Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8928 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-24-2019 4:53 PM
41 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jedothek
Post Volume:
Total: 860,372 Year: 15,408/19,786 Month: 2,131/3,058 Week: 505/404 Day: 20/89 Hour: 4/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Soft Tissue Surviving 65 Million Years?
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 6 of 77 (508823)
05-16-2009 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RDK
05-15-2009 8:20 PM


Schweitzer's group has just published on some further work where they found remnants of collagen in an 80Ma hadrosaur, too. There's nothing wrong with the dates: there just appears to be something about preservation inside a bone that we don't know the details of yet. Plenty of palaeontologists are skeptical of her work, too, though this replication of the tyrannosaur find sure seems to help her case a great deal.

Science, v324, pp626-631, 1 May 2009 - and I can email you a pdf if you want one - see my profile.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RDK, posted 05-15-2009 8:20 PM RDK has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 8 of 77 (508845)
05-16-2009 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Meddle
05-16-2009 2:59 PM


Malcolm: you have the point exactly. Without knowing, for instance, how much water was present in the bones and whether the minerals of the bone offer some hindrance to water attack, calculation means nothing.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Meddle, posted 05-16-2009 2:59 PM Meddle has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 14 of 77 (509035)
05-18-2009 7:10 AM
Reply to: Message 13 by slevesque
05-18-2009 1:52 AM


If research really does prove this to be impossible,

Schweitzer's research appears to have proved it can happen already. The question now is how collagen bits get preserved for 80 million years.

Edited by Coragyps, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by slevesque, posted 05-18-2009 1:52 AM slevesque has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 32 of 77 (509660)
05-23-2009 11:16 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Dr Adequate
05-23-2009 5:34 AM


I haven't been able to find out what the T. rex was buried in,

"The specimen was incorporated within a soft, well-sorted sandstone that was interpreted as estuarine in origin." - so it was at a river mouth. And the tyrannosaur was in the Hell Creek, which has been dated seven ways from Sunday as being ~65 million years old.
Science 25 March 2005: Vol. 307. no. 5717, pp. 1952 - 1955, and it's free at sciencemag.org

There's nothing wrong with the dating, Sleve, just with our current understanding of collagen preservation. As I mentioned upthread, perhaps there's an interaction between the minerals of the fossilizing bone and the protein that stabilizes bits of the latter.

The newer Schweitzer study took rather extraordinary care to avoid contamination and to replicate findings. I'm a chemist, not a palaeontologist, but I sure can't see any holes in their methodology. You can bet that a dozen bright young grad students scattered around the world are on the trail of how the preservation occurs.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-23-2009 5:34 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by JonF, posted 05-23-2009 12:02 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 58 of 77 (510447)
05-31-2009 9:28 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by slevesque
05-31-2009 2:20 AM


But in this particular case, how was it dated ?

In the case of the Hell Creek, there's a review here (pdf). The 80 Ma hadrosaur is from the Judith River formation in Montana: it's interbedded with bentonite, which is volcanic in origin and so datable by potassium-argon and/or uranium methods. Google Scholar has 14,000 hits.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by slevesque, posted 05-31-2009 2:20 AM slevesque has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 61 of 77 (510460)
05-31-2009 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by LucyTheApe
05-31-2009 1:22 PM


Re: Soft Tissue Surviving 65 Million Years?
The only measure of time is the earths rotation and it's orbit around the sun.

Obvious nonsense, Lucy. Does the Moon not orbit the earth where you live? Does the Sun not orbit in the Milky Way? Do pulsars not pulse in the Lucyverse?

Don't be silly.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by LucyTheApe, posted 05-31-2009 1:22 PM LucyTheApe has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by LucyTheApe, posted 05-31-2009 2:18 PM Coragyps has responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5398
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 68 of 77 (510468)
05-31-2009 3:00 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by LucyTheApe
05-31-2009 2:18 PM


Re: Soft Tissue Surviving 65 Million Years?
Yes they do Coragyps, around us.

ROFL. You're stuck in the 1400's? In a geocentric universe that's more geocentric than the Sumerians? And, in any case, the orbital period of the Moon is not tied to the length of a day or year. Does that mean it doesn't tell time?

If you are actually a tool, you seem to be on the order of a Acheulean handax.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by LucyTheApe, posted 05-31-2009 2:18 PM LucyTheApe has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019