-rays reveal hidden leg of an ancient snake

-rays reveal hidden leg of an ancient snake

www.physorg.com

A novel X-ray imaging technology is helping scientists better understand how in the course of evolution snakes have lost their legs. The researchers hope the new data will help resolve a heated debate about the origin of snakes: whether they evolved from a terrestrial lizard or from one that lived in the oceans. New, detailed 3-D images reveal that the internal architecture of an ancient snake's leg bones strongly resembles that of modern terrestrial lizard legs. The results are published in the 8 February issue of the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Here's a bit of info regarding how snakes have lost their legs through the evolutionary process.



It takes a fossil 95 million years old to show a snake with a small leg. the hidden leg is bent at the knee with ankle bones!

this fossil was found in Lebanon y Alexandra Houssaye from the Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle (MNHN) in Paris, France, and included scientists from the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF) in Grenoble, France, where the X-ray imaging was performed, and the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Germany.

www.physorg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/165107795f54.jpgp[atsimg]

reply to post by GrisGris


Excuse my ignorance but when you watch the video in your link what is up with the snake they are showing? What are those "wing" looking lines coming off of the fossilized snake?

physorg.com

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by GrisGris

 

Excuse my ignorance but when you watch the video in your link what is up with the snake they are showing? What are those "wing" looking lines coming off of the fossilized snake?

physorg.com

edit on 12-2-2011 by TheLieWeLive because: (no reason given)

I'm with you. I can't answer definitively at this moment, I believe its the legs!

reply to post by GrisGris


I thought the leg was the upper bone they are showing with what looks like a tibula, fibula and a femur only. Those lines coming off of the lower back doesn't look like legs as much as it does a bat or dragon type wing. Can anyone find more images of this ancient snake?

Originally posted by GrisGris

-rays reveal hidden leg of an ancient snake

www.physorg.com

A novel X-ray imaging technology is helping scientists better understand how in the course of evolution snakes have lost their legs. The researchers hope the new data will help resolve a heated debate about the origin of snakes: whether they evolved from a terrestrial lizard or from one that lived in the oceans. New, detailed 3-D images reveal that the internal architecture of an ancient snake's leg bones strongly resembles that of modern terrestrial lizard legs. The results are published in the 8 February issue of the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology.

(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 12-2-2011 by GrisGris because: (no reason given)

After the reptillien/alien/reptillien race tricked the egptions into building the pyramid to block the frequencie of telekinisis and telepathy.the person/god/alien/hire being/supergenious scientist,decided not to rip the legs off of the reptillien alien and let it slither on its belly.

Text 1 Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the LORD God had made. He said to the woman, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?”

Text 4 “You will not certainly die,” the serpent said to the woman. 5 “For God knows that when you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

“14 So the LORD God said to the serpent, “Because you have done this,

“Cursed are you above all livestock
and all wild animals!
You will crawl on your belly
and you will eat dust
all the days of your life.
15 And I will put enmity
between you and the woman,
and between your offspring[a] and hers;
he will crush your head,
and you will strike his heel.”
The bible was a warning of not to trust the reptillien race snake like aliens.

95 million years ago? So; how exactly would ignorant, superstitious tribesmen know that snakes once had legs? Read Genesis my friend. As the poster above showed, either the Bible is inspired or those writers knew snakes once had legs.

Originally posted by TheLieWeLive
reply to post by GrisGris

 

Excuse my ignorance but when you watch the video in your link what is up with the snake they are showing? What are those "wing" looking lines coming off of the fossilized snake?

physorg.com

edit on 12-2-2011 by TheLieWeLive because: (no reason given)

Exactly what I thought... it looked like some ingested prey bust its guts open. Odd to, as it would throw in some very strange chronology seeings the earliest snakes are dated to about 130 m yrs.

One of the earliest snakes to appear in the fossil record has been given the scientific name Lapparentophis defrenni. It was found in the Saharan Desert and has been dated to the early Cretaceous period, about 130 million years ago.

whales and some large snakes, like anaconda's have vestigial leg bones.

known for a long time.

Originally posted by fooks
whales and some large snakes, like anaconda's have vestigial leg bones.

known for a long time.

erm...incorrect. The bones you see in modern whales are an important part of the creature's anatomy where muscles associated with their reproductive organs attach... nothing vestigial about them.

...and by all means please produce a single shot supporting your vestigial legs in anacondas!

EDIT: Please don't pull an illustration off the physorg site. I honestly have never seen them in any snake skeleton so would be delighted to see an authentic shot.

really!

so i been wrong all these years!?

lol, ok, i will hunt up a pic or 2 and hope it's dated!

Originally posted by GrisGris

-rays reveal hidden leg of an ancient snake

www.physorg.com

A novel X-ray imaging technology is helping scientists better understand how in the course of evolution snakes have lost their legs. The researchers hope the new data will help resolve a heated debate about the origin of snakes: whether they evolved from a terrestrial lizard or from one that lived in the oceans. New, detailed 3-D images reveal that the internal architecture of an ancient snake's leg bones strongly resembles that of modern terrestrial lizard legs. The results are published in the 8 February issue of the Journal of Vertebrate Paleontology.

(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 12-2-2011 by GrisGris because: (no reason given)

maaaan , sick sh t happens lately...

reply to post by fooks


The snake one really surprised me [i keep snakes], as I've never seen it in any skeletal remains. I can't even find a single verified shot on the net which is a worry.... but you're right, it's been taught for eons. What does that say?

If you look at the explanation for the evolution of whales it really does stretch credibility: the 1st ancestor resembles a dog like creature, yet in many examples it's shown prostate, with hind legs spread behind, as if swimming. I could do that to a T Rex or any terrestrial pod.

www.abdn.ac.uk...

i'll get the anaconda next,

"In 1966, commenting on the confused and inconclusive state of the study of snake evolution at that time, Alfred Sherwood Romer wrote, "In contrast to the extinction or seeming evolutionary stagnation of other reptile types, the snakes are today a group of reptiles still 'on the make'." Minton and Heatwole (1978) wrote, "There seems to be little doubt, that [snakes] evolved in the region between northern Australia and the peninsulas of southeast Asia, a region that still harbors the greatest number and variety of species." The same authors wrote, "The snakes appeared late in the Mesozoic, and there is some evidence that, quite early in their history, they produced some huge marine species. Apparently these giant sea snakes were not very successful, for they endured but a short time and left a very scanty fossil record." According to sea snake expert Harold Heatwole, "Other snakes from the Cretaceous are known only from incomplete fossils and as no good skull material exists the most that can be sadi of the is that they were snakes with some characteristics intermediate between those of lizards and modern snakes." (Sea Snakes, 1999.)"


www.edwardtbabinski.us...


good enough?


eta, not really, just grabbed a quote from the page. lol.



ok, how bout this


LENNY FLANK WRITES: "As an aside, we now know, from genetic analysis, why snakes don't have vestigial FRONT limbs. During the evolutionary appearance of snakes, there was a change in one of the HOX genes that shifted the body plan forward a bit. As a result, snakes now have no neck vertebrae --- they are all thoracic and abdominal. Since, genetically, front limbs appear right where the cervical vertebrae begin, snakes can't have front limbs. The vestigial rear limbs appear where the abdominal vertebrae meet the tail. As photos show, the tail of a snake is extremely short. So, even though a snake LOOKS like it is all neck or all tail, in reality, it is all body."

Creation "Science" Debunked

Originally posted by fooks
www.edwardtbabinski.us...

Nice find, I hadn't seen that before, but I'd still like to see a skeleton to confirm they are actually part of the bone structure.

can't help you there, too much.

unless the smithsonian has a pic.

i've been there in person and have seen a whale skeleton but that was in the 60's.



"Recently, before suspending the Basilosaurus skeleton from the ceiling in the new Sant Ocean Hall, Smithsonian paleontologists added a cast of the hind limbs from a fourth animal. Interestingly, the original hind limb of this Basilosaurus is a holotype—the original specimen used to describe and name a new species—for the fossil bird Alabamornis gigantea. Often the fossil remains of several animals are found at any given dig site, and scientists thought that the bones of this fossil bird had mingled with the bones of the Basilosaurus. However, it has since been determined that the hind limb actually did belong to a Basilosaurus. The hind limb provides a clue to the evolutionary past of Basilosaurus.

Today the Smithsonian’s Basilosaurus is the only real mounted specimen on display in the world."


www.mnh.si.edu...

reply to post by fooks


Yeah, I've seen those too, and read the standard explanation, but that bone is necessary for muscles associated with the sex organs.

The pelvic bones of whales serve as attachments for the musculature associated with the penis in males and its homologue, the clitoris, in females. The muscle involved is known as the ischiocavernosus and is quite a powerful muscle in males. It serves as a retractor muscle for the penis in copulation and probably provides the base for lateral movements of the penis. The mechanisms of penile motion are not well understood in whales. The penis seems to be capable of a lot of independent motion, much like the trunk of an elephant. How much of this is mediated by the ischiocavernosus is not known.

In females the anatomical parts are smaller and more diffuse. There is something homologous to the perineal muscles in man and tetrapods, which affect the entire pelvic area - the clitoris, vagina and anus.

The pelvic rudiments also serve as origins for the ischiocaudalis muscle, which is a ventral muscle that inserts on the tips of the chevron bones of the spinal column and acts to flex the tail in normal locomotion.

Since these elements are absent in older snakes found in the fossil record, I can only propose those in the larger, modern boas also play a role in reproduction.



Ah-ha, as suspected....

Most believe that since an anaconda is a reptile, it lays eggs. That's it. But that is not the case with the anacondas. Unlike most of the egg-laying reptiles, an anaconda is a viviparous reptile. It gives birth to live offspring. It breeds heavily and at one go can give birth to two to three dozen young ones or even more at a time.

The courtship between the male and the female anacondas lasts for more than two months that usually starts during the months of April and May. After the completion of the courtship the fertilization of the eggs occurs within the body of the female anaconda.

Courting and mating of anacondas occurs in the water. To lure the males, the female lays down a trail of pheromone or releases a kind of a stimulant in the air. In this manner the female attracts the males towards her. During the breeding process, twelve males group together with one female in a kind of a sphere, known as a breeding ball.

When observed from afar, the breeding ball moves all the time like a huge leather ball that's being pushed and pumped. Actually, what's happening is that, each male fight with the other males so as to mate with the female. This slow motion fight amongst the males can last from two to four weeks. This depends on the female as she is the larger and stronger of all the anacondas in that breeding group.

To arouse and mate with the female, the males use their spurs. During mating, they press their cloacal parts aggressively against the body of the female. In the meantime, they continuously make use of their spurs to scratch the female. The climax of their copulation occurs when the female raises her cloacal part, hence allowing the cloacae of the two to move together. After mating, the female is pregnant for 6 months

.... it would be interesting to know whether these spurs are present on the females.

conceded about anacondas

but,

"Pachyrachis problematicus," another important fossil with clues to the origins of snakes. Scientists believe that modern snakes are descended from lizards and that they lost their limbs over time. Remnants of these limbs can still be found in the anatomy of boa constrictors and pythons, just as the remnants of tails can be found in human anatomy."

and,

. Dr. Harry Greene, professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at Cornell University, said the most intriguing aspect about the West Bank fossils is they may show that certain "atavistic" traits can re-evolve if the right genes are triggered. The West Bank fossils may be snakes whose limbs re-evolved, making them "real snakes, just extinct real snakes" with legs, Greene said. Greene postulates that if animals like the West Bank fossils could re-evolve limbs, then other animals that have certain genes they never lost but whose "triggers" are dormant could re-evolve those traits. Maybe humans will end up with tails again."


nice jousting with you!

reply to post by GrisGris

I will have to wait till I'm on a real computer to see the wings in the video... But here's another article on the subject

news.discovery.com...


Yet another snake from the same time period, Najash rionegrina, is also thought to have had two small rear legs, strengthening the theory that snakes once had legs and evolved from a lizard with limbs. Hussam Zaher of the University of Sao Paolo in Brazil, and a colleague found Najash (which means "snake" in Hebrew) at the Rio Negro province of Argentina.

reply to post by GrisGris


Thanks Gris.

Not that convincing I'm afraid, and again the chronology is contradictory: if this is a 90 million year old fossil why are much older ones still legless? [There's a 60 million year difference]. It just doesn't make sense yet in the fervor this fundamental observation isn't even recognized or addressed! TBH it's this I find more astonishing than anything. One would have to go back beyond 150 million years to lend any credence to this theory regarding snakes, but as with so much in the fossil record there are still no good transitory forms – this is a staggering blow in itself as you'd expect to see 1000s of examples, yet there isn't a single convincing piece of evidence.

I'd like some clarity, yet because we have no viable alternative to the ToE it appears everyone on the pro side are willing to shoe horn anything they observe to fit it regardless of the glaring inadequacies. For me that's unforgivable, and a perversion of an objectively based scientific line of enquiry.