Recommended Posts

Study: early birds had four wings

parrot.jpg

The ancestors of modern birds probably had four wings rather than two, according to a study of fossils found in a Chinese museum.

The four-winged early birds had been identified from fossilised remains a number of years ago, but it was unclear whether the creatures were precursors to modern birds or whether they represented an evolutionary cul-de-sac and had simply died out.

However, eleven skeletons of primitive birds discovered at the Shandong Tianyu Museum of Nature feature evidence of having large feathers on their hind limbs. The remains date from the early Cretaceous period (around 120 million years ago) and, according to the study, "provide solid evidence for the existence of enlarged leg feathers on a variety of basal birds".

Today's two-winged situation could then be the result of a gradual reduction in feathering of these hind limbs, probably as a result of the birds living on the ground and needing to walk around unencumbered.

"If an animal has big feathers on its legs and feet, it's definitely something that's not good for fast running," said Xing Xu from Linyi University in Shandong province in an interview with New Scientist.

The fossil finds help bolster the case for four-winged early birds, however the evidence is not definitive. As a result, Xu and his fellow researchers intend to look to other remains in the museum's collection as well as investigating whether the feathers and wings would have been capable of flight.

Source

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/1141854-study-early-birds-had-four-wings/
Share on other sites

3 parts - Some comments that are serious after a quick joke

This bird has 10 for 6.99.

10-pcs-wings.jpg

Wow actually this makes sense since it probably could have been if you believe:

Evolution where the ground animals took to flight.

Or Theology-

Leviticus 11:20, "All fowls that creep, going upon all four, shall be an abomination unto you."

A lot of translations say insects instead of fowls, but that's interesting if the original was referring to birds.

Some would possibly call it a Griffon....but imagine if the hind legs also had feathers too.

griffon.bmp

http://www.newadvent...then/01517a.htm

GRIFFON. ? So D.V., Leviticus 11:13 (whereas Deuteronomy 14:12, we read "grype") translates theHebrew, p?r?s, the "breaker" whereby the lammergeyer or bearded vulture, gyp?tus barbatus, the largest and most magnificent of the birds of prey is probably intended. The opinion that the Bible here speaks of the fabulous griffon, i.e. a monster begotten from a lion and an eagle, and characterized by the beak, neck, and wings of an eagle and the legs and rump of a lion, is based only on a misinterpretation of the word.

GRIFFON-VULTURE, a probable translation in several cases of the Hebrew, n?sh?r, regularly rendered by eagle. This most majestic bird (gyps fulvus), the type, as it seems, of the eagle-headed figures of Assyriansculpture, is most likely referred to in Mich., i, 16, on account of its bare neck and head.

So just imagine if this was that animal spoken of in the Bible.

What if it had paws like a lion but also feathers.

Also have a read of other translations:

http://bible.cc/leviticus/11-20.htm

American Standard Version

All winged creeping things that go upon all fours are an abomination unto you.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.