Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Science News

New Type of Dinosaur Unearthed 160

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the everything-is-better-with-explosives dept.
MileHighScience writes to mention that a new type of sauropod has been discovered by scientists from Utah's Brigham Young University. Dubbed Abydosaurus mcintoshi, the new addition to the long necked dinosaur family was discovered at Dinosaur National Monument. "The circumstances of its discovery were both unusual and dramatic. The researchers stumbled on four skulls in a quarry at the preserve. Two were still intact. Sauropod skulls are rarely found in the fossil record because the soft tissue from which they are constructed is unlikely to be preserved after death. 'Their heads are built lighter than mammal skulls because they sit way out at the end of very long necks,' Brooks Britt, a BYU paleontologist said in a news release. 'Instead of thick bones fused together, sauropod skulls are made of thin bones bound together by soft tissue.' Of more than 120 known species of sauropods, there have been only eight instances in which scientists have been able to recover intact skulls."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

New Type of Dinosaur Unearthed

Comments Filter:
  • by Thud457 (234763) on Monday March 01, 2010 @04:33PM (#31321468) Homepage Journal
    yeah, but does it have a thagomizer [wikipedia.org]?!
    • by eexaa (1252378)

      To me it seems like they found only the head with rest of the body bitten off. ...so probably had no thagomizer.

    • by Pojut (1027544)

      How rude! That isn't a proper question to be asking. Isaygooddaysir!

    • by RockDoctor (15477)

      yeah, but does it have a thagomizer?!

      Well, I had to follow that link. And it's fun. I've had dealings with Ken Carpenter before, and like the guy ; picking up on a term like that sounds entirely up his street sense-of-humour-wise, and as vertebrate palaeontology isn't my particular specialism, I'm more than willing to follow his lead.
      Boringly : since sauropods typically have strongly ossified tail tendons (and correspondingly low tail flexibility), then it's very unlikely to have a thagomizer.
      The teeth were

  • Mormon scientists have found skolls! How interesting! Maybe this will get a Darwin award.
    • Re: (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
    • Mormon scientists have found skolls! How interesting! Maybe this will get a Darwin award.

      Don't be silly. They dated them at 4000 years old.

      • Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)

        Mormons aren't creationists in the usual sense of the word.
        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by PopeRatzo (965947) *

          Mormons aren't creationists in the usual sense of the word.

          They're not Christian in the usual sense of the word, either.

          • by DesScorp (410532)

            Mormons aren't creationists in the usual sense of the word.

            They're not Christian in the usual sense of the word, either.

            That depends on your definition of Christian. If you define Christian as strictly adhering to the Nicene Creed, then no, they're not. But neither are many other churches by that standard. There are more non-Trinitarian Christian churches then you'd think out there.

            • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

              by Anonymous Coward

              That depends on your definition of Depends.

            • Mormon theology is a lot different from "mainstream" Christianity than just being non-Trinitarian. Of course, mainstream Christianity isn't exactly Biblical either, for the most part...
            • That depends on your definition of Christian. If you define Christian as strictly adhering to the Nicene Creed, then no, they're not.

              If you define christian as being within a country mile of protestants, catholics or eastern orthodox they still aren't.

          • by RockDoctor (15477)

            Mormons aren't creationists in the usual sense of the word.

            They're not Christian in the usual sense of the word, either

            That's one of the nicest things I've heard anyone say about the Mormons for a long time.

            The last time I had them at the door, I was decorating and had a friend around to help. So as soon as I opened the door and saw who they were, I called out "Charlie, can you bring the rubbish bucket". Then I took the set of leaflets out of their hands, said 'thank you', threw them straight into the bucke

      • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

        OK, listen. I'm an expert on Mormonism. Why? I did a Google search an hour ago, that's why.

        Mormons don't specifically believe in either creationism or evolution. The official position of the Church is that this issue is unresolved, because God has not revealed the answer.

        An analogy can be made with birtherism. There are people who consider the certificate of live birth and the old contemporaneous newspaper article as sufficient evidence. Aside from them, there are crazy "creationist" birthers who insis
        • Re: (Score:2, Informative)

          by portforward (313061)

          I'm an expert on Mormonism. I've been one all my life.

          If I may, it really depends on whom you ask. You will probably get a whole range of opinions. I would probably phrase the opinion, "Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." I graduated from BYU, and we were taught taught evolution in Biology. Any modern study of biology without evolution would be incomplete at best and shoddy and fraudulent at worst.

          As a Mormon when we study the different accounts of

  • by MillionthMonkey (240664) on Monday March 01, 2010 @04:38PM (#31321542)
    The following is MY theory.
    *ahem*
    *ahem* *ahem*
    This was the type of dinosaur that wore a saddle, so that people from the Bible could ride it around, and with that long neck it could have easily reached up to get the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Life for that bitch Eve. *Ahem*
    • by Cytotoxic (245301)

      No, no... if you are going to paraphrase Cleese, you have to wait for someone to do the original quote first.* Then you can diverge from Python orthodoxy in the subsequent reply.

      It is as if you skipped the "Triple Dare" and went straight for the jugular with a "Triple Dog Dare".

      *For the uninitiated, and in the world of Slashdot there should be none, the original quote is from Anne Elk (John Cleese)

      "This theory which belongs to me is as follows. Ahem. Ahem. This is how it goes. Ahem. The next thing that I am about to say is my theory. Ahem. Ready?

      The Theory by A. Elk brackets Miss brackets.

      My theory is along the following lines. All brontosauruses are thin at one end, much MUCH thicker in the middle, and then thin again at the far end. That is the theory that I have and which is mine, and what it is too."

    • Re: (Score:1, Troll)

      by Frosty Piss (770223)

      New Type of Dinosaur Unearthed

      Knuckle-dragging tea baggers voting for Palin?

  • by Tumbleweed (3706) * on Monday March 01, 2010 @04:39PM (#31321552)

    Another dinosaur, Windowsaurus Mobelius, has also been identified in the fossil remains of early Silicon Valley users. It seems this dinosaur was replaced in its ecosystem by a smarter, faster breed called Googlesaurus Androidius, which went on to compete for resources with the Applesaurus iPhonius, which survived only as a brightly-coloured niche dinosaur, despite competing claims that its extinction was inevitable, and that its dominance was assured. Neither of these outcomes predicted for the iPhonius turned out to be true, and the Androidius eventually evolved into sentient killing machines.

    All hail, etc.

    • by levell (538346) * on Monday March 01, 2010 @04:49PM (#31321756) Homepage

      Recent reports also note that the Nokiasuarus Maemonicus has been evolving in a new strain: Meegoasaurus Rex which prefers open spaces

      • Oh, and it eats puny Googlesaurus Androidius and Applesaurus Iphonicus for breakfast, lunch and dinner. ^^

    • If we are going to talk about things that are extinct then I would suggest naming it Abydosaurus Lisasaurus [wikipedia.org] instead.

      • by Tumbleweed (3706) *

        If we are going to talk about things that are extinct then I would suggest naming it Abydosaurus Lisasaurus instead.

        I'm not sure a stillborn mutant qualifies as an extinct species, but I suppose that's a matter of perspective. :)

    • iPhonius developed a distaste for most boobies, with the exception of a few big name boobies like Playboyius Boobius. This contributed greatly to it's decline, despite the abundance of it's primary food source childus Improvishedus.

      • by Tetsujin (103070)

        iPhonius developed a distaste for most boobies, with the exception of a few big name boobies like Playboyius Boobius. This contributed greatly to it's

        parser error

      • Actually, it developed a distaste for anything female, except its own growing femininity. And its primary food source was a early biped called Homo Erotica Bubblus Distortensis Realitis. ;)

    • by zullnero (833754)
      Sentient killing machines that are "extremely concerned about your browsing habits" and "offer you suggestions about various products it wants you to buy and websites it wants you to visit?" You got it all wrong.

      Most schools teach that Androidius evolved into Googlesaurus Chromicus, which, throwing the basic concepts of evolution to the wind, took many different shapes and sizes but ultimately couldn't optimize its own form into the perfect killing machine and ended up cannibalizing itself due to an ina
  • I would call it a Brontasaurus just to add confusion.
  • Thesaurus? (Score:5, Funny)

    by fahrbot-bot (874524) on Monday March 01, 2010 @04:40PM (#31321578)
    Thesaurus: Small dinosaur that uses flowery language to extricate itself from dangerous situations. - Dennis Miller
  • Which evolved into its much cooler offspring, iPodosaurus.
  • I wonder if the low density of these skulls will affect the on-going debate about the whether or not the sauropods held their necks and heads erect or horizontally? It will be interesting to see. See here [wikipedia.org] for info on the debate.
  • Actually (Score:4, Informative)

    by riboch (1551783) on Monday March 01, 2010 @04:44PM (#31321660)

    More specifically it was a U of M graduate student:
    http://www.ns.umich.edu/htdocs/releases/story.php?id=7537 [umich.edu]

    • Oh so it wasn't a dinosaur at all then! Still I could see how scientists could get confused by these U of M students with long necks and thin skulls....

  • Is this a new dinosaur or a new as in you didn't have it before BMWsaur?

  • Soft head...tiny brain...a Paleoconservative, no doubt.

  • My favorite dinosaur is still the Lickalotapus. Need less to say, my least favorite is the Megasaurass.
  • After visiting the creation science museum, I wonder if the BYU crew found any evidence of saddles along with the dinosaurs?

Machines that have broken down will work perfectly when the repairman arrives.

Working...