| Line 3: |
Line 3: |
| | I'd like to point out that some scientists consider [[Alligators]], [[Crocodiles]] and [[Komodo Dragons]] to be modern dinosaurs. If the bulk of dinosaurs were killed by flooding/natural disaster, it is conceivable that since alligators, etc. did roam the earth at the same time as said "dinosaurs" that they are basically dinosaurs themselves and therefore survived the disaster (not surprising since alligators and crocodiles can both survive easily in water, and the komodo dragon is poisonous to touch and therefore not likely to be hunted to extinction). | | I'd like to point out that some scientists consider [[Alligators]], [[Crocodiles]] and [[Komodo Dragons]] to be modern dinosaurs. If the bulk of dinosaurs were killed by flooding/natural disaster, it is conceivable that since alligators, etc. did roam the earth at the same time as said "dinosaurs" that they are basically dinosaurs themselves and therefore survived the disaster (not surprising since alligators and crocodiles can both survive easily in water, and the komodo dragon is poisonous to touch and therefore not likely to be hunted to extinction). |
| | | | |
| − | Ignoring European myths about dragons, loch ness/etc, there is ample evidence in Native American mythology that some dinosaurs survived the disaster and were later hunted to extinction. Even today people still claim to have seen the legendary Gaasyendietha and Argont. | + | Ignoring European myths about dragons, loch ness/etc, there is ample evidence in NativeAmerican mythology that some dinosaurs survived the disaster and were later hunted to extinction. Even today people still claim to have seen the legendary Gaasyendietha and Argont. |
| − | | |
| | *[http://www.lilith-ezine.com/articles/2005/canadian_seaserpents.html Sea Serpents of Canada] | | *[http://www.lilith-ezine.com/articles/2005/canadian_seaserpents.html Sea Serpents of Canada] |
| | | | |
| Line 260: |
Line 259: |
| | | | |
| | :I thought Conservative's edits were bad...--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 15:18, 20 March 2007 (EDT) | | :I thought Conservative's edits were bad...--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 15:18, 20 March 2007 (EDT) |
| | + | |
| | + | ==More quote mining== |
| | + | |
| | + | The Scientific American quote that you cite is stripped out of an article that overwhelmingly SUPPORTS evolution - the question at hand was when the feather evolved. The surround context looks like this: |
| | + | |
| | + | "Several lines of research have recently converged on a remarkable conclusion: the feather evolved in dinosaurs before the appearance of birds." |
| | + | |
| | + | "Conservative's quote-mined paragraph" |
| | + | |
| | + | "Progress in solving the particularly puzzling origin of feath-ers has also been hampered by what now appear to be false leads, such as the assumption that the primitive feather evolved by elongation and division of the reptilian scale, and speculations that feathers evolved for a specific function, such as flight. A lack of primitive fossil feathers hindered progress as well. For many years the earliest bird fossil has been Archaeopteryx lithographica, which lived in the late Jurassic period (about 148 million years ago). But Archaeopteryx offers no new insights on how feathers evolved, because its own feathers are nearly indistinguishable from those of today’s birds. Very recent contributions from several fields have put these traditional problems to rest. First, biologists have begun to find new evidence for the idea that developmental processes - the complex mechanisms by which an individual organism grows to its full size and form — |
| | + | can provide a window into the evolution of a species’ anatomy. This idea has been reborn as the field of evolutionary developmental biology, or “evo-devo.” It has given us a powerful tool for probing the origin of feathers. Second, paleontologists have unearthed a trove of feathered dinosaurs in China. These animals have a diversity of primitive feathers that are not as highly evolved as those of today’s birds or even Archaeopteryx. They give us critical clues about the structure, function and evolution of modern birds’ intricate appendages. Together these advances have produced a highly detailed and revolutionary picture: feathers originated and diversified in carnivorous, bipedal theropod dinosaurs before the origin of birds or the origin of flight." |
| | + | |
| | + | THAT is the context. Of course, it supports the idea of evolution. Your hack job is simply a deliberate deception.--[[User:Dave3172|Dave3172]] 15:29, 20 March 2007 (EDT) |