PRO

Where Your Ideas can change Minds

Please visit our new forum at

http://www.4forums.com

CON


YouDebate.com Forum
» back to YouDebate.com
Register | Profile | Log In | Lost Password | Active Users | Help | Board Rules | Search | FAQ |
Custom Search
» You are not logged in.   log in | register

  YouDebate.com Forum
   Creationism vs Evolution Debates
     Dinosaur to Bird evolution

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

    
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I know we've spoken about this before but here's even more recently discovered evidence that links dinosaurs to birds.
From here:
DinoToBird

"CHICAGO - Scientists have unearthed the remains of a large meat-eating dinosaur with a breathing apparatus much like a modern bird, fortifying the link between birds and dinosaurs and helping to explain the evolution of birds' unique system of breathing.

Pulled from 85-million-year-old rock along the banks of Rio Colorado in Argentina's Mendoza Province, this 33-foot-long, two-legged predator weighed as much as an elephant and likely had feathers, the scientists said.

But its method of breathing makes this dinosaur stand out, said Paul Sereno of the University of Chicago, who wrote about the find on Monday in the journal PLoS ONE.

Instead of lungs that expand and contract, Sereno thinks this beast had air sacs that worked like a bellows, blowing air into the beast's stiff lungs, much like modern birds.

"This dinosaur, unlike any other, provides more direct evidence of the bellows involved in bird breathing," Ricardo Martinez of the Universidad Nacional de San Juan, Argentina, who worked with Sereno on the research, said in a statement.

The team named the dinosaur Aerosteon riocoloradensis, meaning "air bones from the Rio Colorado," because its bones have pockets and a sponge-like texture called "pneumatization" in which air sacs from the lung invade the bone.

Most paleontologists believe birds evolved from small, feathered meat-eating dinosaurs, and the earliest known birds were strikingly similar to these dinosaurs.

The researchers think Aerosteon, a type of dinosaur called a theropod, may have evolved this breathing style in part to keep it from toppling over while chasing prey on its two massive legs. And it may have helped control body temperature.

"If dinosaurs and in particular theropods were 'warm-blooded' as many of us suspect and feathered for insulation, they would have had a major problem getting rid of heat at times. Perhaps this is why air sacs initially evolved, and then were co-opted for breathing," Sereno said."

Are there any experts that doubt birds evolved from dinosaurs anymore?  The evidence is overwhelming, this is just confirms what biologists have been saying for years.


 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 12:31 AM on October 1, 2008 | IP
orion

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

That's very interesting.  Another bit of evidence showing the evolutionary connection between dinosaurs and birds.  
 


Posts: 1460 | Posted: 01:16 AM on October 1, 2008 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Yeah, the dino bird. Not enough of a celebrity here (i'm from Argentina). But there are some people proud of it being found here (like there was any merit in living close to the bucket kickage of an animal from 85 kk years ago).

In Argentina the education isn't good at all. It's terrible. But for some reason there are no outstanding creationists.

People here not only laugh at creationists. They laugh at me for trying to argue with them. xD

We have a few creationists. But they're all really limited. They can seldom use a computer. They don't speak on TV.

They don't come up with ideas even remotely smart to defend their belief.

We tend to believe that with more education there would be less creationists. What if you just get more educated creationists? It's not a real oxymoron. Your creationists are much smarter than ours. They're even smarter than some of our "evolutionists" (although that term is kinda meaningless here).

Look at those birds... Look at their feet... It's almost obvious they once were dinos.

Some creationist on YouTube laughs at the concept of chicken descending from the T-Rex.

I think the visible difference between a chicken and a hummingbird is greater than that between an ostrich and a raptor.

What's so special about a book that makes them really believe it's the inerrable word  of God, unlike any of the other sacred books? And makes them think "The book CAN'T possibly be wrong. Can't, can't, can't, can't, can't". So the rest of the reality must be wrong. Except for those parts which temporarily fit into their delusion.



-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 3:10 PM on October 1, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Quote from Demon38 at 12:31 AM on October 1, 2008 :
I know we've spoken about this before but here's even more recently discovered evidence that links dinosaurs to birds.
From here:
DinoToBird

So this fossil

"CHICAGO - Scientists have unearthed the remains of a large meat-eating dinosaur with a breathing apparatus much like a modern bird, fortifying the link between birds and dinosaurs and helping to explain the evolution of birds' unique system of breathing.

Pulled from 85-million-year-old rock along the banks of Rio Colorado in Argentina's Mendoza Province, this 33-foot-long, two-legged predator weighed as much as an elephant and likely had feathers, the scientists said.

But its method of breathing makes this dinosaur stand out, said Paul Sereno of the University of Chicago, who wrote about the find on Monday in the journal PLoS ONE.

Instead of lungs that expand and contract, Sereno thinks this beast had air sacs that worked like a bellows, blowing air into the beast's stiff lungs, much like modern birds.

"This dinosaur, unlike any other, provides more direct evidence of the bellows involved in bird breathing," Ricardo Martinez of the Universidad Nacional de San Juan, Argentina, who worked with Sereno on the research, said in a statement.

The team named the dinosaur Aerosteon riocoloradensis, meaning "air bones from the Rio Colorado," because its bones have pockets and a sponge-like texture called "pneumatization" in which air sacs from the lung invade the bone.

Most paleontologists believe birds evolved from small, feathered meat-eating dinosaurs, and the earliest known birds were strikingly similar to these dinosaurs.

The researchers think Aerosteon, a type of dinosaur called a theropod, may have evolved this breathing style in part to keep it from toppling over while chasing prey on its two massive legs. And it may have helped control body temperature.

"If dinosaurs and in particular theropods were 'warm-blooded' as many of us suspect and feathered for insulation, they would have had a major problem getting rid of heat at times. Perhaps this is why air sacs initially evolved, and then were co-opted for breathing," Sereno said."

Are there any experts that doubt birds evolved from dinosaurs anymore?  The evidence is overwhelming, this is just confirms what biologists have been saying for years.




So this fossil has a breathing system like that of  birds, somewhat hollow bones like a bird, and probably had feathers like a bird couldn't it just be a bird


 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 9:37 PM on December 21, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

So this fossil has a breathing system like that of  birds, somewhat hollow bones like a bird, and probably had feathers like a bird couldn't it just be a bird

Because it had a theropod skeleton, it had theropod teeth, it was 33 feet long and weighted more than an elephant.  Did you bother to do any research here?   Do you really think paleontologists can't tell the difference between a theropod dinosaur and a bird???  And you do know that all birds ARE dinosaurs, right?
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 01:02 AM on December 22, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I was just asking a question Demon no reason to get so upset. But if it makes you feel better I did just look it up and realize it is a dinosaur but I still see no proof of feathers or air sacks just speculation.
 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 12:35 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
tonechild

|     |       Report Post



Newbie
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

oh theres by far more than speculation!!  If you look into the actual genome of the bird you can see instructions for the birds to have tails, hands, teeth, and even scales!  Those genes, while still there in their DNA, are now OFF.  But now with breakthroughs in genetic research, we are actually capable of turning genes on.  In fact, a scientist basically flipped a switch from "OFF to ON" and successfully hatched a bird with teeth!!

This is very exciting, and it is possible that we could see a new kind of dinosaur, made by turning on those old genes, within the next 15 years or so!

Check out these FASCINATING articles
Chicken genes help crack the dinosaur code - TIMES MAGAZINE
Study of Chicken Teeth Sheds Light on Evolution - NPR
The Development of Archosaurian First-Generation Teeth in a Chicken Mutant - Current Biology Magazine

(Edited by tonechild 12/22/2008 at 2:35 PM).
 


Posts: 8 | Posted: 1:52 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I must admit that sounds pretty cool
 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 8:29 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

but I still see no proof of feathers or air sacks just speculation.

Would you even know what proof of air sacs look like???  Pretty dishonest claiming knowledge you don't have!
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 10:55 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Actually yes I do know what evidence would look like and although it could support air sacs as could most dinosaurs in the book
Out of Thin Air:
Dinosaurs, Birds, and Earth's Ancient Atmosphere
it states that the fossil evidence of the dinosaurs could also show signs of a breatthing system very similar to that of modern crocodiles.

And I quote "Ruben does not think this is evidence of air sacs. But if not air sacs, what system was used by the dinosaurs? According to Ruben and his colleagues, we have only to look at respiration in crocodiles to see how—and with what organs—dinosaurs breathed."

http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11630&page=179[u][/u]
 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 11:11 PM on December 22, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Actually yes I do know what evidence would look like and although it could support air sacs as could most dinosaurs in the book
Out of Thin Air:
Dinosaurs, Birds, and Earth's Ancient Atmosphere
it states that the fossil evidence of the dinosaurs could also show signs of a breatthing system very similar to that of modern crocodiles.


You're kidding right?!?!  This book was published in 2006, 2 years BEFORE
Aerosteon riocoloradensis  was even discovered!  Your claim is 2 years out of date, and doesn't take into account the latest evidence, so, therefore, it's a worthless claim.
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 12:17 AM on December 23, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Wow 2 years, the book still takes into account theropods of which Aerosteon riocoloradensis has been identified as.
 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 3:28 PM on December 23, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Wow 2 years, the book still takes into account theropods of which Aerosteon riocoloradensis has been identified as.

Two years is a long time in paleontology!  
Two years is a long time in any science!  Your source was not up to date and accurate, it didn't have Aerosteon riocoloradensis in it, therefore, it is worthless!  That's the way science works.  
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 8:47 PM on December 23, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

[b]Two years is a long time in paleontology!  
Two years is a long time in any science!  Your source was not up to date and accurate, it didn't have Aerosteon riocoloradensis in it, therefore, it is worthless!  That's the way science works

Well then in that case The Origin of Species is just as worthless.
 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 10:24 PM on December 23, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Well then in that case The Origin of Species is just as worthless.

Well, we have discovered  a lot of stuff Darwin didn't know.  So the Origin of the species IS worthless as an up to date guide on evolution.  But it is the first definitive book to explain evolution.  He was right that evolution did occur.  We've just built on his theory since then.  

And since the bible is over 2,000 years old, it is Totally useless as a science book....
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 12:01 AM on December 24, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I had a feeling you'd say that.
 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 12:05 AM on December 24, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

I had a feeling you'd say that.

When I'm right, I'm right!

Are you ever going to admit you were wrong about Aerosteon riocoloradensis , that your research source was ridiculously out of date, that it IS another piece of evidence that birds evolved from dinosaurs.  
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 12:34 AM on December 24, 2008 | IP
oct08

|     |       Report Post




Member
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

No I will not concede because from what I've read in your posts and other sources all theropods have the spongy texture within their bones and from what I've researched it seems more likely for little prize fossil to have the same breathing system as a crocodile and any other theropod. So for now I feel we'll have to agree to disagree
 


Posts: 44 | Posted: 12:33 PM on December 24, 2008 | IP
wisp

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

Is that the reason why you won't concede?

You're not conceding about your claims about sight being irreducibly complex, or about Gould, with no reasons why.

So why do you need one in this particular case?

Like i've said, i have a feeling that you will leave this forum without taking your claims back.


(Edited by wisp 12/29/2008 at 03:01 AM).


-------
Quote from Lester10 at 2:51 PM on September 21, 2010 in the thread
Scientists assert (by Lester):

Ha Ha. (...) I've told you people endlessly about my evidence but you don't want to show me yours - you just assert.
porkchop
Would we see a mammal by the water's edge "suddenly" start breathing underwater(w/camera effect of course)?
Contact me at youdebate.1wr@gishpuppy.com
 


Posts: 3037 | Posted: 07:13 AM on December 26, 2008 | IP
Demon38

|      |       Report Post




Fanatic
Post Score
Adjustment:
n/a

Rate this post:

No I will not concede because from what I've read in your posts and other sources

Let's make sure we add your sources are irrelevant because they don't examine the newest evidence!  This is a typical creationest tactic, cherry picking data, using the data they want and ignoring the data that disproves their claims!  

from what I've researched it seems more likely for little prize fossil to have the same breathing system as a crocodile

YOu do know that crocodilians are more closely related to birds than they are to other reptiles...From here:
DinoLungs

"Based on Ruben et al (1997, 1999), many creationist websites claim that theropod dinosaurs had crocodile-like pelvovisceral muscle pump (aka 'hepatic piston') rather than the air-sac complex typical of modern birds, that a transition from a crocodile-like lung to a bird-like lung is impossible, and therefore that theropod dinosaurs could not have been ancestral to Archaeopteryx and to later birds. As we'll see, however, the skeletal morphology morphology of theropods, far from demonstrating the presence of a croc-style pelvovisceral pump, actually strongly suggests just the opposite."

As we see here, non avian theropods breathing systems might have looked "crocodilian"  because crocodilian breathing systems evovled into avian breathing systems, From here:

"Some of the initial reconstructions of the pulmonary condition in nonavian dinosaurs were characterized as the “stepwise transformation of a crocodilian-like lung into an avian airsac system” [74: 132]. Such a transformational approach presumes that the crocodilian lung is primitive for archosaurs, which may not be the case. For nonavian dinosaurs, avians are the first and only outgroup for many of the pneumatic structures of interest, and so identifying osteological correlates and their probable functional associations is the best available approach [55].

Perry [75: 58] outlined a “dinosaur grade” pulmonary system that involved a dorsally attached lung, avian-like air sacs, bi-directional air flow, and costal-driven aspiration. Later [74], [76: 134] it was postulated that the “dynamic gastralia” of theropods suggests there were abdominal air sacs, which in turn are “crucial for unidirectional flow in the paleopulmo of birds.” On this basis, anterior and posterior air “chambers” were inferred to have evolved at the base of Dinosauria and “true airsacs” to have evolved at the base of Theropoda [76: fig. 1]."

So outdated sources, like the one you use, can definitely claim that non avian theropod breathing systems look "crocodilian" yet, as the new evidence you ignore shows us, these systems did have avain characteristics and look like an evolutionary step between the two.  

So for now I feel we'll have to agree to disagree

Well, if you want to ignore the evidence that disproves you claim, go ahead and disagree all you want!
 


Posts: 1664 | Posted: 11:58 PM on December 28, 2008 | IP
    
[ Single page for this topic ]

Topic Jump
« Back | Next »
[ Single page for this topic ]
Forum moderated by: admin
    

Topic options: Lock topic | Unlock topic | Make Topic Sticky | Remove Sticky | Delete thread | Move thread | Merge thread

 

© YouDebate.com
Powered by: ScareCrow version 2.12
© 2001 Jonathan Bravata. All rights reserved.