The Dinosaur Feather Mystery Part.2

[pinball281]

lol creationist do not refuse dinosaurs and some are very big in dinosaurs.Check out Kent Hovind and what he has to say about the young earth creation and genesis and dinosaurs

[S0XF0X]

Correction at 3:40-"Apatosaurus" is not also known as "Brachiosaurus", but "Brontosaurus". Just thought I'd clear that up.

[pienipaha]

@S0XF0X

Yeah that's been mentioned before in the comments. Thanks anyway (the original comment is one of the oldest ones). I forgot to add the note on the description.

[gooddarkjedi]

@S0XF0X -_- no. there is manny species of sauropod. while these are closly related, brachiosaurus is actualy more dinstand relative. its like comparing a africa wild dog and calling it wolf.

[S0XF0X]

@gooddarkjedi I miss typed in my comment. What I meant to say was "Apatosaurus" is NOT also known as "Brachiosaurus", but as "Brontosaurus." Scientists thought that the two specimens were different, but it turns out they are the same, so now we "Brontosaurus" doesn't technically exist; it's actually "Apatosaurus". Pardon my mistake. :D

[MrIcicle]

poor pigeon is getting nuked...

[Daruqe]

I also hear that at least Velociraptor probably had some horizontal S-shape motion in their tail, so I'd assume that for Deinonychus as well.

[Daruqe]

I was about to freak out, 'cause I thought Archaeopteryx wasn't a bird, but I double-checked it and we're all okay now. =)

[benthemiester]

They all practiced jumping up real high for millions of years, and evolved wings. Anyone could see that,

but I have to admit, the learning how to fly by grabbing and pulling your prey with its arms theory, is also tantalizing.

[acerb45666555]

1:00...this species is not the missing link im thinking about. i want to find the first actual hard beaked "bird". though still a reptile, this link is now fully airborn a can manipulate its wings instead of just gliding.

[pienipaha]

Birds are reptiles, so it's gonna be hard to find a link between them. Also, missing link is not really a valid term anyway...

There is a link on the description box the one of the newer flightless, feathered dinosaurs older than Archaeopteryx. There are several feathered flying / gliding / grounded species of small dinsaurs that give us the idea of how dinosaurs evolved into birds.

[puncheex]

@pienipaha: Shortly after the dinosaurs disappeared, the birds experienced their heyday and ruled the Earth. It only lasted 3 or 4 million years, but they developed large sizes that stayed around even onto the Moa, which has only been extinct for about 200 years.The birds at that time are beaked, so the conversion from tooth to beak must have happened right around or just before the meteor time.

[puncheex]

Sorry - that was aimed at acerb, not pienipaha.

[S0XF0X]

@pienipaha Birds are not reptiles, they are derived from therapod dinosaurs which are derived from reptiles.

[pienipaha]

@S0XF0X

Any organism can not stop being what ever it's ancestors used to be. Therefore, since they evolved from dinosaurs, birds are dinosaurs. And dinosaurs evolved from archosaurs, so they are archosaurs and so on. (Birds and crocodilians are the only living archosaurs left.)

It's quite simple, really. All ducks are birds, but not all birds are ducks. The same applies to all groups and the relations between them.

[axorozzas]

@acerb45666555

For this, you should look to the very recently discovered extinct bird zhongornis, which has a beak and was capable of powered flight, but still has a reptile-like tail and only partially fused digits on its forelimbs. The first birds with a bird-like tail. Then to changengornis and Confuciusornis which are almost avian but with 3 seperate claws in their wings. Features evolved independantly on seperate branches to the one leading to aves, but still show us how they evolved.

[axorozzas]

@acerb45666555

For this, you should look to the very recently discovered extinct bird zhongornis, which has a beak and was capable of powered flight, but still has a reptile-like tail and only partially fused digits on its forelimbs. The first birds with a bird-like tail. Then to changengornis and Confuciusornis which are almost avian but with 3 seperate claws in their wings. Features evolved independantly on seperate branches to the one leading to aves, but still show us how they evolved.

[justtypegladson]

Maya! love that 3d program! :D

[goshawker07]

Sorry folks, the verdict is out, birds did not evolve from dinosaurs. Learn about actual natural selection, not whats taught by these nuts. These genetic changes are not possible.

[pienipaha]

Evidence points otherwise.

[Archimedes555453525]

What do you mean, the verdict is out? Is a judge going to decide if birds are descendents of dinosaurs or not?

[MissMysterics]

You know I thought dienonychus made an odd example, closer relations to birds as we know them long predated deinonychus, as well as there being closer relations in the raptor family.

But it does work as an example I suppose.

[pienipaha]

Not to mention it's quite familiar to the general public (all though many still falsely refer to them as velociraptors).

[Grimacebot]

Birds Are REPTILES! Birds Are REPTILES!

[HomoCyborgZombie]

I'll be honest, I always thought archeopteryx was bigger.

Not small enough to perch on your wrist.

[makubx]

This is already been dismissed as a missing link. Its a pure bird not a transitional or half bird half reptile.. Its because of its bird bone structure found in the fossil. The scientist confirm that this bird is already a perfect flying machine and it wont need evolution to achieve flying.

[pienipaha]

Dude, you just missed the point entirely.

[PaleoRAS]

does anyone else find it interesting that protofeathered dinosaurs first apeared in the cretacious whereas archiopteryx as jurassic?

[pienipaha]

See the description box, there's a link to an article about Epidexipteryx hui, a protofeathered dinosaur that predates Archaeopteryx.

[PaleoRAS]

I dont buy that. it dosn't corilate to any jurassic dinosaur I've ever seen. They probably got the period wrong. If you ask me that looks like a primitive overartorid, or an ancestor of caudipteryx. People make mistakes, happens to the best of us. They put a plesiosaur head on it's tail, for crying out loud.

[PaleoRAS]

Okay scrach that I just found out that it night not have (and in my opinion probably didn't) predate archeopteryx.

[pienipaha]

Yeah well, I guess we just have to wait an see what is revealed in future. When our understanding increses, we can fix our mistakes. Every find is studied for decades, after all.

Small feathered theropods aren't easily fossilized either. Interesting how China is a real goldmine of feathered or protofeathered dinos.

Science doesn't ask for opinions though. I would love to see the fossils myself, much better to evaluate something you see for real than an artists impression.

[ofelixdacat]

I can't believe some extremely religious people refuse to believe in the existence of Dinosaurs, especially when fossil evidence proves there existence.

[pienipaha]

I know one fundamentalist, who studies biology, and who also said "dinosaurs probably existed".

I'm not sure if she's studying to become a teacher or a scientist, though I wish the latter. She is going to have a hard time with her studies, having to deal with evolution every day. If she's to be a teacher I hope she won't be slipping creationist propaganda in her class...

[NUTCASE71733]

@ofelixdacat

I know, and most religious folk out there accepted their existance long ago. Heck some priests even beleive god experimented with dinos, and it's basically what evolution is essentially; life experimenting with possible adaptations.

[Duplooytim]

@ofelixdacat Who are you refering to as extremely religious people!!??!

I believe dinosaurs exist and I believe Jesus lived 2000 years ago and died for my sins???

The word dinosaur was invented in 1842... Before that they were known as dragons.... Bible has dozen of mentions of dragons and so does loads of ancient beliefs, communities and cultures

Who ever told you religious people dont believe in dinosaurs??? thats a pure lie!

[111E982a]

@Duplooytim some creationist and dinosaur deniers, yes, there are people who deny dinosaurs exists and i have met a few of them. And the OP actually said SOME religious people, not all, please read it properly first before making a fool out of yourself. And you can't believe that dinosaurs existed because it's a fact that they existed and if you don't take genesis literally, there's no need to believe in jesus.

[thoostorm4]

@ofelixdacat somerefuse to admit they existedit might change their viewson religion so to them it is easier to say they never existed

[mardescrap]

Creationist idiot, go back to your dark age minded asshole community and let the rest of the world learn.

Take your fucking bible and shove it up yours.

[Dipstikk]

"Apatosaurus... also known as Brachiosaurus"

Formerly known as BRONTOSAURUS.

[XrAiDeN]

Yeah that's what I thought!

[ImpKicker]

What's the point of making a documentary about dinosaurs if they're not going to bother researching?

[pienipaha]

Errare humanum est..

[jazzygeofferz]

That's some lazy dinosaur research there. They couldn't even bother reading Wikipedia for 20 minutes before sending their camera crews out. Also, because of the narrator the whole documentary sounds like it's a trailer for something

[pienipaha]

@jazzygeofferz

I find most dinosaur documentaries to

have the same problem.

Also, wikipedia is not a very good source.

Especially if it's the only source. The reference links

are the most worthwhile things there.

Also remember that this documentary is

all ready quite old - though the actual point,

hoe feathers evolved - still stands.

[puncheex]

@Dipstikk: wiki: "In 1877, Othniel Charles Marsh published the name of the type species Apatosaurus ajax. He followed this in 1879 with a description of another, more complete specimen, which he thought represented a new genus and named Brontosaurus excelsus. In 1903, Elmer Riggs pointed out that Brontosaurus excelsus was in fact so similar to Apatosaurus ajax that it belonged in the same genus, which Riggs re-classified as Apatosaurus excelsus." The ICZN recognizes the first published name.

[villeppi]

Wow! That was an ugly deinonychus at 07:35

[pienipaha]

Agreed... Aika rumilus on joo.

[AngryFaces]

It's a terrible, old-fashioned recreation. In my opinion, it needs feathers.

[pienipaha]

Yes, it is pretty sure raptors also had feathers since they originate from the same lineage as our feathered friends.

In the primeval -series the Deinonychus had nice protofeathers that it could rise when it was threatened or preparing to attack.

There are other documentaries too where raptor species are all ready animated with (proto)featheres, even T.rexes all though were not sure if they and related theropods had plumage too.

[AngryFaces]

Even though I really enjoyed this program you uploaded, there is one thing that really bothers me. This show seems to imply that raptors were a 1st stage in bird evolution and that Archaeopteryx was a 2nd stage. Problem is that dromeosaurs existed in the Cretaceous period and Archaeopteryx existed in the preceding Jurassic period. From what I've researched, raptors would actually be flightless descendants of protobirds, therefore are cousins of birds and are not direct ancestors to them.

[pienipaha]

That's right, the movie is might be considered misleading for those who think of evolution as sort of a latter (and otherwise too, if one is not all ready familiar with the theropod family tree).

So the protofeathered little buggers evolved into several different lineages, one being the raptors other being the ancestors of birds. Avian dinosaurs are also theropods though.

Good to have you clearing that up. Also notice the article posted on the description!

[puncheex]

I would guess what had to have happened is that the line of raptors started in the early Jurassic. They developed warm bloodedness before they split, and feathers after. Then came Archaeopterx, then the Cretaceous, and as long as all the raptors are feathered, then it all works out. Some of the raptors could even have shed their feathers, perhaps if they got big enough to not need them for heating.

[111E982a]

@AngryFaces i guess since that birds are maniraptors and came from raptor looking like ancestors, that's why they name it raptor..I think it's just for the common audience that's why they say it this way.

[ORCA4312]

@111E982a Raptors were named after the birds. Now some are trying to make that sound meaningful.

There is a lot of poorly based claims on the evolution and behaviour of raptors. Claims that they hunted in packs. Well, perhaps, but what birds do that? What birds have the big killing talon?

[111E982a]

@ORCA4312 raptor actually means thief. the term raptors for dinosaur only became "in" after jurassic park, it's just a short form of velociraptor. But birds are a sister taxon of "raptors" and that's in a very broad sense, "right". and some dinosaur have raptor in their name cos of their avian features. Some raptors do live in group, a set of footprints was found in Shandong to prove that.

[111E982a]

@ORCA4312 And since birds didn't come from raptors directly, but came from the same ancestor, it's hardly surprizing that they don't hunt in packs. early dinosaurian birds still have that big talon(relative in size) which is useful in climbing trees too and Seriemas have that claw too.

[shishkabobby]

@ORCA4312 Lots of birds are found in flocks. How is a flock different than a pack? If you look at a flock of sea gulls on a beach, I'm pretty sure they are hunting, at least it looks that way to the fish and crustaceans near the beach.

[okapitheif]

Ornitholigists found that the supracoracoideus is mostly involved in supination and not powering the upstroke.

Seems conjecture to describe theropod prey grasping. Either way, birds are dinos...

[pienipaha]

Such an over simpliication won't do. (One celled organisms are not a synonym to bacteria.) Do some research on the subject, ok? T. rex is related to the species that eventually evolved into birds. Watch the documentary please. It portrays some theories on how theropods are related to birds but mostly it's about the feather and it's developement.

The family tree of life is very complicated and is updated every year when new research ads to it.

[pienipaha]

What the He- ?

Didn't quite follow.

Have you even watched this documentary?

[pienipaha]

Right back at you. Apparantly the people responsible of making that film didn't know much about therapod/avian anatomy.

This documentary that I posted is renews the theory of feather origin, which those people on that outdated film of yours haven't even heard about. Feathers didn't evolve from scales, nor did their body structure have to transfrom as much as one might think.

They even use a T.rex as an example which is pretty much enough to show your ignorance.

[pienipaha]

I just have posted a documentary on new research on what science has to say. Feathers are not the result of elongated scales, as you can see.

[pienipaha]

And the ability to fly means that it's a bird? So according to your logic, bats and dragonflies are birds too.

[pienipaha]

No it wasn't an actual bird, although close.

Do you go to school or what's up with your grammar? I've already finished school, thank you very much. And as a biology student I'm very well aware of what wings are.

[pienipaha]

Archaeopteryx is not a bird. Watch the whole movie, there's plenty more of those feathered fossils. Birds and terapods had features easily recognized and archaeopteryx and co. had some that were common to both groups as well as those that can be seen only on other.

[pienipaha]

Sorry, that's "therapod" not a terapod. My bad :D

[pienipaha]

Sorry, I take that back. Archaeopteryx is classified as a bird, though it has many reptilian traits (but then again modern birds have some too..like scales on their feet.)

Nontheless, genetic research and the fossil record show us that birds are related to dinosaurs, actually so closely that they are dinosaurs. New species of confuciusornis (named Eoconfuciusornis) has been recently revealed from China. (I'll cover that in a upcoming video...)

[pienipaha]

Originally posted by jonthebaptist666:

Seriously, the aspect that I like best about this doc voer the other YouTube user docs on evolution, is that this is just about learning, while the others are involved in the debate with close-minded fundies. Unfortunately, we do have to debate with these neanderthals, but it is still cool to just learn for the sake of learning.

[Vercingetorix422]

Im sure you probably caught on to this but the video said apatosaurus was also known as brachiosaurus but actually it is brontosaurus (which was an apatosaurus skeleton with the head of a camarasaurus stuck on.) Also wanted to say thanks for posting this, Deinonychus is my favorite dinosaur and it was awesome to learn something new about it.

[pienipaha]

Yeah I've studied dinosaurs enough to notice that. I also like raptors -megaraptor being one of my favourites. Even if T. rex is nowadays concidered as a less succesfull hunter and more of a scavenger, raptors of that size pretty much even the score for teropods. After all, they were built for killing.

Learning is so much fun!

[Vercingetorix422]

Yes i agree learning is very fun! Once again, thank you for increasing my knowledge on the subject :)

[AtOneWithNothing7]

Hmm. I didn't realize archaeopteryx was so small.

[pienipaha]

I didn't use to like it as a kid because it was too small and I'm more of a fan of the big boys! However it's a very important discovery and I've learned to respect it more.

[rapperoone]

where's part 3?

[pienipaha]

Be patient..I'm working on it. Just been a little busy.