×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

New Dinosaur Species Found In China

timothy posted more than 3 years ago | from the well-it's-a-big-place dept.

Earth 139

jones_supa writes "A previously unknown dinosaur has been identified from fossils dug up in China and has been nicknamed as 'T-Rex's cousin.' The gigantic creature roamed North America and east Asia between about 65 million and 99 million years ago. Named in honour of Zhucheng as Zhuchentyrannus magnus, this animal was about 11 metres long, 4 metres tall and it weighed about 6 tonnes. The research team was led by Dr. David Hone, from University College Dublin school of biology and environmental science."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

How about.. (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705286)

We don't dig up any more dinos in China, that name is horrific.

Re:How about.. (1)

dadelbunts (1727498) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705300)

And 70% of the reason why people love a dinosaur is its name. Its nickname doesnt help much either. "Oh him? Yeah.... thats T'Rex's cousin"

Re:How about.. (2)

Seumas (6865) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705376)

We'll nickname him "The Zuck" and say China named it after the Facebook pioneer. Speaking of which, someone create a Zhuchentyrannus Magnus facebook account, stat.

Re:How about.. (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705626)

We'll nickname him "The Zuck" and say China named it after the Facebook pioneer. Speaking of which, someone create a Zhuchentyrannus Magnus facebook account, stat.

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002230338954

Re:How about.. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706338)

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100002230338954

Pretty good... although music should be 'Cher' instead of 'T-Rex'. I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that Cher roamed North America and east Asia between about 65 million and 99 million years ago.

Re:How about.. (1)

flyneye (84093) | more than 3 years ago | (#35708076)

Yes but did they put the right wings on this dinosaur, this time?
Usually post-facto dinosaur gene splicing Chinese style is instantly classified bullshit science, but, I have admittedly found it to be entertaining.
Thankfully someone in China has no reservations about adding some National Enquirer philosophy to archeology. While it may not be science, who doesn't want to dream at night of flying T-rex cousins dive bombing the cavemen they will doubtlessly add to their find.
What? No wings? Quick resind the article till they get the wings taped on.

Re:How about.. (1)

c0lo (1497653) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705332)

We don't dig up any more dinos in China, that name is horrific.

Still better than "Zuckenberg-tyrannus maximus"... aka "the FBeast"

Re:How about.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705452)

We don't dig up any more dinos in China, that name is horrific.

I hear Dr Zhucheng's name can also be transliterated as "Suchong" and that Zhuchentyrannus Magnus really means "Big Daddies" [wikipedia.org]

Re:How about.. (1)

koxkoxkox (879667) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705656)

Zhucheng is the city where it was found.

Surnames in China are usually formed with a single vowel.

Re:How about.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706178)

The pinyin consonant "Zh" doesn't have an English equivalent but is sort of like a cross between a hard "J" and a "Ch". It's definitely not an "S".

Re:How about.. (1)

realityimpaired (1668397) | more than 3 years ago | (#35707630)

There is a character in the extended Latin alphabet that expresses the sound... it gets used in Slavic, Baltic, and Finno-Ugric languages... it's a Z with a caron (hacek) on top of it. Unfortunately, Slashdot eats Unicode, so I can't copy it into this post, but if you go to Wiki and search for U+017E, the first link is the article about that particular character. :)

Let's see if this works... [wikimedia.org]

Re:How about.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705540)

And that's better than the Japanese Sushirex Godzillaus? The common name "Tokyo Stomping Lizard" is marginally better.

Re:How about.. (1)

Asgerix (1035824) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705638)

I suggest "Chinasaur".

Re:How about.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706384)

...de Dublin Dinosaur..?
(Why am I suddenly speaking in a Cork accent?)

How about Chingchongasaurus? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706202)

Me so solly! Me so solly! Ah, so! Ah, so! Me frappy dickie!

Horatio says... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705296)

I'll bet someone... *sunglasses* ...will have a bone to pick with this.

YEAAAAAAAAH!

Scalies (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705298)

Lets hear it for scales!

Re:Scalies (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705372)

Lets hear it for scales!

Does it scale well?

Bring on the Bible jokes (4, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705308)

They're so funny, every... single... time.

Re:Bring on the Bible jokes (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705582)

Burn the Chinese flag [flagburningworld.com]

Re:Bring on the Bible jokes (1)

Y2KDragon (525979) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706094)

Is it too soon for the Godzilla jokes?

Re:Bring on the Bible jokes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706432)

Silly evolutionists, now you have TWO gaps to fill in your fossil record:

A gap between this fossil and fish, and a gap between this fossil and humans! Praise Jebus!

Re:Bring on the Bible jokes (1)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706968)

Obviously, this one was too big for Noah to get on the boat.

Mod parent down! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35707278)

And your adolescent comments are getting older, every... single... time.
 
How about something constructive for once rather than a juvenile anti-religious slant? How about some statement about how the chinks always have unpronounceable words and that this is no exception? Wouldn't fly on slashdot?

piracy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705324)

it's a faaake...

Re:piracy (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705362)

it's a faaake...

Its a guy in a Z-Wreck suit.

Gave it a nick because of... (1)

abednegoyulo (1797602) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705334)

FTFA:

The dinosaur has been officially named Zhuchengtyrannus magnus in honour of Zhucheng, the city in which the fossils were found. But because of its huge size, scientists quickly tagged it T-Rex's cousin.

Yeah... Sure.... It because of its size... I believe you...

Disgusting (3, Interesting)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705336)

I don't care what the dino people's fetish is, but stop naming dinos -annus.

And name this one Z-Rex.

Re:Disgusting (0)

cvtan (752695) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705778)

Naming it Z-Rex is a great idea! +5 mod points for that.

Re:Disgusting (1)

Anne_Nonymous (313852) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706516)

I believe this has already been named "The People's Liberation Lizard of Great Serenity", but yes, "Z-Rex" was a close second in the committee meeting.

April Fools (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705352)

Article's Date

12:30AM BST 01 Apr 2011

Re:April Fools (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705660)

April Fools' jokes don't get published as articles in scientific journals, cretin.

Re:April Fools (4, Funny)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705962)

You've clearly never read an economics journal.

Re:April Fools (1)

avgjoe62 (558860) | more than 3 years ago | (#35707348)

For an Economics journal, April Fools makes no difference.

I often wonder... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705360)

About them identifying new species based on a skull and some fragments. Is it impossible that it was just a large t-rex?

Took a while to hit the FP (4, Informative)

jd (1658) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705378)

This story's a few days old. Mind you, that's still not bad.

Anyways, the interesting part is that this new dino is only a little smaller than the largest T Rex ever found, making it quite possible larger specimins will be found. In turn, this raises the possibility that we're nowhere near as close to the top of the dino chain as we'd previously thought.

Having said that, we know T Rex had hollow bones essentially the same design and internal composition as modern birds. Now, it is true that the tallest bird that ever lived (the Giant Moa) was 13' tall, rather taller than a T Rex. This is important as a heavy weight on the top of tall spindly legs is going to generate rather different loads than a heavy weight much closer to the ground. It is also true that the heaviest dino, according to some estimates, may have been upwards of 20 tonnes. Clearly, this design of bone is capable of rather suprising feats under the right conditions. However, the T Rex is now thought by some to have been quite the Olympic sprinter, not a slow plodder like the Moa.

It doesn't take much to realize that if, indeed, that was the case that you simply can't up the tonnage to the limits the bones could take by standing still. They'd shatter long before you got to that point. Which means that if T Rex' ilk were indeed the sprinters claimed, you really are very close to the upper limits, ergo if the new cousin is found to be substantially larger, then T Rex was proportionally slower.

Re:Took a while to hit the FP (1)

c (8461) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706370)

> ergo if the new cousin is found to be substantially
> larger, then T Rex was proportionally slower. ... or this new cousin wasn't a sprinter and could get away with being bigger and heavier. It's not exactly unheard of some some oddball specimens of a species to develop different sizes and structures due to changes in hunting or food gathering strategies.

Mass comparison? (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706444)

Now, it is true that the tallest bird that ever lived (the Giant Moa) was 13' tall, rather taller than a T Rex. This is important as a heavy weight on the top of tall spindly legs is going to generate rather different loads than a heavy weight much closer to the ground.

The Moa had a mass estimated at less than 300 kg, while T.Rex had a mass estimated at 5.5 to 7 tons, 25 times heavier.

I find it easier to believe the T.Rex was a slow plodder carrion eater, rather than the Olympic sprinter hunter some people claim.

Re:Took a while to hit the FP (2)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706490)

Hollow bones does not mean the bones are weak.

It is very well known that most of the strength of a structure [*] comes from the outermost parts of the structure and the center is usually a dead weight. That is why you see most wheels are thinned out between the hub and the rim with lots of weight reducing holes in the in-between portion. Next time you board a plane, gander a look at the thickness of the skin of the fuselage. What you see is the strengthened and parts because of the cutout for the door. Even then it looks awfully thin. The real skin of the plane is hardly 1 or 1.5mm thick. Now remember there is no "chassis" or a frame for a airplane fuselage. That skin is the only load bearing part for the fuselage. It is called monocoque (single shell) construction. The entire bending strength and torsional rigidity of the airplane fuselage comes from the skin. The bulkheads are used to keep the shape and to attach the load of your seats and deck to the fuselage! Ha, ha, scared you right? But it is true.

So hollow bones of these massive animals does not mean the bones are weak. It just means evolution, tinkering with the design has found that it can save some weight and materials by using hollow cross sections like box girder's for a load bearing part.

[*] OK, for the structural engineering purists: I plead guilty to oversimplification. What I really mean is that most of the contribution to moment of inertia comes from the outer parts of the cross section. I beams, box girders etc.

Re:Took a while to hit the FP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706588)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur_size

Re:Took a while to hit the FP (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706646)

Umm... the Moa was only 12-13 feet tall, the T-Rex was around 13 feet tall at the hips.

Re:Took a while to hit the FP (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 3 years ago | (#35707030)

essentially the same design

I know I'm picking nits, but those bones were not designed.

Same height and weight as an elephant (3, Informative)

DeadboltX (751907) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705380)

African elephants can get to be 4 meters tall and 6 tonnes (12 feet and 13,000 pounds). This is about the height of a Tyrannosaurus's hips.

Yes, but "topping the food chain"... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705444)

Topping the food chain is somehow the scary part. Just imagine some cross of crocodile and turkey the size of an elephant :-(

Re:Yes, but "topping the food chain"... (1)

somersault (912633) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706072)

I'm imagining, and it's big.. :0 big enough to feed my family for a few weeks, and it tastes just like chicken!

Re:Yes, but "topping the food chain"... (1)

Sique (173459) | more than 3 years ago | (#35707980)

You mean, like the Deinosuchus [wikipedia.org] ?

North America? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705386)

Fossil found in China recently, yet it "roamed North America"? How do they work that out if it's found in China? Unless of course China has now taken over North America....

Re:North America? (3, Informative)

voidphoenix (710468) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705554)

The gigantic creature roamed North America and east Asia

Reading comprehension failure? Also, try this. [wikipedia.org]

Re:North America? (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 3 years ago | (#35707576)

Fossil found in China recently, yet it "roamed North America"? How do they work that out if it's found in China? Unless of course China has now taken over North America....

The gigantic creature roamed North America and east Asia

Reading comprehension failure? Also, try this.

Okay, we know it roamed East Asia smarty pants. But if this was a "previously unknown" dinosaur, then how does North America fit in that sentence? Reading comprehension failure indeed.

"New" dinosaur species? (-1, Flamebait)

M8e (1008767) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705400)

Is this some speed of light thingy?
We just found out about it and therefore it happens now and not 99 million year ago when it actually was new?

We must have found it via a mirror 49.5 million lightyears away. Thats the only way something on earth can happen 99 million year ago at the same time as it's happens right now.

Re:"New" dinosaur species? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705436)

It's newly _discovered_, not new as in new iPhone.

Overly pedantic post is overly pedantic.

Re:"New" dinosaur species? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705448)

Original iPhone isn't that new anymore either.

Re:"New" dinosaur species? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705758)

Thats right, everything that happens in the universe happens when the light from that 'happening' hits Earth and we can observe it, and not when it happened millions years ago and millions of lightyears away.

Pronunciation (2, Informative)

Praseodymn (195411) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705446)

For those of you struggling to figure out just exactly how you're supposed to pronounce this creatures name..

Zh is a tough sound to make for English speakers. The h represents aspiration of the z, and the z is pronounced as a 'ds' sound. Mix ds with a j, and you're pretty much there.

Fucking hell, why did they have to name this thing with -the- most difficult sound in the entire Chinese language?!

Re:Pronunciation (3, Informative)

DNS-and-BIND (461968) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705868)

Are you suggesting that English speakers should use the Mandarin pronounciation? That's insane. Where'd you get that idea? English speakers can't do it. It just gets pronounced zzzzzh. Try giving Mandarin speakers a name like Worthington or Covington, there is no way that they can pronouce it correctly, nor should they be expected to.

P.S. zh is not the most difficult sound in Mandarin for English speakers. The worst are j, q, x, and especially r. I have known several long-term residents of China who speak Chinese much better than I do, and they still say "shay-shay" instead of "xiexie". Your advice on pronounciation is listed among the common misconceptions [sinosplice.com] . Please stop giving strange, creative, and wrong instructions on how to pronounce Mandarin's sounds. Read this page to learn how to pronouce zh correctly [sinosplice.com] . People who will never speak a word of Mandarin in their lives don't need to worry about it.

I'm sure the name is just a result of the scientist trying to be a proper multiculturalist. It is suitable that the dinosaur be named with this way, it is good behavior and will go over well with his academic colleagues. If the plebes can't pronounce it, fuck 'em.

Re:Pronunciation (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706010)

Fucking hell, why did they have to name this thing with -the- most difficult sound in the entire Chinese language?!

The most difficult sound for native English speakers, perhaps. But what makes native English speakers so special that their linguistic needs should be taken into account when naming a creature?

Re:Pronunciation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706560)

Just ego and being the most spread language on the surface of the world. We don't know what the mole-men use yet, but when we do I am sure that many of us will switch over.

Revenge (1)

srussia (884021) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706050)

Zh is a tough sound to make for English speakers. The h represents aspiration of the z, and the z is pronounced as a 'ds' sound. Mix ds with a j, and you're pretty much there.

Fucking hell, why did they have to name this thing with -the- most difficult sound in the entire Chinese language?!

Just payback for "Tyrannosaurus Rex". That's three Rs right there, a tough sound to make for Chinese speakers*.

*I am aware that Mandarin has the rhotic (as in Pinyin 'ri' or 'ren'), which for me is the most difficult sound in the Chinese language.

Re:Pronunciation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706316)

Actually, zh is like 'j' in 'jewellery'. It may not be exactly right, but I live in China, and people understand my zh's without problem.

'C's are much harder I assure you.

'zhu' is basically pronounced 'jew', or 'jue'.

'cheng' is pronounced 'chung'.

So 'jew chung' or 'jue chung', as you prefer.

Re:Pronunciation (1)

140Mandak262Jamuna (970587) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706544)

Welcome to the real world, American speakers. For centuries the colonial rulers have mangled the names given by the native people for their lands and mountains and rivers and made them memorize pronunciation of stuff like Quixote (not quick-sotte) or Worcestershire (not worcestershire) or rendezvous (not ran-dezz-voos) or San Jose (not saan jose). Now the shoe is on the other foot. You guys learn to pronounce names like Sathyavakeeswaran and Bengalooru.

Reminds of this joke:

James Bond was traveling in a plane and the Indian in the next seat tries to make small talk.

"What ees your good name saar?"

"Bond, James Bond "

The Indian likes the style a lot and so he introduces himself the same way.

"Rao"

"Siva Rao"

"Samba Siva Rao"

"Subramanya Samba Siva Rao

"Parameshwara Subramanya Samba Siva Rao "

"Gangadhara Parameshwara Subramanya Samba Siva Rao"

"Ananthapur Gangadhara Parameshwara Subramanya Samba Siva Rao"

Re:Pronunciation (1)

quenda (644621) | more than 3 years ago | (#35707024)

Zh is a tough sound to make for English speakers

'j' is near enough. Chinese people have enough trouble pronouncing Mandarin. Countless millions cannot pronounce "sh", which is used in Mandarin, but not in southern dialects.

Re:Pronunciation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35707314)

I thought 'zh' was a relatively simple sound, even used in a few words such as "azure". It's basically just a voiced 'sh' consonant.

Of course, Chinese might be using 'zh' differently than whichever phonetic alphabet I learned that from.

Interesting a European was the lead discoverer (2)

Michael Woodhams (112247) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705462)

Are the Chinese very generous in allowing access to their dinosaur quarry? Is there a shortage of Chinese paleontologists? (If so, why?) Was it really lead by a Chinese scientist but the western press gives us a biased story? Are there lots of these discoveries but the western press doesn't report them if made by a Chinese scientist? Was it just coincidence that one of only a few Europeans happened to get lucky? Do they have some exchange program, and we're just as likely to have a European dinosaur discovered by a Chinese scientist?

(Wild guess: China is somewhat short on paleontologists because China's per-capita wealth is fairly recent and paleontologists are a long lead-time item. Dr Hone's presence was in part to train the new wave of Chinese scientists. Also, he got lucky.)

Aside: TFA says "The research paper was published in Cretaceous Research in the online journal Science Direct." No - Science Direct is an aggregator/distributor of scientific papers in electronic form, from many journals. Cretaceous Research would be the journal.

Re:Interesting a European was the lead discoverer (4, Informative)

rtfa-troll (1340807) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705542)

There have been a bunch of interesting paleontological discoveries by Chinese scientists in the past few years. These were reported in western media [reuters.com] . Generally it's not surprising if they end up attracting good people from elsewhere and if there weren't scientists from other countries getting involved then you would begin to be concerned. International collaboration is a crucial element of scientific credibility. China probably (rightly) wants that more than it wants credit for any particular dinosaurs. From a long term economic point of view this should probably be more important in China's attempt to overtake the USA economically. There is no way that research like this is going to be properly funded by private companies but you need it to get the really bright fundamental science people to come and visit and that, long term, is what drives real invention, not just thousands of patents on minor variations of the same idea.

Re:Interesting a European was the lead discoverer (1)

Rudisaurus (675580) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705552)

Dr Hone's presence was in part to train the new wave of Chinese scientists. Also, he got lucky.

I didn't see anything in TFA about Dr. Hone's sex life.

Re:Interesting a European was the lead discoverer (1)

lul_wat (1623489) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705662)

Trust me, as a round-eye in asian countries they all think you look like Brad Pitt.. Unfortunately they all look the same so it's hard to keep track of them.

Re:Interesting a European was the lead discoverer (1)

ub3r n3u7r4l1st (1388939) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706108)

That is why you need a bio-chip to be installed like the Japanese trying to do.

Exchange Scientists (1)

Rollgunner (630808) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705780)

They do have somewhat of an "exchange program." Fellow from China was helping out at a dig in Alberta, Canada some years back when my father was up there on a working vacation. Apparently there are a number of sites in China that are absolutely lousy with dino bones.

The visitor also seemed a bit surprised at the methodology that was being used over here. We've all seen dino digs in films, and they're at least semi-accurate. Over in China, though, the preferred method back then (I am not kidding here) is to drill a hole and use a light explosive charge to shatter the fossil-bearing rock and then just glue all the bits back together. That method is *occasionally* used over here, but there, it was the standard.

Re:Exchange Scientists (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706404)

Over in China, though, the preferred method back then (I am not kidding here) is to drill a hole and use a light explosive charge to shatter the fossil-bearing rock and then just glue all the bits back together

Using that technique, it's only a matter of time before they put the pieces together and re-discover Piltdown Man [wikipedia.org] .

Re:Interesting a European was the lead discoverer (1)

ripdajacker (1167101) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705782)

(Wild guess: China is somewhat short on paleontologists because China's per-capita wealth is fairly recent and paleontologists are a long lead-time item. Dr Hone's presence was in part to train the new wave of Chinese scientists. Also, he got lucky.)

Basically no, they are just all afraid of Godzilla.

Re:Interesting a European was the lead discoverer (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706188)

In general, China is underexplored paleontologically compared to, say, Europe or North America. That's not a unique feature (there are many places around the world that have underexplored territory), but China has some very important sites, such as Chengjiang in the Cambrian [wikipedia.org] and the various Jurassic-Cretaceous lake basins, including the area of Liaoning that has yielded most of the feathered dinosaurs from the Yixian Formation [wikipedia.org] and other units, not to mention many other well-preserved fossils.

Because China has significant paleontological resources, and China's study of paleontology is at an early stage of development, it is commonplace for western scientists and Chinese paleontologists to team up in order to study a particular site or find. The authorship of the paper [sciencedirect.com] (which you correctly identify as being in the journal Cretaceous Research) indicates that Hone (the lead author) was studying in China at the time the paper was published, and the news article and the paper indicates he is now at Dublin (in the paper: "Corresponding author current address: School of Biology & Environmental Sciences, University College Dublin, Dublin 4, Ireland", versus "Key Laboratory of Evolutionary Systematics of Vertebrates, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, P.O. Box 643, Beijing 100044, People's Republic of China" for the location at the time it was written). The reason the European gets the headline is that the journalism article was printed in the The Telegraph, a UK publication, so he was the one they could easily talk to; and because he is first author, implying that he was the leader of the study in a scientific sense. When Chinese authors write important papers those *do* get noted in the western media as well.

This touches on some pretty sensitive subjects, but because you asked specifically about it ...

In my experience publications by Chinese scientists are highly variable in quality. Some papers are really good, especially when published in well-known journals (those are the ones that usually get mentioned in the media), but the Chinese literature itself has a pretty mediocre standard: it's prolific, but not always done well. For example, there's a real tendency to generate many more new species names than is probably justified. However, the standards are getting better over time. Like most things it's a learning process, and as you have correctly inferred, China is still in early stages of developing its paleontology to the same standard as other parts of the world. Even in a couple of decades there has been considerable improvement.

The bargain for getting access to some of the sites in China is also as you have suggested: that the Chinese paleontologists involved will learn from the paleontologists visiting from elsewhere. The visiting scientists get much out of the exchange too.

And the next Hollywood blockbuster is... (1)

martin-boundary (547041) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705498)

Big Trouble In Little Jurassic Park

KNOWING CHINA, THEY COPIED IT FROM SOME PLACE !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705508)

China never has an original anything. The chineses steal then copy. Yaga !!

Anti Time? (1)

frrrrrspl (1112559) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705512)

Two thoughts: Did Dinosaurs live anywhere else but China? Seems like there's no other place anymore that they're found. Also: "between about 65 million and 99 million years ago"? Did they live backward in time?

Re:Anti Time? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706766)

Seriously?

They've been found all over the continental United States. Also check out the Le Brea Tar Pits. Down in New Zealand, we've even got a few, although they're quite rare. I found a few fossils in a river bed as a kid, but my neurotic bipolar mother wouldn't let me keep the stones that had formed around them.

Shortcomings? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705538)

11 meters? Me rinks they rying to make up for somering.

Assumptions as Facts (3, Interesting)

Israfels (730298) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705548)

The gigantic creature roamed North America and east Asia between about 65 million and 99 million years ago.

If they know the region where it roamed, does that mean this isn't the first of it's species discovered? Is there other evidence of this specific species in other areas? Are they just assuming and then stating as fact? I read the article, and it suggests the later.

Re:Assumptions as Facts (1)

bloodhawk (813939) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705718)

that is exactly what I thought when I read it, they found a few bones of a single animal in a single location and somehow jump to the conclusion of where it roamed. That type of assumption really irritates my scientific side.

Re:Assumptions as Facts (1)

will_die (586523) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706358)

It gets worse because all they found is a part of the face, so they have no true idea of the shape or size or even if this is just an already identified creature but this one had a bone growth.

Re:Assumptions as Facts (4, Funny)

dingen (958134) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706042)

Since they found it in China, the researchers concluded it has to be a copy of something from the US.

Re:Assumptions as Facts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706380)

LOL - Brilliant!

Re:Assumptions as Facts (1)

DigitalReverend (901909) | more than 3 years ago | (#35707258)

I wish I had moderator points today. Thanks for the chuckle.

Chinasaur? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705580)

lol...

Mildly Insulting (1, Offtopic)

LordHatrus (763508) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705594)

No one went for the mildly insulting tag "Chinasaurus Rex"? Dissapointing.

what about us? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705614)

New dino species but still no direct link between us and the apes. I mean we've been searching hard haven't we? The only reasonable conclusion is that there is no link!

Re:what about us? (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706506)

New dino species but still no direct link between us and the apes. I mean we've been searching hard haven't we? The only reasonable conclusion is that there is no link!

Huh? What do you mean? The Bible Belt is full of such links!

Oh, I see. What you mean is that rednecks are a more primitive life form than apes. Well, I guess you are right...

Re:what about us? (1)

gtall (79522) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706748)

Maybe it would help if you actually read evolutionary theory first. Apes and humans split approx. 7 million years ago. Which means you won't find a human body with a chimpanzee head. It is still possible to find humans with chimpanzee brains, however. I'll leave it to your imagination where they can be found.

Bad Name. Sould have been named the Carolosaurus (2)

lul_wat (1623489) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705654)

..because at 6 tons it resembled by ex-wife, Carol.

Reptile or Animal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35705702)

"this animal was about 11 metres long, 4 metres tall and it weighed about 6 tonnes"

I might be being a bit of an anal retentive wise-ass, but isn't a dinosaur a reptile and not an animal?
Just a thought.

Re:Reptile or Animal? (1)

TapeCutter (624760) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705746)

I might be being a bit of an anal retentive wise-ass, but isn't a dinosaur a reptile and not an animal?

Animal = member of the animalia kingdom
Reptile / dinosaur = member of the animalia kingdom = animal.

Re:Reptile or Animal? (1)

espiesp (1251084) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705748)

A reptile is a type of animal. WTF, did I just get baited?

Re:Reptile or Animal? (1)

dingen (958134) | more than 3 years ago | (#35705952)

As the other posters point out, a reptile is obviously also an animal. But, dinosaurs aren't reptiles. Reptiles have their legs besides their body, while dinosaurs have legs under their body (like mammals and birds). Also, there is evidence at least some dinosaurs might have been warm-blooded, which also disqualifies them as reptiles. And then there's the feathers...

Re:Reptile or Animal? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706320)

Did you intend to talk about "MAMMAL" as opposed to "ANIMAL" ?
Honest mistake or I just fed a honest-sounding troll.

Strom Thurmond? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706002)

Just askin'...

Not a very descriptive name (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#35706018)

Should be named Wepirateeverything Magnus or Greatfirewallofchinasaurus Magnus

Amazing conclusion from little information (1)

markmay (557326) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706110)

Amazing, previously unknown dinosaur found with a few fossil fragments in China and we already know it roamed North America?

Re:Amazing conclusion from little information (1)

rossdee (243626) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706416)

Yeah, it must have been found with its passport showing where it had traveled.

I'm still waiting for the new species of dinosaur to be discovered off Japan

Am I reading too much into this? (1)

davidbrit2 (775091) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706252)

April 3: China Detects 10 Cases of Radiation Contamination

April 4: New Dinosaur Species Found In China

...Or is China about to becme totally awesome?

Mob Mentality (0)

BobbySkillzz (1949676) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706366)

WTF? Do people just devour the baseless estimation of age without any question? Why is there such a huge variance in the estimated time all these animals supposedly roamed the earth? This isn't science. This is conjecture.

Re:Mob Mentality (1)

jax523 (2032906) | more than 3 years ago | (#35706546)

Eh, i don't know. I would assume more samples would help get a more accurate claim on the dino's age. I also believe it's scientific to give the information they have. It would be conjecture to choose an arbitrary age. That being said... it is a wildly large spread.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?