|
|
Post by stoneage on May 3, 2008 0:39:56 GMT
I have a question, if theropods had lizard hips and ornithischians were bird hipped how come the lizard hipped dinosaurs became birds?
|
|
|
|
Post by giganotoigauana on May 3, 2008 0:57:27 GMT
I have a question, if theropods had lizard hips and ornithischians were bird hipped how come the lizard hipped dinosaurs became birds? lmao ;D |
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on May 3, 2008 1:32:07 GMT
Therapods with "lizard hips" were most likely the "primative condition", as in thier hip structer was more like the ancestral hips of when lizards and dinosaurs divered from one another in the triassic. "Burd hipped" ornithischians had a hip structure that made them more stable, and that is similar to that of modern birds in some ways. www.dinosauria.com/jdp/buckna/two.htmThis link explains the situation much more fluidly then I would be able to. |
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on May 3, 2008 1:53:13 GMT
Then I guess birds have lizard hips and some non birds have bird hips. It makes perfect sense. Science.
|
|
|
|
Post by piltdown on May 3, 2008 2:19:19 GMT
Then I guess birds have lizard hips and some non birds have bird hips. It makes perfect sense. Science. That's how I feel when I read the term 'feathered dinosaur'.  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by stoneage on May 3, 2008 2:26:18 GMT
Whats that red thing called hanging from your face.
|
|
|
|
Post by crazycrowman on May 3, 2008 3:11:42 GMT
"Then I guess birds have lizard hips and some non birds have bird hips. It makes perfect sense. Science."
That happens. As understand becomes greater, older beliefs are proven wrong. When they were dubbed "bird hipped", the thoughts of what convergent evolution was had not crossed a mind, or at least one who penned it down.
"bird hip" still works, as the hips of those animals do in some ways resemble those of modern birds. When you consider that both modern bird hips and the ornithischians both stem from the same immediate "lizard hipped" dinosaurian ancestory, it no longer seems so silly. Both were different ways to stabilize and lighten the "lizard hip" plan.
As for the "feathered dinosaurs", that IS what Archeopteryx is.
|
|
|
|
Post by sbell on May 3, 2008 4:04:32 GMT
"Then I guess birds have lizard hips and some non birds have bird hips. It makes perfect sense. Science." That happens. As understand becomes greater, older beliefs are proven wrong. When they were dubbed "bird hipped", the thoughts of what convergent evolution was had not crossed a mind, or at least one who penned it down. "bird hip" still works, as the hips of those animals do in some ways resemble those of modern birds. When you consider that both modern bird hips and the ornithischians both stem from the same immediate "lizard hipped" dinosaurian ancestory, it no longer seems so silly. Both were different ways to stabilize and lighten the "lizard hip" plan. As for the "feathered dinosaurs", that IS what Archeopteryx is. That is exactly what I was going to say--since there is no logical way to disprove the fact that there are dinosaur fossils that clearly demonstrate feathers (and some people are trying), it becomes time to pick at weak straws--in this case, terminology created in the 1800s by people that didn't really understand what they were seeing. Unfortunately, the Linnean rules of nomenclature were already fixed, so that the names given to the two groups (which have proven highly robust taxonomically) remain in use, even if they are misleading. A little slight of hand, some distraction ("sure there's evidence here in the fossil record, but look over here--someone over 100 years ago coined terms that I deem confusing") and suddenly it's supposed to sound like a solid argument. Fact is, until YOU ANTI-FEATHER PEOPLE get in there with electron microscopes and UNDENIABLY DEMONSTRATE once and for all that EVERY SINGLE FEATHER IMPRINT IS FAKE, you have no argument. Including the Archaeopteryx fossils. Attacking Chinese honesty, nomenclature, and media/artist conceptions is beside the point. Main problem? As Carl Sagan put it better than I will--extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, ergo, the feather fossils have been analyzed in depth. And guess what? They look like feathers at various stages in evolutionary development (stages that were previously hypothesized, I might add). As for the famous mistakes (Archaeoraptor, Psittacosaurus)--that's what happens when claims are made before the evidence is in; someone else does the work to confirm or contradict your findings. It's one thing to be skeptical of something that goes against your understanding--it's another entirely to remain defiant just because you don't like what the evidence tells you (that difference is SCIENCE vs. RELIGION). |
|
|
|
Post by Dinotoyforum on May 3, 2008 9:34:30 GMT
I have a question, if theropods had lizard hips and ornithischians were bird hipped how come the lizard hipped dinosaurs became birds? It's actually a good question I think. It's sorta been stated already but I this I can distill the answer. If you call me a birdbrain, it does not mean I have the brain of a bird. It's just a name, right? Ornithischia and Saurischia are just names. Then I guess birds have lizard hips and some non birds have bird hips. It makes perfect sense. Science.No, for the same reason that birdbrains don't have bird brains. |
|
