mummified dinosaur found.

[lithium.]

This is something will possible let us really know what dinosaurs skin was like. I wonder what everyone else thinks about this.

"A mummified dinosaur unearthed in Montana a year ago is giving scientists a rare peek at what the creature's muscles and other soft tissues may have looked like."

http://www.sciencenews.org/20021019/fob2.asp

 

[npetreley]

A piece of fossilized skin that fell from Leonardo's side while researchers prepared the specimen for exhibition provided a look at the dinosaur's last meal. Preliminary analyses suggest magnolia and conifer, says Murphy.

Magnolia and conifer? Fascinating.

The presence of liverwort, a plant that can't survive even a short period of dry conditions, strongly suggests that Leonardo's mummification didn't result primarily from desiccation. If the environment was really hot and humid, finding Leonardo would be the equivalent of stumbling across a long-dead but intact elephant in a steamy tropical jungle, says Michael J. Everhart of Fort Hays State University in Hays, Kansas. "Something had to shut down the normal process of decomposition within just a few days," he notes. "It's difficult to explain."

It's not difficult to explain at all. But I guess Everhart hasn't read the Bible.

 

[lithium.]

It's not difficult to explain at all. But I guess Everhart hasn't read the Bible.

What do you think explains it.

 

[Didaskomenos]

How would a flood explain that, Nick?

Great article! What an awesome find!

 

[MSBS]

Originally posted by npetreley
It's not difficult to explain at all. But I guess Everhart hasn't read the Bible.

 

Boy, I sure didn't see that one comming.  Did any of you?

 

[lithium.]

nope

 

[MSBS]

Originally posted by npetreley
Magnolia and conifer? Fascinating.

npetreley, just curious as to why this is fascinating.  Maybe I'm paranoid, but I assume you think this conflicts with evolution or something in some way.  I'd like to hear it.

 

[ocean]

Magnolias in Montana? Impossible.

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by MSBS
npetreley, just curious as to why this is fascinating.  Maybe I'm paranoid, but I assume you think this conflicts with evolution or something in some way.  I'd like to hear it.

I was just wondering why dinosaurs evolved into birds since that fossil was mummified, but magnolias and conifers hadn't evolved into intelligent fly traps with wings during the same period. Given that plants have the potential to "evolve" more quickly than most other life forms (natural hybrids occur all the time), and the fact that there's no reason plants would be immune to the same selection pressures that affect things like dinosaurs, it strikes me as odd that they were chewing on something you can find in your backyard today. Shouldn't they have been munching vineosaurus plants? Or shouldn't the magnolia have evolved into a venus beaver trap by now?

 

[MSBS]

*sigh* (tm Louis Booth)

Someone actually needs to explain to you why dinosaurs and flowers don't have the same selection pressures?

 

[npetreley]

Originally posted by MSBS
*sigh* (tm Louis Booth)

Someone actually needs to explain to you why dinosaurs and flowers don't have the same selection pressures?

Sure, why not? And while you're at it, why not get around to fulfilling my challenge to produce a transitional series from the non-vertebrate fossil record (that is, the 99.9875% of the fossil record that hardly anyone ever talks about) that is comparable in range, scope and detail to that of the series people often present to show transitions from reptile-to-mammal. And if you're really feeling ambitious, how about producing the rest of the skeletons in that reptile to mammal series? All we ever get to see are the skulls, and that doesn't tell the whole story.

 

[lithium.]

Yes it does. If you looks a skull of a lion and then looked at a skull of house cat it would look the same, the only big difference would be the size.

 

[paulewog]

That's 'cause they are both in the same family. Feline.

So. I find it odd that the more scientists discover, the more questions are asked.... not the other way around. hehe

Now they have to come up with a theory to solve the problems they find with this new discovery.....

 

[lithium.]

Well anything is better than poof all live on earth is now here.

But anyway thats the point of science to find the answers, and to find the answers you have to ask questions, and if the answers don't seem to be right you ask more questions until you find the answer.

 

[Morat]

Sure, why not? And while you're at it, why not get around to fulfilling my challenge to produce a transitional series from the non-vertebrate fossil record (that is, the 99.9875% of the fossil record that hardly anyone ever talks about) that is comparable in range, scope and detail to that of the series people often present to show transitions from reptile-to-mammal. And if you're really feeling ambitious, how about producing the rest of the skeletons in that reptile to mammal series? All we ever get to see are the skulls, and that doesn't tell the whole story.

  Sure, Nick. As soon as you tell me how to determine polyploidy from fossils, and why it's so important to you. Oh, and why the two series we gave you, which contain more morphological change than the dino->bird sequence are unacceptable.

    Jeez, Nick, did your last humiliation on this topic finally pass far enough back into the archives that you feel safe enough to pull it out again?