Liverpool FC Forum

[Judge]

BEIJING (AFP) - One of the world's top fossil hunters unveiled a previously unknown gigantic, chicken-like dinosaur Wednesday that may change evolutionary theory on prehistoric animals.

The remains of the animal, thought to have weighed 1,400 kilogrammes (3,100 pounds), was discovered in a freak find by Xing Xu in the Erlian basin in Inner Mongolia, an area rich with fossils, the scientist told AFP.

The new species, named the Gigantoraptor erlianensis, is the biggest bird-like dinosaur ever found and at a height of five metres (17 feet) is comparable in size to the famous Tyrannosaurus, Xing said.

The 85 million-year-old creature was 35 times heavier than other known similar species, and is thought to have had a beak and sporadic patches of feathers, according to a paper to be released in UK science journal Nature on Thursday.

"If you saw a mouse as big as a pig you would be very surprised, it is the same when we found the Gigantoraptor," Xing, from the Chinese Academy of Sciences in Beijing, told reporters on Wednesday.

"The new dinosaur is much larger than its relatives of the similar species. We have spent a year to confirm its features and characteristics."

The find may contradict an evolutionary theory that as carnivorous dinosaurs got smaller they became more birdlike, the Nature paper said.

Xing discovered the first femur of the Gigantoraptor in 2005 during the shooting of a documentary about one of his previous finds.

The crew asked him to demonstrate how he finds fossils and during the shot, he chanced upon a section of the femur, or thigh bone.

"We randomly picked up a bone on the surface," Xing said in an interview with AFP.

"We initially thought it was from the same species as we had discovered before, but minutes later we realised it was from a meat-eating dinosaur.

"This big size is very unusual for a meat-eater and only a Tyrannosaur is of similar size."

Xing's team then embarked on further digs which uncovered an extensive collection of bones, followed by a lengthy verification process, leading to the release of the latest paper, which suggests the huge 11-year-old was only partly grown.

Sections of the film where Xing discovered the first bone were shown during a press conference Wednesday here in Beijing, where several parts of the species, including its skull were on display.

"We found it was a very bird-like, feathered dinosaur -- like an enormous chicken," Xing told AFP earlier.

"It is the largest beaked dinosaur, and would have had no teeth in its mouth."

Xing is one of the world's leading fossil hunters and has discovered more than 20 new species at various sites across China.

In 2001 he was embroiled in controversy over the discovery of a fossil believed to be the "missing link" between dinosaurs and birds, which tests revealed to be a clever fraud.

Xing authenticated the find in 1999, but was also part of the team that began expressing doubts a few months later after he found that the tail on fossils were suspiciously similar to those of a different species.

Forensic scanning found that the fossil -- which had been sold to unwitting US collectors by Chinese traffickers -- was simply a thin stone slab coated with grout and glued to a jigsaw of 88 fragments of rocks and fossilised bones.

China is rich with archaeological sites, but suffers from an illegal trade in real and fabricated dinosaur bones, previous reports have said.

[woof woof !]

In an adjoining site Professor Xing also claims to have discovered mans early attempt at vehicle manufacture and has the photo to prove it.

[Judge]

cant view the picture woof

[LFC2007]

It's a flintstone-esque carriage Judge.

[7_Kewell]

[kalos]

These things tend to get revised and the mind changed .

There is sitll no concrete example of evolution taking place. Minor variations within  a species but never one species becoming something else.

Darwin has been taking the p--s for 150 years and people still fall for evolution hook ,line and sinker.

Where are all the intermediate species he predicted would be found? where are the apemen? If they were superior to apes how come the apes survived and they didn't?

How come the fossil record consistently shows complete organisms spring up with no inetrmediate "ancestors" and the oldest rocks show an explosion of life all at once?

Evolution needs to be confined to the dustbin of pseudo-intellectual history.

[LFC2007]

Evolution needs to be confined to the dustbin of pseudo-intellectual history.

So what's your theory?

[Big Niall]

Man and dinosaurs obviously existed at the same time - how else could the Flintstones have had dino as a pet.

[The Manhattan Project]

These things tend to get revised and the mind changed .

There is sitll no concrete example of evolution taking place. Minor variations within  a species but never one species becoming something else.

Darwin has been taking the p--s for 150 years and people still fall for evolution hook ,line and sinker.

Where are all the intermediate species he predicted would be found? where are the apemen? If they were superior to apes how come the apes survived and they didn't?

How come the fossil record consistently shows complete organisms spring up with no inetrmediate "ancestors" and the oldest rocks show an explosion of life all at once?

Evolution needs to be confined to the dustbin of pseudo-intellectual history.

-sighs-

Dear me.

Evolution denialism.

I had hoped this sort of nonsense was limited to America's deep south.

[kalos]

I never offered a "theory" just pionting out the obvious flaws in the one that is believed in religiously by the majority.

Manahttan - answer my questions - there has been enough repeating of the Mantra that "evolution is a proven scientific fact"-

Evolutionists themselves disagree as to the how, why's and wherefores of the theory and the masses blindly follow the refuse they are fed. Give me some evidence.. to contradict what the fossil record shows - organisms appearing fully formed with no intermediate links and no "evolutionary history".

Many scientists with the highest intellectual credentials dismiss evolution. Many now concur with the idea of intelligent design. Whether you call the designer God or some unknown force is for each person to decide ...or you can swallow the bull about chance , mutations and the like for which there is not a shred of evidence.

If you want to actually see why Darwin's gig is up read "Darwins  Black Box" by Michael Behe- no not some religious zealot but a Professor of Biochemistry in the states. He used to believe in evolution until he researched the so called "facts" and found that there is no basis at the molecular level (which is where we are told it all began) for believing in evolution.

Keep an open mind folks , everyone beleived the world was flat at one time and laughed at some blokes who said they would sail around the world.

Chance, mutations and the Big bang eh?  Try telling the folks in Hiroshima and Nagasaki that big bangs with tremendous release of uncontrolled energy bring forth an orderly universe.

[The Manhattan Project]

If you want to actually see why Darwin's gig is up read "Darwins  Black Box" by Michael Behe- no not some religious zealot but a Professor of Biochemistry in the states.

Dude, who do you think you are kidding?

You seriously believe I haven't heard of Behe?

He's a proponent of "intelligent design" which even the U.S. courts defined (in Kitzmiller vs Dover School District Case No: 04cv2688) as a religious theory.

It's simply creationism hidden with pseudo-scientific language with no evidential basis.

All of your coherant "questions" are dealt with in the FAQ sections of most evolutionary science websites. I suggest you do some reading around and you should be able to find the answers for yourself.

[LFC2007]

I never offered a "theory" just pionting out the obvious flaws in the one that is believed in religiously by the majority.

Manahttan - answer my questions - there has been enough repeating of the Mantra that "evolution is a proven scientific fact"-

Evolutionists themselves disagree as to the how, why's and wherefores of the theory and the masses blindly follow the refuse they are fed. Give me some evidence.. to contradict what the fossil record shows - organisms appearing fully formed with no intermediate links and no "evolutionary history".

Many scientists with the highest intellectual credentials dismiss evolution. Many now concur with the idea of intelligent design. Whether you call the designer God or some unknown force is for each person to decide ...or you can swallow the bull about chance , mutations and the like for which there is not a shred of evidence.

If you want to actually see why Darwin's gig is up read "Darwins  Black Box" by Michael Behe- no not some religious zealot but a Professor of Biochemistry in the states. He used to believe in evolution until he researched the so called "facts" and found that there is no basis at the molecular level (which is where we are told it all began) for believing in evolution.

Keep an open mind folks , everyone beleived the world was flat at one time and laughed at some blokes who said they would sail around the world.

Chance, mutations and the Big bang eh?  Try telling the folks in Hiroshima and Nagasaki that big bangs with tremendous release of uncontrolled energy bring forth an orderly universe.

A typical "intelligent design" nutter, hasn't a fecking clue.

[Big Niall]

While evolution seems the best explanation at the moment, I do agree that it is a theory just like much of physics(complicated parts not the basics done in school) is based on theories which we can't yet prove and which in the future may be disproved. Hawkins admitted that his book (the really popular one - cant think of title - something about time) was wrong and had to change his theory

[kalos]

Big Niall,

Thanks for a very astute observation. Unfortunately the evolutionist brigade is now guilty of what the religious zealots were int he dark ages- name calling and putting others down without a reasoned arguement.

Manhattan - your mind has been made up for you by a court in the US? Do you know the opinions and bias of the judges and/or jury? Why are you totally convinced that the court is disproving Intelligent design by labelling it as rleigious - all that does is giv eit a lable - nothingt o do with proving ro disproving it surley..? If you give so much wieght to court decisions on the sciebtific then maybe you will concur with the case of  June 22, 1633. Catholic Church v Galileo where the court ruled that the earth was the centre of the universe??

Anyone reading this please note - No answers to the questions raised above. Even Darwin had the good sense to note: “If numerous species . . . have really started into life at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of evolution. and also conceded."   Would he put forward hs theory in 2007 if alive - no chance?

That is why people like Stephen Jay Gould and others came up with "punctuated equilibria" and other novel concepts that say evolution happened in rare but giant strides , not gradually.

Phillip Johnson, a professor of criminal law at the University of California at Berkeley in the United States, has long been fascinated by the way biologists defend the theory of evolution. They seem so defensive and dogmatic on the subject that Johnson set about finding out “what the vulnerable points were they’re trying to protect.” The result of his research is a book, Darwin on Trial, that The Sacramento Bee describes as “a lawyer’s examination, bit by bit, of the logic of and evidence behind the theory of evolution.” The newspaper summarizes: “Darwin flunks.” Johnson claims he found many scholars, including biologists, who are afraid to speak out publicly against evolution. “One of the things I’ve learned from this experience,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle, “is that to establish an intellectual orthodoxy and keep it beyond criticism, you don’t need concentration camps and secret police. All you have to do is say that people will laugh at you and you’ll lose your prestige. This has an enormous effect in academic life.”

Here are a few excerpts form evolutionists and other reference works . Anyone reading can make up his own mind whether evolution should remain a sacred cow or needs to be challenged.

New Scientist  (Feb 1982)noted that evolution “predicts that a complete fossil record would consist of lineages of organisms showing gradual change continuously over long periods of time.” But it admitted: “Unfortunately, the fossil record does not meet this expectation, for individual species of fossils are rarely connected to one another by known intermediate forms. . . . known fossil species do indeed appear not to evolve even over millions of years.”

The New Evolutionary Timetable (p.95 , 1981)acknowledges, “the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another. Furthermore, species lasted for astoundingly long periods of time.”—

Professor J. D. Bernal in the book The Origin of Life: “By applying the strict canons of scientific method to this subject [the spontaneous generation of life], it is possible to demonstrate effectively at several places in the story, how life could not have arisen; the improbabilities are too great, the chances of the emergence of life too small.” He added: “Regrettably from this point of view, life is here on Earth in all its multiplicity of forms and activities and the arguments have to be bent round to support its existence.”

[Ciggy]

Jesus Christ