Feather Dino Fossil 10
wyren writes "This story in the NYTimes (free req req'd) summarizes some findings published in the journal Nature about a recent dig in China. The article claims the find is the most complete skeleton to date with fossilized evidence of feathers. There have been previous similar finds but one researcher claims the superior quality of this specimen makes it the 'find we've been waiting for.'"
Re:What will the ICU say? (Score:2)
Obviously kangaroos exist and hummingbirds and bumblebees can fly. If anyone wants to dispute those facts then we're in for some really interminable discussion. However, using the accepted model of aerodynamics at the time, it was once "proven" that bumblebees and hummingbirds had no way of producing sufficient lift to fly. It has also been proven that kangaroos use more energy moving around in tremendous leaps that they take in when they eat. So, either the principles of thermodynamics go out the window or kangaroos don't exist. Either that, or perfectly valid mathematics were being done on a completely flawed model in which none of the energy that a kangaroo uses in a leap is regained on landing for the next leap.
I believe the same problem applies to the above. The model for nonsterile favorable mutations was flawed (the biggest flaw is probably the notion that a mutation has to be favorable to start off with to carry on to the next generation). There's no way for the model not to be flawed since the process of mutation is so poorly understood. There's no way that anyone can come up with a believable estimate of mutation rates.
ICU[^HR] will probably laugh their butts off (Score:2)
The ratio is at least thousands of provably damaging mutations to one notionally helpful mutation. Sickle cell anaemia is not an example of a helpful mutation, as it is 25% lethal and 25% ineffective. The duds (if collectively fertile they are inheritable) are called ``genetic burden'' and one of the consequences of discovering this was a conference to decide whether mutation plus natural selection cold be sufficient to drive evolution as she is conventionally understood. The answer was ``No''. Not maybe, not at long odds, not in some circumstances, just ``No''.
I can dig out refs if required, but basically evolution is once again in the embarrassing position of saying, ``we don't know how it happened, but we believe that it did''. Now that's blind faith!
The ICU certainly saw you coming... (Score:3)
Images, no registration. (Score:3)
You can see a couple of photos of the fossil and a drawing of the reconstructed critter at the American Museum of Natural History's Website [amnh.org].
Kinda cute, doncha think? Probably worse than a cat about tearing up the furniture, though.
--
Re:Images, no registration. (Score:3)
--
What will the ICU say? (Score:5)
What I worry is that people in general will hear this and say "so?" and forget about it like every other tidbit of science they've ever heard. Then later on they're going to be watching some well-funded, slickly-produced Creationist video that claims there aren't any known transitionary fossils and just swallow it. How else can Kansas be explained?
It's just good that most of the brain-disease known as creationism is confined to the USA and undeveloped countries where education is so poor people will actually fall for the literalist fundie crap.
Free NYTIMES link (Score:2)
By the way... (Score:1)
--
Do I play Hockey? [nhl.com]
Posting at -1 since April 18/01.
Yay! (Score:2)
Score another point for intelligent design and the forces of God!
Now we can see that "intermediate" species never would have survived. This fossil sure isn't living.
Dancin Santa
Apteryx (Score:4)
It's also conceivable that they needed feather like coverings to impress their girlfriends [naturephoto.com].