Slashdot Mirror
Four-legged Snake Fossil Stuns Scientists, Ignites Controversy
sciencehabit writes: Scientists have described what they say is the first known fossil of a four-legged snake. The limbs of the 120-or-so-million-year-old, 20-centimeter-long creature are remarkably well preserved and end with five slender digits that appear to have been functional (abstract). Thought to have come from Brazil, the fossil would be one of the earliest snakes found, suggesting that the group evolved from terrestrial precursors in Gondwana, the southern remnant of the supercontinent Pangaea. But although the creature's overall body plan—and indeed, many of its individual anatomical features—is snakelike, some researchers aren't so sure that it is a part of the snake family tree.
I don't see any reason why this is "stunning" or a big controversy. It's just a new fossil and they'll argue a bit on where it goes into the taxonomy tree... happens all the time.
The fact is that, as always, those who found it are basically screaming "sensational discovery, mystery XYZ is finally solved", while other scientist are more cautious. It's the old theme of "sensationalism versus business as usual", dangerously close to the stance of attention whores.
Having read the article, I think it's more likely that those weak limbs were used for tree climbing than for grabbing preys and probably this is not a snake but a specimen from some extinct group.
According to a paper which failed peer review.