Velociraptor may have had feathers

Quill knobs found on a Velociraptor’s forearm bone in Mongolia prove that the fierce dinosaurs had feathers, according to researchers.

Scientists have believed for a long time that Velociraptors were related to birds, but this is the first evidence that they had feathers.

“If people saw this animal now, they would think it’s a really strange-looking bird,” Alan Turner, a paleontologist at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, told National Geographic.

“Instead of the more reptilian-looking versions that Steven Spielberg used in Jurassic Park, these would be much fluffier, much [more] feathery animals with what looks like wings on their forearms.”

Researchers don’t think the dinosaur was able to fly, but the feathers may have been useful for display, to shield nests, for temperature control or to help it maneuver while running.


  1. If that “proves” that they really did have feathers, Why did Boy’s life say it “May” have had feathers? ❓ 💡 And how would feathers be “useful for display”? Maybe I’ll start calling myself “The questioner”. I always seem to have questions about everything. 😕 :mrgreen:

  2. I don’t agree with this. I’m not a Boy Scout so I’m not sure, but don’t you have to believe in God to join, or is it in the pledge or something? Then why is evolution in the Boy’s Life and on this website?

    So Pedro, what’s up with the evolution?


  3. Evolution is pathetic.They might have had feathers but that dose not make them related to birds! You that how they think they found the missing link, IT IS PATHETIC, they found more than 20 of the same miss ing link so it couldn’t have been evolving, it had to be a species!

    • the bumps could be scales or warts because we know that dinosaurs had rough skin so they could be bumps or, maybe where he fell and he spraped himself

  4. Hello:), you asked about how feathers would have been useful for display. Look at the male peacock, for instance. It uses its bright tail feather design for several things, such as scaring away other peacocks or trying to attract a female peacock, or peahen.

    Also you said, “If that “proves” that they really did have feathers, Why did Boy’s life say it “May” have had feathers?” Generally when scientists ‘prove’ things that happened a long time ago it just means ‘probably’; plus boys life didn’t say they may have had feathers, they said, “…the feathers may have been useful for display…”

    To Yo_shi, first of all you don’t have to be religious to join the boy scouts (or at least not when I joined); and second I don’t believe in evolution meaning I don’t believe that humans came from monkeys. However, I don’t know whether animals have evolved. I think it would be very possible that dinosaurs evolved into birds. As far as I know, animals evolving wouldn’t contradict any religion (at least not my religion). Evolution as in monkeys into humans is what contradicts religion.

  5. Sorry about my post. It’s not my place to say and tell you not to believe in evolution, or anything of that matter. But I am allowed to state my views. Here is a great paragraph from am article I found on Answers in Genesis website:

    “Evolutionists claim that dinosaurs evolved over millions of years. They imagine that one kind of animal slowly changed over long periods of time to become a different kind of animal. For instance, they believe that amphibians changed into reptiles (including dinosaurs) by this gradual process. This would mean, of course, that there would have been millions of creatures during that time that would be ‘in between,’ as amphibians evolved into reptiles. Evidence of these ‘transitional forms,’ as they are called, should be abundant. However, many fossil experts admit that not one unquestionable transitional form between any group of creatures and another has been found anywhere. If dinosaurs evolved from amphibians, there should be, for example, fossil evidence of animals that are part dinosaur and part something else. However, there is no proof of this anywhere. In fact, if you go into any museum you will see fossils of dinosaurs that are 100% dinosaur, not something in between. There are no 25%, 50%, 75%, or even 99% dinosaurs—they are all 100% dinosaur!”

    The paragraph only talks about amphibians evolving into dinosaurs, not birds into dinosaurs, but it still is the same conclusion.

    There is no proof bird evolved into dinosaurs. Maybe some dinosaurs had feathers, and birds definetly have feathers but that does not make them the actual same creature that has evolved. If they did evolve where is the proof? There is no fossil record of a bird or amphibian evolving into a dinosaur. Since “evolving” supposedly takes soooo long to finish, shouldn’t there be some fossil record of the animal in the middle of evolving?

    Then I ask you Exterminator: Why do you believe that bird may have evolved into dinosaurs if you believe there is no way monkeys evolved into humans?

    Then I ask you Pedro : Why can’t you post other science stuff other than evolution?

    Thanks for reading this and replying,


  6. That’s a good point. There would be some kind of transitional stage.

    Well I guess I’ll just skip right to your question, “Why do you believe that bird may have evolved into dinosaurs if you believe there is no way monkeys evolved into humans?” I do not believe in monkeys into humans because it contradicts my religion. Dinosaurs into birds however does not contradict my religion, and that’s why I believe it might be possible.

    I don’t believe in evolution (by which I mean dinosaurs into birds, not monkeys into humans), but I don’t not believe in it either. What I’m trying to say is that I really have no stance on the subject, and that’s why I stick with just saying it might be possible.

    Anyway, I hope that answers your question.

    Oh wait, I almost forgot that I actually do have some proof of animals evolving. I used to have a Charmander, but it is now a Charizard. Now explain that! 😉

  7. This is unbelievable, how come that there is no REAL proof that this ferrocious animal had feathers, Pterodactyl species were that from the family of birds and they had no feathers, it is excedingly rare that an animal as ferrocious as this will have had feathers, if you do have any proof then please notify me at once, but I doubt that you will find any. 🙂

  8. Quill knobs might mean it had quills like porcupine, right? Would’ve been a better defense mechanism then frilly feathers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.