|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 19, 2015 2:11:10 GMT
The researchers from South Africa's University of Cape Town (UCT) and the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits University), and from the Argentinian Museo de La Plata and Museo Paleontológico Egidio Feruglio made the announcement in the scientific journal Zoological Journal of the Linnaean Society. The paper, titled: "A new basal sauropodiform from South Africa and the phylogenetic relationships of basal sauropodomorphs," was published online on Tuesday, 23 June 2015.The specimen was found in the late 1930s in the Zastron area of South Africa's Free State province, about 30km from the Lesotho border. For many years it remained hidden among the largest fossil collection in South Africa at the Evolutionary Studies Institute (ESI) at Wits University. A few years ago it was studied and considered to represent the remains of another South African dinosaur, Aardonyx. However, upon further study, close scrutiny of the fossilised bones has revealed that it is a completely new dinosaur. One of the most distinctive features is that one of its ankle bones, the astragalus, is shaped like a cross. Considering the area where the fossil was discovered, the researchers aptly named the new dinosaur, Sefapanosaurus, after the Sesotho word "sefapano," meaning "cross." Anusuya Chinsamy-Turan, co-author and Professor in the Department of Biological Sciences at UCT, says: "The discovery of Sefapanosaurus shows that there were several of these transitional early sauropodomorph dinosaurs roaming around southern Africa about 200 million years ago."Dr Alejandro Otero, Argentinian palaeontologist and lead author, says Sefapanosaurus helps to fill the gap between the earliest sauropodomorphs and the gigantic sauropods. "Sefapanosaurus constitutes a member of the growing list of transitional sauropodomorph dinosaurs from Argentina and South Africa that are increasingly telling us about how they diversified."Says Dr Jonah Choiniere, co-author and Senior Researcher in Dinosaur Palaeobiology at the ESI at Wits University: "This new animal shines a spotlight on southern Africa and shows us just how much more we have to learn about the ecosystems of the past, even here in our own 'backyard'. And it also gives us hope that this is the start of many such collaborative palaeo-research projects between South Africa and Argentina that could yield more such remarkable discoveries."
Argentinian co-author, Dr Diego Pol, says Sefapanosaurus and other recent dinosaur discoveries in the two countries reveal that the diversity of herbivorous dinosaurs in Africa and South America was remarkably high back in the Jurassic, about 190 million years ago when the southern hemisphere continents were a single supercontinent known as Gondwana.
Finding a new dinosaur among old bones
Otero and Emil Krupandan, PhD-student from UCT, were visiting the ESI collections to look at early sauropodomorph dinosaurs when they noticed bones that were distinctive from the other dinosaurs they were studying.Krupandan was working on a dinosaur from Lesotho as part of his studies when he realised the material he was looking at was different to Aardonyx. "This find indicates the importance of relooking at old material that has only been cursorily studied in the past, in order to re-evaluate past preconceptions about sauropodomorph diversity in light of new data."The remains of the Sefapanosaurus include limb bones, foot bones, and several vertebrae. Sefapanosaurus is represented by the remains of at least four individuals in the ESI collections at Wits University. It is considered to be a medium-sized sauropodomorph dinosaur -- among the early members of the group that gave rise to the later long necked giants of the Mesozoic.Taken from: www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/06/150624105940.htm |
|
|
|
Post by treepolitik on Aug 23, 2015 2:32:39 GMT
I remember you saying that essentially everything the experts said on the spot wasn't stuff that had solid proof. So you zeroed in on when the specimen was found, where it came from, and what it means for science, short version. So I'm guessing that because they thought it was a different dinosaur before and changed their minds, you wanted to imply that evolution is not an exact science and that peers in the field disagree. It could also be argued that because peers in the field disagree more, it forces them to go back to the drawing board and find a better way of doing routine tasks that will utilize the most knowledge and give the most informed outcome. But that's vague.
|
|
|
|
Post by treepolitik on Aug 23, 2015 2:35:33 GMT
So how can the faith be made clearer than this vague science? If God created everything, why would he want it to be "good," but not necessarily "perfect." If survival is dependent on God, he somehow has to make us perfect to live by his law, every word of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 25, 2015 12:16:06 GMT
So how can the faith be made clearer than this vague science? If God created everything, why would he want it to be "good," but not necessarily "perfect." If survival is dependent on God, he somehow has to make us perfect to live by his law, every word of it. To answer your first, we need to divide science from faith. The scientific method is what we can observe, test, and repeat. For example, we can observe computers, medicines, chemicals, and so forth. That is what it is called "Observational Science." It is what we can test with our 5 senses. But when we take observational science and try to determine its origins, then that is called "Historical Science." It goes beyond the realm of our natural senses. For example, taking a rock and try to trace it back to when it is formed. Most like they will use Radiometric Dating methods, which has so many assumptions when doing so. Then it goes into the realm of faith. Then to answer your second question, everything was created by God and God created everything perfect. In Genesis 1, God says that "it was good" multiple times. In translation, that means that it is perfect, how He wanted it. In the beginning, everything was perfect, until Adam and Eve sinned. Because of that, the whole of creation is cursed. |
|
|
|
Post by treepolitik on Aug 26, 2015 5:18:10 GMT
Can you describe what was in the apple that cursed Eve and then Adam. Is it something like poison? Second, does the Bible imply that division of labor is part of the curse, when it says that Adam is condemned to toil and fight with snakes, and that Eve is condemned to having harsh child bearing and subservience to man?
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 26, 2015 9:29:30 GMT
Can you describe what was in the apple that cursed Eve and then Adam. Is it something like poison? Second, does the Bible imply that division of labor is part of the curse, when it says that Adam is condemned to toil and fight with snakes, and that Eve is condemned to having harsh child bearing and subservience to man? First question: The fruit from the tree of good and evil was most likely not an apple. It never says what it is. All it says is the fruit of the tree. There was no poison in the fruit. It is their disobedience that cursed Adam and Eve. When they rebelled against God, they knew that something is wrong. They had fellowship with God, but since they go their own way, they didn't have the fellowship. After that, God cursed them for their disobedience. (Genesis 3:16 - 19) Second question: According to Genesis 3:16 - 19, it seems that there was not that much work needed for Adam and Eve. It does say that they need to attend to the Garden (Genesis 2:15). But after the fall, he must work hard for his food. |
|
|
|
Post by treepolitik on Aug 28, 2015 22:13:36 GMT
So does this imply that even before He created them, he intended Eve to be a housewife and child rearer, while Adam would be the one bringing home the income and doing the heavy labor? (as well as defending against snakes and snake like things)
|
|
|
|
Post by treepolitik on Aug 29, 2015 0:35:12 GMT
Of course before income was a reality, it seems like they used their roles as barter to each other.
|
|
|
|
Post by treepolitik on Aug 29, 2015 0:39:46 GMT
Also, I wanted to ask why it says, let us* make mankind in our image. I can understand that God might be saying to himself more like, "here we go" which doesn't imply there's more than one person. But can we rule out a possibility that anyone else was working on the "humans project"?
|
|
|
|
Post by treepolitik on Aug 29, 2015 0:42:44 GMT
Further, I just wanted to double check that you don't believe in any "ape-like" people as human ancestry, or anything that was more hairy, or bow legged or whatever.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Aug 29, 2015 17:25:24 GMT
So does this imply that even before He created them, he intended Eve to be a housewife and child rearer, while Adam would be the one bringing home the income and doing the heavy labor? (as well as defending against snakes and snake like things) Well.... According to Genesis 1:28-30, God wants them to be fruitful and multiply. Eve is subject to her husband (1 Corinthians 11:3, 8-9, 11-12). It is the authority order that He has designed for her to do. And He designed her to raise up her children. I am pretty sure that there was minimum to no work before the Fall. Everything obeys the voice of God. Everything, even bears, lions, dinosaurs, and man, ate only vegetation. That is until after the Flood when they could eat meat (Genesis 9:3). The hard labor is a result after the Fall (Genesis 3:17-19) |
|
