Prehistoric Birds May Have Used Four Wings

[Still Waters]

Roughly 150 million years ago, birds began to evolve. The winged creatures we see in the skies today descended from a group of dinosaurs called theropods, which included tyrannosaurs, during a 54-million-year chunk of time known as the Jurassic period.

Why the ability to fly evolved in some species is a difficult question to answer, but scientists agree that wings came to be because they must have been useful: they might have helped land-based animals leap into the air, or helped gliding creatures who flapped their arms produce thrust.

http://blogs.smithso...r-wings-to-fly/

Four-winged birds? First fossils identified

http://science.nbcne...identified?lite

Edited March 15, 2013 by Still Waters
Added another source link

[Ultima Weapon]

Why the ability to fly evolved in some species is a difficult question to answer,

Maybe because Darwinism's just a bunch of speculations based on no evidence...

[Ashotep]

Maybe I should stand on the house and flap my arms. Maybe I could develop wings and fly away.

I might get committed too.

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

This story also on Russian media today. This is a photo from vesti.ru of Confuciusornithidae, or number 176 in a Chinese menu

[Jacques Terreur]

Maybe because Darwinism's just a bunch of speculations based on no evidence...

what is your alternative on Darwin's theory of evolution?

[Zeta Reticulum]

Maybe I should stand on the house and flap my arms. Maybe I could develop wings and fly away.

I might get committed too.

Well if evolution is correct, maybe if we all flap our arms each day, in a few million years people will have developed wings and the ability to fly.

[Lava_Lady]

Maybe because Darwinism's just a bunch of speculations based on no evidence...

Yeah, unlike religion which is backed up by hard evidence...

This 4 wing theory does not make a lot of sense. The large feathers on the back legs were probably just that, large feathers. May have aided in gliding.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Lava_Lady

[Starseed hybrid 1111]

interesting its more than possible and etc.like how long ago did they lose the other two set of wings?

[highdesert50]

There is certainly less energy expelled in walking than in flying. So, using that argument, and the notion that these feathered legs would have inhibited movement, why would feathered flying legs ever emerged as an evolved trait?

[Abramelin]

interesting its more than possible and etc.like how long ago did they lose the other two set of wings?

They never did lose the other set of wings: it were -and still are- also legs.

.

Edited March 19, 2013 by Abramelin

[Abramelin]

Well if evolution is correct, maybe if we all flap our arms each day, in a few million years people will have developed wings and the ability to fly.

The evolution theory is most probably correct, but your understanding of it is obviously not.

[Tutankhaten-pasheri]

There is certainly less energy expelled in walking than in flying. So, using that argument, and the notion that these feathered legs would have inhibited movement, why would feathered flying legs ever emerged as an evolved trait?

The feathers would have evolved before flight, for instance we now know velociraptor had feathers on parts of it's body, forearms, head and arms I think. Probably for display, but I think also for warmth. On the smaller dinosaurs these feathers were very small and seem to act as down for insulation. I presume that it is no longer disputed that dinosaurs were warm blooded, or at least the later manifestations of theropods. I can see how the "down" on small tree climbing theropods would have evolved into proper flight feathers, and cumbersome feathers on the legs gradually becoming smaller until non exitant. They would have been gliders before becoming flappers.

[shrooma]

Well if evolution is correct, maybe if we all flap our arms each day, in a few million years people will have developed wings and the ability to fly.

.

I was kinda hoping for jetpacks & hovercars instead.....

:-)

[Frank Merton]

The evolution theory is most probably correct, but your understanding of it is obviously not.

That would be inheritence of acquired characteristics. Chop off the puppy's tail and it does not alter the length of its decendents' tails.

I would say we should prefer the phrase, "evolutionary theory," representing the body of understanding science has about evolution. The other wording is obsolete and misleading.

Now if there were some reason puppies born with short tails survive and reproduce better than those with longer tails, then nature would select in favor of those with shorter tails and ultimately the longer tails would disappear.

Edited March 21, 2013 by Frank Merton

[Geldoblam]

If they flew with four wings why lose them then?