Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,784 Year: 4,041/9,624 Month: 912/974 Week: 239/286 Day: 0/46 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Early birds had dino-feet: study
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 1015 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 1 of 36 (264854)
12-01-2005 6:00 PM


Early birds had dino-feet: study
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - An especially well-preserved specimen of Archaeopteryx shows the first known bird had feet like a dinosaur -- made not for perching but for running on the ground, scientists said on Thursday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The first toe on the fossil turns inward, similar to a human thumb and most like the hunting dinosaurs known as deinonychosaurs -- notably the Velociraptor with its long claw for disemboweling prey.
Gerald Mayr of the Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg in Frankfurt, Germany, and colleagues at the Wyoming Dinosaur Center in Thermopolis, say their findings strengthen theories that birds descended directly from dinosaurs.
The 150 million-year-old fossil, found in Germany's Bavaria region, suggests the magpie-sized creature could hyperextend its second toe in a dinosaur-like way, the researchers report in Friday's issue of the journal Science.
"By all measures, it is a treasure," Peter Dodson of the University of Pennsylvania was quoted by Science as saying.
The feathered fossils were long believed to be representative of the first birds and this one now links Archaeopteryx to dinosaurs.
"Contrary to virtually all existing reconstructions of Archaeopteryx, the new specimen shows that the first toe was not fully reversed as in extant birds," the researchers wrote.
"Most workers consider Deinonychosauria to be the sister taxon of Aves, and the presence of a hyperextendible second toe in Archaeopteryx supports a close relationship between deinonychosaurs and avians."
SOURCE

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Theus, posted 12-04-2005 1:53 AM roxrkool has replied
 Message 3 by arachnophilia, posted 12-04-2005 3:34 AM roxrkool has not replied
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 12-04-2005 3:02 PM roxrkool has not replied
 Message 22 by Dr Jack, posted 09-27-2006 5:07 AM roxrkool has not replied

  
Theus
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 36 (265389)
12-04-2005 1:53 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by roxrkool
12-01-2005 6:00 PM


Small museums and big displays
The Archaeopterx specimen in question is very contentions in paleontology right now, but not only because of it's better preservation and new insights into dino-bird anatomy, but due to it's new home, the Wyoming Dinosaur Center in Thermopolis Wyoming (total population 2,500 or so). This, being a small town museum, is arguably a horrible choice for such a precious specimen. There are security and access issues that haven't been dealt with in oh, a hundred years or so when the other dino museums were founded.
The question I have is, do others see this as a problem? Having worked and researched at the museum in question since my teenage years, I have some definite opinions about the specimen's storage, but what to other's think? Do you think important specimens should be stored in the best museums, or be sold to the highest bidder?
Au revoir,
Theus

Veri Omni Veritas

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by roxrkool, posted 12-01-2005 6:00 PM roxrkool has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by roxrkool, posted 12-04-2005 1:56 PM Theus has not replied
 Message 6 by Omnivorous, posted 12-04-2005 3:42 PM Theus has replied
 Message 7 by RAZD, posted 12-04-2005 8:58 PM Theus has not replied
 Message 13 by Coragyps, posted 12-05-2005 10:38 AM Theus has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1370 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 3 of 36 (265404)
12-04-2005 3:34 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by roxrkool
12-01-2005 6:00 PM


no opposible hallux?
somebody better notify talkorigins.
*moves one trait from the bird-pile to the dinosaur-pile*
this will be yet another problem for creationists, who contend that archaeopteryx is "just a bird." i have always considered archae to primarily dinosaurian, in that it's theropodal features far outnumber it's avian features. i described it's dinosaurian features in this post some time back. that thread would be a good place for debate, should anyone want to, uh, actually answer that post about why archaeopteryx is not "just a bird."

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by roxrkool, posted 12-01-2005 6:00 PM roxrkool has not replied

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 1015 days)
Posts: 1497
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 4 of 36 (265461)
12-04-2005 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Theus
12-04-2005 1:53 AM


Re: Small museums and big displays
Some good points. I guess I don't know the answer.
I think that if the Museum, or some other entity, financed the operation and the museum received permission to keep any and everything it discovered, then they have a right to the fossils - no matter how important they are. It would then be up to the Museum to decide what to do with such important finds as this newest fossil.
I haven't been to Thermopolis, but I might have to make a trip up there now.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Theus, posted 12-04-2005 1:53 AM Theus has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1431 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 5 of 36 (265486)
12-04-2005 3:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by roxrkool
12-01-2005 6:00 PM


National Geographic Article
It's not just the feet, but the skull and the shape and articulation of other bones:
National Geographic article: Earliest Bird Had Feet Like Dinosaur, Fossil Shows (click)
A 150-million-year-old fossil of Archaeopteryx, long considered the oldest bird, may put to rest any scientific doubt that dinosaurs”specifically the group of two-legged meat-eaters known as theropods”gave rise to modern birds.
The skull is the only Archaeopteryx specimen that reveals a bird's-eye view of the species' upper head surface.
"[It] presents important new details of the skull morphology [shape and function] of the earliest known bird," he said, "showing also that the skull of Archaeopteryx is much more similar to that of nonavian theropod dinosaurs than previously thought."
The animal's feet, both of them perfectly preserved, attracted the researchers' particular attention.
Archaeopteryx, the fossil shows, had a hyperextendible second toe. Until now, the feature was thought to belong only to the species' close relatives, the deinonychosaurs. (The name means "fearsome claws." The deinonychosaur Velociraptor wielded switchblade-like examples of these talons in the movie Jurrasic Park.)
Contrary to all previous reconstructions of Archaeopteryx, the hind toe of the new specimen is not completely reversed to form a "perching" foot as it is in modern birds.
In the new fossil, the foot looks more like that of the four-toed foot of Velociraptor and its other nonwinged theropod relatives. The specimen clearly lacks a reversed toe.
The shape and articulation of other bones of the new specimen also help tie Archaeopteryx to the theropods.
The bones of its hind legs, for example, have played an important role in the dispute about bird ancestry. The new Archaeopteryx specimen shows a clearly visible hind leg bone structure that is identical to that of theropod dinosaurs.
Of course we'll have to listen to rants about how it was falsly portrayed before etc....
Looks like the link is pretty solid now .... therapod to archy to birds.
Enjoy
This message has been edited by RAZD, 12*04*2005 03:04 PM

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by roxrkool, posted 12-01-2005 6:00 PM roxrkool has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by arachnophilia, posted 12-05-2005 12:47 AM RAZD has not replied
 Message 10 by Omnivorous, posted 12-05-2005 8:38 AM RAZD has replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3988
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.0


Message 6 of 36 (265492)
12-04-2005 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Theus
12-04-2005 1:53 AM


Re: Small museums and big displays
Hi, Theus.
Ideally, any important find would be in an optimal setting, accessible to the greatest number of researchers and given the best professional care.
OTOH, I'd like to see major finds relevant to and persuasive of evolution in every mueseum in the country and readily viewable by the public.
I fear that sometimes academic specialists' absolutist views on this matter damage both the lay public's opinion and appreciation of science. Also, viewing the actual evidence can have a profound impact.
In a number of ways, then, centralizing important collections only in large city or university museums can have a counterproductive effect.
If this museum's facilities are lacking, we may hope that a prize like this one will help attract funding for improvements.
BTW, wasn't this archie purchased from a private collection?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Theus, posted 12-04-2005 1:53 AM Theus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Theus, posted 12-05-2005 12:42 AM Omnivorous has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1431 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 7 of 36 (265555)
12-04-2005 8:58 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by Theus
12-04-2005 1:53 AM


Re: Small museums and big displays
Welcome to the fray theus.
I trust that you have taken the opportunity to see this fossil?

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Theus, posted 12-04-2005 1:53 AM Theus has not replied

  
Theus
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 36 (265629)
12-05-2005 12:42 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Omnivorous
12-04-2005 3:42 PM


Re: Small museums and big displays
Hey,
Yes, the specimen was purchased from a private collection, for an absorbent sum of money. And it is being donated to the Big Horn Basin Foundation (the non-for-profit aspect of the Wyoming Dinosaur Center). I know the donator well, though I assume he wishes to remain anomynous. However, this is not the first time he's spent millions to rescue scientificly important fossils from the commercial market. And the same fortune that went to rescue the specimen will also be used to help ensure it's safety at the Thermopolis Museum.
Reading more about the specimen, I am growing more angry at those who say that it shouldn't be there. In my initial post I wanted to be more reserved, however I have to speak in the donors defence, particularly after this in the Rocky Mountain News:
"There's nothing preventing it from being sold again in the future and then being removed from the scientific arena," said Mark Goodwin, assistant director of the Museum of Paleontology at the University of California, Berkeley.
Rocky Mountain News
First off, there are many provisions guarding it. A specimen I have researched repeatedly in the past* is also under the same protective guidlines. If something should happen to the museum financially, then the specimens will all go to a fossil repository.
If Mr. Goodwin feels so strongly about this issue, then I suggest that he spend his personal fortune on rescueing such specimens from the black market.
P.S. I haven't seen it yet, it's still on a European tour. It won't arrive until the security systems are finished anyway.
* Goodchild Drake, Brandon, 2004, A New Specimen of Allosaurus from North-Central Wyoming, Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, Volume 24, Supplement to Number 3, pp. 65A
*Goodchild Drake, Brandon, 2005, A Preliminary Analysis of Cranial Suture Variation in Allosaurus, Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology, Volume 25, Supplement to Number 3

Veri Omni Veritas

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Omnivorous, posted 12-04-2005 3:42 PM Omnivorous has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Wounded King, posted 12-05-2005 8:45 AM Theus has replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1370 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 9 of 36 (265633)
12-05-2005 12:47 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by RAZD
12-04-2005 3:02 PM


Re: National Geographic Article
Of course we'll have to listen to rants about how it was falsly portrayed before etc....
oh god, don't tell randman. everytime science changes a little, it's guilty of lies and deception in his eyes.
of course. this time, the deception was perpetrated by creationists, in claiming that it's a bird.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 12-04-2005 3:02 PM RAZD has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3988
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.0


Message 10 of 36 (265683)
12-05-2005 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by RAZD
12-04-2005 3:02 PM


Re: National Geographic Article
Of course we'll have to listen to rants about how it was falsly portrayed before etc....
Since creationists are immune to data, they see scientists who defend their positions as dogmatic ("You take evolution on faith!"), and scientists who modify their positions as data come in ("If you had truly believed your prior stand, you couldn't have changed it!) as frauds.
It's the new Scylla and Charybdis, but the same old song and dance.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by RAZD, posted 12-04-2005 3:02 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by arachnophilia, posted 12-05-2005 11:14 AM Omnivorous has not replied
 Message 18 by RAZD, posted 12-05-2005 9:30 PM Omnivorous has replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 11 of 36 (265688)
12-05-2005 8:45 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Theus
12-05-2005 12:42 AM


Re: Small museums and big displays
Yes, the specimen was purchased from a private collection, for an absorbent sum of money.
I'm pretty sure you meant an exorbitant amount of money, or are you saying they were soaking them?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Theus, posted 12-05-2005 12:42 AM Theus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Omnivorous, posted 12-05-2005 9:47 AM Wounded King has not replied
 Message 15 by Theus, posted 12-05-2005 11:42 AM Wounded King has not replied
 Message 17 by arachnophilia, posted 12-05-2005 8:23 PM Wounded King has not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3988
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.0


Message 12 of 36 (265713)
12-05-2005 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Wounded King
12-05-2005 8:45 AM


Re: Small museums and big displays
Darn it, WK--I exercised great restraint, and you get the laughs!
Malapropisms are among my favorites: totally wrong, and yet sometimes perfectly right.
Edit: restrained to restraint. Ha! I actually don't exercise at all well when restrained...
This message has been edited by Omnivorous, 12-05-2005 11:46 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Wounded King, posted 12-05-2005 8:45 AM Wounded King has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by RAZD, posted 12-05-2005 6:00 PM Omnivorous has not replied
 Message 24 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-27-2006 5:46 AM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 761 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 13 of 36 (265726)
12-05-2005 10:38 AM
Reply to: Message 2 by Theus
12-04-2005 1:53 AM


Re: Small museums and big displays
but due to it's new home, the Wyoming Dinosaur Center in Thermopolis Wyoming (total population 2,500 or so). This, being a small town museum, is arguably a horrible choice for such a precious specimen.
Wait a second! I love Thermop, especially in winter with the steam rising from the springs! And, in any case, it's not much smaller than Drumheller, Alberta, where the Royal Tyrrell Museum has all those fantastic fossils.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by Theus, posted 12-04-2005 1:53 AM Theus has not replied

  
arachnophilia
Member (Idle past 1370 days)
Posts: 9069
From: god's waiting room
Joined: 05-21-2004


Message 14 of 36 (265739)
12-05-2005 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by Omnivorous
12-05-2005 8:38 AM


Re: National Geographic Article
Since creationists are immune to data, they see scientists who defend their positions as dogmatic ("You take evolution on faith!"), and scientists who modify their positions as data come in ("If you had truly believed your prior stand, you couldn't have changed it!) as frauds.
It's the new Scylla and Charybdis, but the same old song and dance.
double standards are fun.

אָרַח

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Omnivorous, posted 12-05-2005 8:38 AM Omnivorous has not replied

  
Theus
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 36 (265756)
12-05-2005 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by Wounded King
12-05-2005 8:45 AM


Re: Small museums and big displays
What are you talking about? Money increases in value when you marinate it, I recomend a little lemon as well.
Point taken... I am sufficiently humbled

Veri Omni Veritas

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Wounded King, posted 12-05-2005 8:45 AM Wounded King has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024