Full story: http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/08/health/dinosaur-tail-trapped-in-amber-trnd/index.html
I’d love proponents of both evolution and ID to tell me how their theories predicted this, along with supporting documentation from before the discovery. Thanks!
Oops
Willam, you said CNN was the worst example of a news source. So I asked you what source was better than CNN. Did you give one?
Of course not. But I suspect it would sound something like SUX. Or LOX. Or something like that.
And I’m sure that the downfall of Ailes and O’Reilly was a liberal conspiracy to discredit FOX news.
I question if anyone from the 19th century was expert at anything especially extinct biology!
Well if he saw theropods as lizards then he was wrong. he did not see their bird bones, bird feathers, bird egglaying.
It was the origin of false classification systems.
We should do a better job today.
Question presumptions.
A theropod , it seems, is just a ground bird in a spectrum of diversity.
All dinos are in fact just KINDS relatated to living kinds today or extinct.
The concept of a dinosaur9great lizard) is a false one.
modern research in these theropods is hinting at this as they find them feathered after finding them with identical bone structures as birds.
Whopps!
it would only of been of interest what KINDS meant after the attacks on biblical accuracy about origins.
what is a kIND?
Genesis gives the snake kind example and bird kinds example and humans.
humans have different bodyplans but are the same kind.
snakes, cursed with leglessness, are the same kind despite the diversity in snakes.
birds, dove/crow, mentioned on the ark means these are kinds despite being BIRD.
so the original KINDS changed in diversity but stayed as kinds.
Unless new bodyplans makes new kinds but i don’t think so.
Yes laying eggs is typical of birds.
I do not recall saying you did , it seems we agree on that and on the fact that human trafficking exists.
But this is a “claim”, if I understand your point correctly, that rejection of the ridiculous and factual deficient story of pizzagate is a ”handy talking point” against the crime of human trafficking.
If I falsely accused you trolling this thread how does my false accusation then become a handy talking point to ridicule those who take the problem internet trolls very seriously?
This is the “ claim” which I reject, in fact I think making a false claim for the purpose the besmirching your character for personal gain or pleasure actually serves to undermine the seriousness of the issue. And those who perpetuate the false claim about your trollishness undermine that which they claim to care deeply about.
You disagree?
From the op Richard says:
What about those of us who see some trith in both evolution and ID?
The problem with the reporting on this subject is not in trying to understand the relationship between birds and therapods, it is in the intrinic bias that comes out.
Here is a report on a prehistoric bird found in amber which refers to the link given in the op.
In the middle of the above passage they provide the link to the subject of this thread.
An article about the subject has this to say:
Note that the creature to which the fossil belongs has been called a bird. Now look at the artistic impression that goes along with it (second image below).
The more complete fossil found in amber linked to above is reported to have feathers similar to the subject fossil but we have a more accurate image of it (first image below).
So based on the fact that the fossil showed that the creature had a tail the artistic impression shows it as being very much more therapod like than bird like.
The second image didn’t show up. Here it is:
I think that you are confusing rational, logical criticism with attack.
Sounds like the biblical scholars simply changed the definition to meet their needs. If the words are the inspired word of god, doesn’t changing the definitions go against god’s wishes?
No it doesn’t have similar feathers. The feathers on the tail are interesting because they’re different. According to Mark Norell of the American Museum of Natural History:
NYT article
To be sure, I don’t think vertebrae in the tail necessarily means that it was a non-avian dinosaur, as I believe that Archaeopteryx did as well. But the novel feather type is certainly interesting, and possibly more in line with non-avian dinosaurs (at least what we see don’t look much like flight feathers, in my paltry judgment).
I don’t know that it’s certain that it’s not a bird tail, but even if it is it’s apparently enough different to be informative about feather varieties. Of course there’s nothing new about feathers on dinosaurs, but this seems to be the best preserved example.
Glen Davidson
No. why say this. I said kINDS was never established due to lack of interest.
Only what the bible says matters to bible believers. scholars don’t matter.
Its common knowledge in these things that artists can’t do much just looking at bones. They need comparative data.
so these ‘dinos’ are always from imagination with a wee bit of bone boundaries.
In fact the better investigation these days keeps showing these theropods are just birds. ground birds.
They are not reptiles or dinos . Dinosaurs was a myth.
Just 19th century incompetence.
I didn’t say it had similar feathers, I said it was “reported t have similar feathers”. as in the National Geographic
The therapod dinosaur feathers they are talking about are the ones they link to here, which are those in the link of the op.
In fact the original tail feather article has this to say:
I didn’t say that you said that.
“More similar to the theropod dinosaur feathers” is hardly the same as “similar feathers.”
Glen Davidson
If you had any idea of what the term “pizzagate” refers to beyond mainstream media talking points, you’d understand the absurdity of your statement.
Because you do not know what the term “pizzagate” actually refers to, you offer an analogy based on that minsinformation.
Yes. You think “pizzagate” means X because the mainstream media has told you it means X, not because you have done any actual investigation into it. Therefore, we can’t have a meaningful discussion about it.
Feel free to offer those quotes and links.
As far a s Podesta and Comet Ping Pong, there’s plenty of evidence for both. Whether or not one finds it “credible” is up to the individual. But Podesta and Ping Pong are a very, very, very tiny part of what is covered by the term “pizzagate”, and anyone who investigates that soon finds it out. The validity of what is covered by the term “pizzagate” is beyond reasonable doubt – it is historically documented and is being revealed every single day in the media these days.
Pizzagate doesn’t live or fail based on Podesta and Comet Ping Pong – it’s much, much larger than that. The modern investigation by literally tens of thousands of researchers and investigators on the internet into human trafficking and institutionalized pedophilia sprang from those who were looking over the hacked emails and found the use of terms like “pizza” and “hot dog” troubling in context.
Thinking that “pizzagate” is all about podesta and Comet Ping Pong, though would be like thinking newtonian physics is all about the apple that fell on Newton’s head. More myth than substance.
Yes, I did.
Either back up allegations with facts or stop making them here. Thanks in advance.
If memory serves, I started a thread here with a link to such evidence and it was summarily removed even though it broke no forum rules.
TSZ is subject to libel law. Our rules do not circumvent the laws of libel. If you want to argue about TSZ’s rules, please do so in the dedicated thread, “Moderation Issues”. If you want to support a claim regarding a paedophilia ring with actual verifiable evidence, then do so. Though I wonder why such evidence is not the subject of a police enquiry.
What makes it credible is the evidence for specific claims.
Move the goalposts a little wider. False accusations undermine true accusations. Something about wolf and crying.
Haha. Now we know why Patrick had to leave.
I seem to recall allegations directed at you which I requested should be either supported or withdrawn.
So were the allegations directed at Mung supported or withdrawn? Did you warn the people making the allegations? Did you tell the individuals they are not welcome here if they don’t?