (West Antarctica/ Antarctic Peninsula) ; and for the remaining area, where there are real uncertainties about presence of and quality of source rocks, and the thermal history of the area to mature those source rocks, and the sediment sources to provide clastic reservoir rocks
It's your money. You have the hassle of organising it ; I'll do your wellsite geology. It'll be $1000/day if you're starting in the next 3 years, beyond that I'm not able to commit myself to a price, but it's likely to be higher.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"