"
In China, scientists have identified the fossilized remains of a tiny dinosaur in the stomach of a mammal. Scientists say the animal's last meal probably is the first proof that mammals hunted small dinosaurs some 130 million years ago.
It contradicts conventional evolutionary theory that early mammals couldn't possibly attack and eat a dinosaur because they were timid, chipmunk-sized creatures that scurried in the looming shadow of the giant reptiles.
In this case, the mammal was about the size of a large cat, and the victim was a very young "parrot dinosaur" that measured about 5 inches long.
A second mammal fossil found at the same site claims the distinction of being the largest early mammal ever found. It's about the size of a modern dog, a breathtaking 20 times larger than most mammals living in the early Cretaceous Period."
This is what the live science
article explains. What makes it particularly interesting is that according to virtually all evolutionary biologists, very small mammals barely eking out of existence, should have ever been contemporaneous with dinosaurs. The prevailing theory, obviously, having mammals made their rise to glory after a profound cataclymsic event caused the dinosaurs to go extinct, allowing for the proliferation of small mammals.
This is one of several contradictions concerning the the long-held paradigms of evolution that have been undermined in recent years. Another example and a more notorious case being the discovery of unfossilized fascial tissue attached to an alleged 70 million year old T-Rex. How should modern biology feel about such discoveries, and is it in the best interest of the entire biological community to rethink some of their timescales in lieu of such discrepancies?
“"All science, even the divine science, is a sublime detective story. Only it is not set to detect why a man is dead; but the darker secret of why he is alive." ”G. K. Chesterton