Dinosaur Eggs: Troodon formosus

The other day I mentioned an interesting study on dinosaur embryos, a day or so later a study on incubation strategies in Troodon was published in Paleobiology. I don’t have access to this article so I will have to rely on the the abstract and the press release on Science Daily. Continue reading

Dinosaur Embryos: Lufengosaurus

I’m currently working my way through the Australopithecus sediba articles mentioned in the previous post. In the meantime, in wandering around the internet there are a number of things make a science story jump out and say “write about me!” First, if it uses a methodology that answers the question “how do we know?” Second, if it is about life history. Third, if it combines the first two with dinosaurs.

Science Daily (World’s Oldest Dinosaur Embryo Bonebed Yields Organic Remains) points us to a research paper that has all three (plus more). The paper, Embryology of Early Jurassic dinosaur from China with evidence of preserved organic remains, was published in Nature. I don’t have access to the Nature paper so I will have to rely on the Science Daily press release. Continue reading

Creationists and the Grand Canyon

I thought this video from Steve Newton of the NCSE was quite interesting:

Shark Bites Whale

Phys.Org mentions an interesting article published in the International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. The article concerns a fragment of a whale rib, dating to the Pliocene, that shows evidence of a shark bite. In this case the rib also displays evidence of having survived the attack. From Phys.Org: Continue reading

Marsupial Carnivore Diversity

The Four Stone Hearth will be up later this evening. In the meantime, check out this interesting paper on marsupial carnivores. The paper uses geometric morphometrics to look at skull shape in a wide variety of marsupial and placental carnivores.

“It Will Rewrite Evolutionary Theory…” and “Prove Darwin Wrong…”

The title of this post are two common remarks one hears when the press covers evolution. Drives me straight up the wall. A study published in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B looks at these claims from the standpoint of paleontology and paleoanthropology.
Continue reading

Wohoo! Fossil Marsupials

Science Daily mentions an interesting paper appearing in the current edition of the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology.

Continue reading

Interesting Science Pictures: Part IX

Mojoceratops perifania

Source: Mojoceratops: New Dinosaur Species Named for Flamboyant Frill.

From Science Daily:

The dinosaur is one of more than a dozen species belonging to the chasmosaurine ceratopsid family, which are defined by elaborate frills on their skulls. A plant eater about the size of a hippopotamus, Mojoceratops appeared about 75 million years ago during the Late Cretaceous — 10 million years earlier than its well-known cousin, the Triceratops. The species, which is related to another dinosaur in Texas, is found only in Canada’s Alberta and Saskatchewan provinces and was short-lived, having survived for only about one million years.

The find is described in the Journal of Paleontology

So Does This Mean Australopithecines Walked On Their Hands?

Those paleontologists are always one methodological and theoretical step ahead of paleoanthropologists. Consider this new discovery about dinosaurs:

“Basically they scooted around by grabbing nearby vines with their mouths and pulling their bodies. Almost like a snake. What we used to think were legs were actually big flippers that flapped about in the air, driving them forward. Incredible.” Kirch told reporters that when you think about it, paleontology makes a lot more sense now.

Need Help On An Archaeopteryx Photo And Begging For An Article

Some years ago Darksyd published a picture of Archaeopteryx on my blog Transitions. I’m not sure where the picture came from but I need a high resolution copy – or any picture that refutes Hoyle’s contention that the feathers are fraudulent. Seems there is a commenter at Talk Rational propagating Hoyle’s false claims and Monad needs a good picture to refute them.

On a related note, can someone send me a copy of the following article?

Archaeopteryx Is Not a Forgery
Charig et al
Science 2 May 1986:
Vol. 232. no. 4750, pp. 622 – 626
DOI: 10.1126/science.232.4750.622

Thanks in advance!