Global warming LOL
- Thread starter John_Wensink
- Start date
Lol, back to the head in the sand lib arguments that dinosaurs are sixty five million years old and only "crazy" people dispute that.
Even liberal wikipedia admits that dinosaurs are among us today. Birds are dinosaurs.
And t rex who supposedly went extinct 65 million years ago? A North Carolina State scientist found soft tissue within a t rex femur bone a decade ago. That can't happen according to science. LOL And no scientist can dispute it with any sound evidence. All they can come up with are idiot theories that have no basis. Sort of like the "multi universe" argument used by faux scientists who can't explain why their own crackpot science falls devastatingly short of explaining the universe.
Science all seems rather gay to me.
Soft fu&*ing tissue in a T-Rex Bone!! And found by a scientist!! They found a whole T-Rex once that wasn't fossilized. The initial story admitted that, then over time the "not a fossil" part disappeared... Watch for the "it's been disproven" statements with no references to the "disproof", for sure they will get here...
that is amazing.... I did not know they found soft tissue.
from national geographic...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/03/0324_050324_trexsofttissue.html
"The team made a plaster jacket to get part of the fossil out, and it was too big for the helicopter to lift. And so we had to take the fossil apart.
"In so doing, we had to break a thighbone in two pieces. When we did that, it allowed [Schweitzer] to get samples out of the middle of the specimen. You don't see that in most excavations, because every effort is made to keep the fossil intact," said Horner, a co-author of the study.
A certain amount of serendipity lead to the discovery.
Because the leg bone was deliberately broken in the field, no preservatives were added. As a result, the soft tissues were not contaminated.
I found this interesting later in the later in the article...
Schweitzer's background is in biology, and she performed a number of tests on the fossils that are common medical practices today.
The paleontologist and her colleagues removed mineral fragments from the interior of the femur by soaking it in a weak acid. The fossil dissolved, exposing a flexible, stretchy material and transparent vessels.
The vessels resemble blood vessels, cells, and the protein matrix that bodies generate when bones are being formed.
"Bone is living tissue, is very active tissue, and has its own metabolism and has to have a very good blood supply," Schweitzer said.
"So bone is infiltrated with lots and lots of blood vessels in its basic structure. When bone is formed, it's formed by cells that are specific for bone, that secrete proteins like collagen and form a matrix."
Further chemical analysis might enable the scientists to answer long-standing questions about the physiology of dinosaurs. For instance, were they warm-blooded, cold-blooded, or somewhere in between?
If protein sequences can be identified, they can be compared to those of living animals. This might allow a better understanding of how different groups of animals are related.
The find may potentially change field practices, perhaps by encouraging more scientists to reserve parts of fossils for cellular and molecular testing.
from national geographic...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/03/0324_050324_trexsofttissue.html
"The team made a plaster jacket to get part of the fossil out, and it was too big for the helicopter to lift. And so we had to take the fossil apart.
"In so doing, we had to break a thighbone in two pieces. When we did that, it allowed [Schweitzer] to get samples out of the middle of the specimen. You don't see that in most excavations, because every effort is made to keep the fossil intact," said Horner, a co-author of the study.
A certain amount of serendipity lead to the discovery.
Because the leg bone was deliberately broken in the field, no preservatives were added. As a result, the soft tissues were not contaminated.
I found this interesting later in the later in the article...
Schweitzer's background is in biology, and she performed a number of tests on the fossils that are common medical practices today.
The paleontologist and her colleagues removed mineral fragments from the interior of the femur by soaking it in a weak acid. The fossil dissolved, exposing a flexible, stretchy material and transparent vessels.
The vessels resemble blood vessels, cells, and the protein matrix that bodies generate when bones are being formed.
"Bone is living tissue, is very active tissue, and has its own metabolism and has to have a very good blood supply," Schweitzer said.
"So bone is infiltrated with lots and lots of blood vessels in its basic structure. When bone is formed, it's formed by cells that are specific for bone, that secrete proteins like collagen and form a matrix."
Further chemical analysis might enable the scientists to answer long-standing questions about the physiology of dinosaurs. For instance, were they warm-blooded, cold-blooded, or somewhere in between?
If protein sequences can be identified, they can be compared to those of living animals. This might allow a better understanding of how different groups of animals are related.
The find may potentially change field practices, perhaps by encouraging more scientists to reserve parts of fossils for cellular and molecular testing.
Notice how the nationalgeo article never even points out the most relevant part of the find, and in fact makes an attempt to cover it up.
Which is that according to scientists, soft tissue cannot survive past a few thousand years. Impossible. And yet they call the fossil 70 million yrs old.
The soft tissue in the t rex that cannot be refuted is the "evidence that must not be discussed" in scientific circles. Lol
a very interesting article covering the discovery in depth.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur.html?c=y&page=3
Further discoveries in the past year have shown that the discovery of soft tissue in B. rex wasnât just a fluke. Schweitzer and Wittmeyer have now found probable blood vessels, bone-building cells and connective tissue in another T. rex, in a theropod from Argentina and in a 300,000-year-old woolly mammoth fossil. Schweitzerâs work is âshowing us we really donât understand decay,â Holtz says. âThereâs a lot of really basic stuff in nature that people just make assumptions about.â
Young-earth creationists also see Schweitzerâs work as revolutionary, but in an entirely different way. They first seized upon Schweitzerâs work after she wrote an article for the popular science magazine Earth in 1997 about possible red blood cells in her dinosaur specimens. Creation magazine claimed that Schweitzerâs research was âpowerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. It speaks volumes for the Bibleâs account of a recent creation.â
This drives Schweitzer crazy. Geologists have established that the Hell Creek Formation, where B. rex was found, is 68 million years old, and so are the bones buried in it. Sheâs horrified that some Christians accuse her of hiding the true meaning of her data. âThey treat you really bad,â she says. âThey twist your words and they manipulate your data.â For her, science and religion represent two different ways of looking at the world; invoking the hand of God to explain natural phenomena breaks the rules of science. After all, she says, what God asks is faith, not evidence. âIf you have all this evidence and proof positive that God exists, you donât need faith. I think he kind of designed it so that weâd never be able to prove his existence. And I think thatâs really cool.â
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur.html#ixzz2byRdtOtX
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur.html?c=y&page=3
Further discoveries in the past year have shown that the discovery of soft tissue in B. rex wasnât just a fluke. Schweitzer and Wittmeyer have now found probable blood vessels, bone-building cells and connective tissue in another T. rex, in a theropod from Argentina and in a 300,000-year-old woolly mammoth fossil. Schweitzerâs work is âshowing us we really donât understand decay,â Holtz says. âThereâs a lot of really basic stuff in nature that people just make assumptions about.â
Young-earth creationists also see Schweitzerâs work as revolutionary, but in an entirely different way. They first seized upon Schweitzerâs work after she wrote an article for the popular science magazine Earth in 1997 about possible red blood cells in her dinosaur specimens. Creation magazine claimed that Schweitzerâs research was âpowerful testimony against the whole idea of dinosaurs living millions of years ago. It speaks volumes for the Bibleâs account of a recent creation.â
This drives Schweitzer crazy. Geologists have established that the Hell Creek Formation, where B. rex was found, is 68 million years old, and so are the bones buried in it. Sheâs horrified that some Christians accuse her of hiding the true meaning of her data. âThey treat you really bad,â she says. âThey twist your words and they manipulate your data.â For her, science and religion represent two different ways of looking at the world; invoking the hand of God to explain natural phenomena breaks the rules of science. After all, she says, what God asks is faith, not evidence. âIf you have all this evidence and proof positive that God exists, you donât need faith. I think he kind of designed it so that weâd never be able to prove his existence. And I think thatâs really cool.â
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur.html#ixzz2byRdtOtX
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter