What evidence links T. rex to chickens?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Teegvin
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the distinctions between dinosaurs and other reptiles, particularly crocodiles, which coexisted with dinosaurs but are not classified as such. Key points include the morphological differences that define dinosaurs, which are not present in crocodiles, despite both groups sharing a common ancestry. The classification of animals has traditionally relied on morphology, but this approach is increasingly viewed as an arbitrary social construct that can evolve with advancements in genetic analysis. The conversation also touches on the evolutionary link between dinosaurs and birds, highlighting evidence such as preserved soft tissue and proteins found in a Tyrannosaurus rex specimen, which support the theory that birds evolved from dinosaurs. This connection reinforces the idea that classification may shift as new genetic insights emerge.
Teegvin
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
That is, what distinguishes dinosaurs from other reptiles that existed at the same time, or which still exist, such as crocodiles?

People do not normally consider the crocodiles to be dinosaurs, despite the fact that they appeared before many other reptiles which have since gone extinct and which are considered dinosaurs.

Does the fact that they still exist automatically put them in a different classification?
 
Biology news on Phys.org
Morphology - dinosaurs had different morphologies than such reptiles. Classification used to go along the lines of which animals had X morphology and which animals had Y morphology. This way of classification is an arbitrary social construct, but it usually consistent with the genetic evidence (though there are notable exceptions). Nowadays we have access to genetic analysis, which could change our possible ways of classification.
 
Simfishy said:
Morphology - dinosaurs had different morphologies than such reptiles. Classification used to go along the lines of which animals had X morphology and which animals had Y morphology. This way of classification is an arbitrary social construct, but it usually consistent with the genetic evidence (though there are notable exceptions). Nowadays we have access to genetic analysis, which could change our possible ways of classification.

Its long been held that several of the Dinosaurids had a warm blooded system. They've evolved into birds. One documented case is the famous T-Rex which we see today as the Chicken.

An adolescent female Tyrannosaurus rex died 68 million years ago, but its bones still contain intact soft tissue, including the oldest preserved proteins ever found, scientists say.

And a comparison of the protein's chemical structure to a slew of other species showed an evolutionary link between T. rex and chickens, bolstering the idea that birds evolved from dinosaurs.

http://www.livescience.com/animals/070412_dino_tissues.html
 
https://www.nhs.uk/mental-health/conditions/body-dysmorphia/ Most people have some mild apprehension about their body, such as one thinks their nose is too big, hair too straight or curvy. At the extreme, cases such as this, are difficult to completely understand. https://www.msn.com/en-ca/health/other/why-would-someone-want-to-amputate-healthy-limbs/ar-AA1MrQK7?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=68ce4014b1fe4953b0b4bd22ef471ab9&ei=78 they feel like they're an amputee in the body of a regular person "For...
Thread 'Did they discover another descendant of homo erectus?'
The study provides critical new insights into the African Humid Period, a time between 14,500 and 5,000 years ago when the Sahara desert was a green savanna, rich in water bodies that facilitated human habitation and the spread of pastoralism. Later aridification turned this region into the world's largest desert. Due to the extreme aridity of the region today, DNA preservation is poor, making this pioneering ancient DNA study all the more significant. Genomic analyses reveal that the...
Whenever these opiods are mentioned they usually mention that e.g. fentanyl is "50 times stronger than heroin" and "100 times stronger than morphine". Now it's nitazene which the public is told is everything from "much stronger than heroin" and "200 times stronger than fentany"! Do these numbers make sense at all? How do they arrive at them? Kill thousands of mice? En passant: nitazene have already been found in both Oxycontin pills and in street "heroin" here, so Naloxone is more...
Back
Top