Birds evolved from dinosaurs

[Owlscrying]

A new species of feathered dinosaurs provides hard evidence the prehistoric creatures evolved into birds, a group of Chinese scientists has claimed.

The team - lead by the man dubbed the 'real-life Indiana Jones' - say the fossils represent five different species from two different rock sequences in north-eastern China. All the species have feathers or feather-like structures.

Continued...

Source / Pic

[Pinx]

Check out the pic of what it probably looked like. That was one helluvan awesome looking birdosaur.

[village_idiot]

So this is why my chickens always remind me of the Velociraptors from Jurassic Park? Knew I couldn't trust 'em...

[SQLserver]

Of course, evidence from a multitude of fields have already cemented this as a fact in science. But, heck, the more the merrier.

[Raptor]

Of course, evidence from a multitude of fields have already cemented this as a fact in science. But, heck, the more the merrier.

Not quite a fact, recent findings have cast doubt over the idea:

A stunning new fossil from China reveals primitive filamentary feathers on a dinosaur only distantly related to birds, indicating that all dinosaurs share a feathery ancestry. About 70 centimetres long, the plant-eating Tianyulong lived from about 140 to 100 million years ago. The fossil is a member of the ornithischian group of dinosaurs that diverged about 220 million years ago from the other main branch of the dinosaurs, which contained the theropods. The presence of feathers on both branches of the evolutionary tree suggests they were present in the ancestor of all the dinosaurs.

Source

Researchers at Oregon State University have made a fundamental new discovery about how birds breathe and have a lung capacity that allows for flight – and the finding means it's unlikely that birds descended from any known theropod dinosaurs.

The conclusions add to other evolving evidence that may finally force many paleontologists to reconsider their long-held belief that modern birds are the direct descendants of ancient, meat-eating dinosaurs, OSU researchers say.

Source

I'm no expert but that seems to suggest that perhaps birds' ancestors were the dinosaurs' cousins, and they branched away from each other just shortly before the age of the dinosaurs began.

Edited September 26, 2009 by Raptor

[Emma_Acid]

Humans and birds are not related in any way, and neither are humans and dinosaurs. Primates and birds are not related in any way, and neither are primates and dinosaurs. You're dealing with an evolution known as "Macroevolution."

First off, every living thing is related to every other living thing. You're mistaking being related to something for ancestry. Chickens are not descended from primates, but they are related. We share a common ancestor with chickens - it was just a very very long time ago, much further back than the common ancestor we share with chimps.

Secondly, most scientists don't make a distinction between micro and macro evolution. There really is no such thing. Its like saying there's a difference between 5 frames of film and an entire 2 hour movie's worth.

Edited March 16, 2010 by Emma_Acid

[Siara]

I thought wings and arms were evolutionary variations on the same appendage. In the pic, it looks like this thing had six limbs.

[Abramelin]

Some "Non-Avian Feathered Dinosaurs" May Have Been Birds

So called "non-avian theropod" dinosaurs from the Cretaceous had feathers, nests, laid eggs and roosted like birds. If they were so much like birds, why don't we just say they were birds?

A paper in the February issue of Medical Hypotheses argues that these "dinosaurs" could very well, in fact, have been birds. The group includes what are now called troodontids and oviraptorids.

All birds are technically avian dinosaurs, but there's still controversy over exactly how and when the first actual birds emerged.

UC Berkeley's J. Lee Kavanau, the author of the paper, argues that there is ample evidence supporting that troodontids and oviraptorids were secondary flightless birds. These birds, like today's ostriches and emus, lost their ability to fly, but retained their feathers.

"This evidence ranges from bird-like bodies and bone designs, adapted for climbing, perching, gliding, and ultimately flight, to relatively large, highly developed brains, poor sense of smell, and their feeding habits," Kavanau writes. "Because ratites also are secondarily flightless and tinamous are reluctant, clumsy fliers, the new evidence strengthens the view that troodontids and oviraptorids were secondarily flightless."

He also points out that "secondary flightlessness apparently favors paternal care of clutches of large, abundant eggs." That's been observed for both the "non-avian theropods" and today's flightless birds. A single ostrich egg, for example, can weigh around 3 pounds and is equivalent to about 24 chicken eggs.

Fossilized eggs aren't that uncommon, so studies on them, along with evidence on how they were cared for by their parents, could provide clues as to when the first actual birds emerged. It's interesting to me that troodontids and oviraptorids exhibited relatively sophisticated parenting, with males helping out. It's thought that the earliest eggs from bird or bird-like animals enjoyed only maternal care, with the co-parenting emerging later.

Birds and avian precursors could therefore have been around much earlier than presently believed. As it stands, the world's first known bird is thought to have been Archaeopteryx, which lived about 150 million years ago.

[ShadowSot]

Interesting flip on the theory.

[Msparx]

I don't understand why people can't understand the simple fact that birds descended from dinosaurs. It seems very concrete to me, but still people refuse to believe.