• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Fossil "Mummy" gives glimpse of dinosaur skin.

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,136
3,175
Oregon
✟925,908.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
I've never taken any visual representation of dinosaurs as factual. From their fossilized bones we can get a pretty good idea of their body shape. Which I've always enjoyed learning. But we don't know the color of their skin, it's texture, it's thickness or anything like that. I understand all of that, and so does the scientific community. So I really appreciate it when we get even the smallest window that fills in the gaps of those unknowns. Science is a wonderful tool towards that end.
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,011
7,392
31
Wales
✟422,789.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
I was just being facetious.

When you demand exacting wording like that, I consider the conversation over.

Then maybe you should keep quiet on something like that in the future. Would do you a world of wonders.
 
Upvote 0

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
9,184
10,080
✟280,728.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
Then, for crying out loud, what's all this hullabaloo about?
I respectfully disagree with @BCP1928 . You are absolutely wrong. You persist in conflating random illustrations, from undefined sources with the definitive, peer reviewed, evidence based descriptions made by the expert scientists. These are not the same things. The illustrations, in most cases, have as much relationship to the research conclusions as your posts do to rational, informed conversation. i.e. precious little.

The hulllabaloo is about your intransigent, decade spanning impersonation of a fool which, while worthy of an Oscar, is not worthy of respect.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,483
52,482
Guam
✟5,122,999.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The hulllabaloo is about your intransigent, decade spanning impersonation of a fool which, while worthy of an Oscar, is not worthy of respect.

Whose respect?

I ask this because you joined two years after I, but I have five times more likes than you.

I'm not saying this to toot my own horn, but to make a point.

Perhaps not your brand of respect, but whatever.
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,011
7,392
31
Wales
✟422,789.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
Whose respect?

I ask this because you joined two years after I, but I have five times more likes than you.

I'm not saying this to toot my own horn, but to make a point.

Perhaps not your brand of respect, but whatever.

That definitely sounds like vanity on your part.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,483
52,482
Guam
✟5,122,999.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The hulllabaloo is about your intransigent, decade spanning impersonation of a fool which, while worthy of an Oscar, is not worthy of respect.
That definitely sounds like vanity on your part.

Hey, we're on a roll! :oldthumbsup:

But lest you think it's all me, qv please:

Respect to AV1611VET

And others deserve respect just as well, but don't get it.

I'm sure we're not going to lose any sleep over it though.
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,011
7,392
31
Wales
✟422,789.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
Hey, we're on a roll! :oldthumbsup:

But lest you think it's all me, qv please:

Respect to AV1611VET

And others deserve respect just as well, but don't get it.

I'm sure we're not going to lose any sleep over it though.

That thread is not saying what you think it's saying at all.
 
Upvote 0

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
9,184
10,080
✟280,728.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
I ask this because you joined two years after I, but I have five times more likes than you.

I'm not saying this to toot my own horn, but to make a point.

Perhaps not your brand of respect, but whatever.
Oh dear. You made, as of this writing, 3,851,272 posts and received 52,418 reactions. So what?
I made 9,134 posts and received 10,039 reactions.

Now many of your posts, apparently were some kind of junk "counting" posts. Most of the rest are rarely more than four or five sentences long. Nevetheless, this means that for every 1000 posts you've made you got an average of 13.6 reactions. For every 1000 posts I made I got an average of 1003 reactions. So what? Irrelevant, other than as an example of how to distort facts with statistics. (I may use these in the next data analysis course I give.)


But lest you think it's all me, qv please:

Respect to AV1611VET
If you follow the subsequent posts it becomes quite clear that the poster was reflecting on the lack of respect for your posting record. It's just a little sad that you did not recognise this.

/deviation

Finis.
 
Upvote 0

sjastro

Newbie
May 14, 2014
5,740
4,672
✟345,963.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Oh dear. You made, as of this writing, 3,851,272 posts and received 52,418 reactions. So what?
I made 9,134 posts and received 10,039 reactions.

Now many of your posts, apparently were some kind of junk "counting" posts. Most of the rest are rarely more than four or five sentences long. Nevetheless, this means that for every 1000 posts you've made you got an average of 13.6 reactions. For every 1000 posts I made I got an average of 1003 reactions. So what? Irrelevant, other than as an example of how to distort facts with statistics. (I may use these in the next data analysis course I give.)



If you follow the subsequent posts it becomes quite clear that the poster was reflecting on the lack of respect for your posting record. It's just a little sad that you did not recognise this.

/deviation

Finis.
Your record is far more impressive, you have 1.099 reactions per post as opposed to 0.014 reactions per post.
Where AV most likely holds the record is in the number of individuals who have him on their ignore list.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

awstar

Well-Known Member
Aug 21, 2004
477
83
✟34,535.00
Faith
Methodist
But we don't know the color of their skin, it's texture, it's thickness or anything like that. I understand all of that, and so does the scientific community. So I really appreciate it when we get even the smallest window that fills in the gaps of those unknowns. Science is a wonderful tool towards that end.

Hey, you’re in luck. I just read this article:


Although this Nature paper did not chemically investigate what these tissues are made of—whether mineral replacement or what remains from original biochemicals—certain observations make a strong case that these are indeed the original bone, skin, and claw tissues. For one, each tissue type shows a different color. The bone looks off-white—like old bones do. The skin looks, well, skin-tone. And UV light revealed the claws’ “keratinous sheath” as slightly lighter and more yellow than the bone.


 
  • Like
Reactions: dlamberth
Upvote 0

Tuur

Well-Known Member
Oct 12, 2022
2,327
1,255
Southeast
✟82,911.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I've never taken any visual representation of dinosaurs as factual. From their fossilized bones we can get a pretty good idea of their body shape. Which I've always enjoyed learning. But we don't know the color of their skin, it's texture, it's thickness or anything like that. I understand all of that, and so does the scientific community. So I really appreciate it when we get even the smallest window that fills in the gaps of those unknowns. Science is a wonderful tool towards that end.
Actually, in some rare cases we do know what their skin looked like, and in rarer cases the color. First is fossilized impressions of skin. That's not the skin itself, but the impression left in the material. This can include feathers, or shadings in the rock where feathers once were. Next is fossilized skin. For whatever reason, hadrosaurs come up a lot with this. Fossilized hadrosaur skin has been known for decades. In some very rare instances there are traces of pigments. In some cases, there's enough representative fossils and impressions of skin that it's known that some dinosaurs had differences in texture and likely thickness depending to where their skin was on their bodies.

Here's a photo of fossilized T-Rex skin:

https://www.science.org/content/art...in-suggest-it-was-covered-scales-not-feathers
 
  • Like
Reactions: dlamberth
Upvote 0