The Dinosaur Feather Mystery Ending

This is a little disturbing...

This short clip includes the final conclusion in a nutshell and the end credits.

It'd be appreciated if you'd watch the credits. Those people worked hard to make this documentary!

disclaimer. You know the routine...

ps. my cat just hunted down a dinosaur


Epidexipteryx hui, the feathered fossil dinosaur older than Archaeopteryx! http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2008/10/22/shake-your-jurassic-tail-fe...

Category:

Education

Tags:

• dinosaur
• feather
• mystery
• bird
• evolution
• in
• developement
• flight
• credits

[rezario1]

Thanks a lot for uploading this excellent video. I tried to buy this documentary - but it's not possible to buy it from anywhere including "Discovery"

Is there any chance you can upload it to Google videos ? (cheeky request !)

I wasn't aware that Archeopteryx is older than Laoning fossils, but it is clear that about the transition of dinosaurs to birds due to the shared features of both grops, etc.

Another related excellent docmentary is called "The Four Winged Dinosaur" by NOVA. Thanks again

[neonwind]

Thank you for uploading this.

[pienipaha]

@Cheuvin

Birds are dinosaurs. Naturally, they are different from many other dinosaurs, but they still are and always will be one of the many subgroups within. See my explanation about classification below.

[Cheuvin]

@shoshanish yes but birds also have qualities that dinosaurs do not have

[shoshanish]

@Cheuvin birds are dinos because they still have the qualities of there ancestors!

some dinos had feathers, look up "the dinosaur feather mystory" here on youtube!

[geoffreyah]

"imagine if you will" if you reverse enginered a bird, the whole animal from head to toe, and you find the direct line of birds runs right through the heart of the whole of Dinosauria-each step, each missing linc along the path towards avisaurus brings you through the closest direct ancestors of all dinosaurs...each direct link shows it's closeness to all of the fossil records archasaurs(not to mention all lifes trail )-then they mint change them closer to those lost vistages in the flesh...(O:

[geoffreyah]

The only system that we should use to measure desent of life is a direct line relationship with the life that still lives today to understand the history of the living world-again direct line desent-so we can protect the living diversity-and have a special respect for the struggle that life must endure to reach a pinnicle.

[geoffreyah]

"Most traits evolved having nothing to do with flight,? including Wings!! WOW! Wings? yeah WINGS! for 'display' true flight being one of the only definable characteristics that is Bird!!-Metabolism and Growth rates being the other two.

[puncheex]

Indeed: The Linnaean system was built upon the only clue they had at the time, morphology. Now we have genetics, and a couple of other fields that all corroborate the morphology, correcting it and making it more robust.

[pienipaha]

The problem with Linnaean classification is that it doesn't always accurately reflect common decent, thus the need for other systems. (That's pretty much what you said there with not including all decendants...)

Just some time ago I spoke to a person who didn't know what dinosaur means, saying that lemurs are surviving dinosaurs (and then linked me to Ida). This person is not stupid, just confused. (Was very willing to learn, actually.)

Shows that these things aren't so easy to grasp...

[puncheex]

(Excuse me, above where I said "paraphyletic" I meant "monophyletic".)

Now, phylogenetics is a relatively new field; it was started in 1950. Before that we had the traditional Linnaean classifications., and in that system, many of the names were paraphyletic rather than monophyletic, in which a names did not necessarily include all descendants. Thus dinosaurs had a special meaning that the modern system has changed; likewise monkey, fish and others. So it depends on your system.