T-Rex soft Tissue Could have D.N.A.
Posted: 05 September 2008 06:00 PM   [ Ignore ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  633
Joined  2007-12-10

NOVA-T.Rex Blood?

There actually could be a real Jurassic Park.

 Signature 

Dan

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2008 06:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15435
Joined  2006-02-14

We’ve had an interesting and lengthy discussion of Mary Schweitzer’s work already here on the forum ... check out THIS thread. Let’s just say that this data is very controversial, and may simply be contaminant.

[ Edited: 05 September 2008 06:06 PM by dougsmith ]
 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2008 06:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22

Yeah, when we are finally able to clone animals from a small DNA sample, wouldn’t they be surprised to find that what comes out isn’t T. Rex, but rather a mouse that had been nibbling at the bones.  LOL

Occam

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2008 07:07 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  633
Joined  2007-12-10

Thanks for the link

 Signature 

Dan

Profile
 
 
Posted: 07 September 2008 01:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  73
Joined  2008-06-25

If it is T-Rex I’d love to see that although I’m sure there would be a lot of controversy.

 Signature 

Many bottles of alcohol were harmed in the making of this story.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 September 2008 04:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  31
Joined  2008-09-09

Wow!  nobody find it odd that soft dino tissue was found in the bones?  In my mind there is no way these creatures could be millions of years old—more like thousands, or hundreds even.  Makes you wonder if the whole evolution/long ages thing is bogus.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 September 2008 05:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4108
Joined  2006-11-28

Wow!  nobody find it odd that soft dino tissue was found in the bones?  In my mind there is no way these creatures could be millions of years old—more like thousands, or hundreds even.  Makes you wonder if the whole evolution/long ages thing is bogus.

Of course! Clearly God put the fossils there a few thousand years ago just to challenge our faith, be He never thought we’d get smart enough to go looking for DNA, so he left a bit of the gooey stuff on the insides. Makers much more sense than the ridiculous idea that the DNA tests are erroneous or that DNA is tougher than we thought. grin

 Signature 

The SkeptVet Blog
You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place. 
Johnathan Swift

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 September 2008 07:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 7 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  31
Joined  2008-09-09
mckenzievmd - 09 September 2008 05:02 PM

Wow!  nobody find it odd that soft dino tissue was found in the bones?  In my mind there is no way these creatures could be millions of years old—more like thousands, or hundreds even.  Makes you wonder if the whole evolution/long ages thing is bogus.

Of course! Clearly God put the fossils there a few thousand years ago just to challenge our faith, be He never thought we’d get smart enough to go looking for DNA, so he left a bit of the gooey stuff on the insides. Makers much more sense than the ridiculous idea that the DNA tests are erroneous or that DNA is tougher than we thought. grin

who said anything about God putting fossils in the ground?  All I said is it makes it laughable that this creature the soft tissue was taken from died 70 million years ago.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 September 2008 08:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 8 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15435
Joined  2006-02-14
atlantis - 09 September 2008 07:31 PM

who said anything about God putting fossils in the ground?  All I said is it makes it laughable that this creature the soft tissue was taken from died 70 million years ago.

Well, “laughable” is a bit strong. (Who knows what sort of stuff can get preserved in rock?) But at any rate, as you will see in our prior discussion (linked to above) this evidence is controversial and may simply be modern contaminant.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 September 2008 08:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 9 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2457
Joined  2008-06-03

500 million year old Jellyfish fossils. Jellyfish!!! Lots of gooey fun.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21552161/

I thought it was so cool that something with no bones could become a fossil, and an excellent looking one at that!

 Signature 

Some people can read War and Peace and come away thinking it’s a simple adventure story. Others can read the ingredients on a chewing gum wrapper and unlock the secrets of the universe.    - Lex Luthor

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 September 2008 09:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 10 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  342
Joined  2008-06-23
atlantis - 09 September 2008 04:52 PM

Makes you wonder if the whole evolution/long ages thing is bogus.

With the mountains of evidence supporting evolution, it would be more prudent to question the validity of the find or our understanding of soft-tissue preservation.  If you found a pencil stuck in the ceiling, would you immediately question gravity?  I doubt it.

 Signature 

“There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere.”   

..............-Isaac Asimov

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 September 2008 11:05 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 11 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  698
Joined  2007-10-14
dougsmith - 09 September 2008 08:01 PM

as you will see in our prior discussion (linked to above) this evidence is controversial and may simply be modern contaminant.

Here’s a related article that’s a little more recent than the last post in the prior discussion:

Soft Dinosaur Tissue Dispute - Probably Just Biofilm

 Signature 

‘we are so fundamentally constituted of desire that we go on hearing music…...even though we know the band is gone and the stage is silent’

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2008 04:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 12 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15435
Joined  2006-02-14
Axegrrl - 09 September 2008 11:05 PM
dougsmith - 09 September 2008 08:01 PM

as you will see in our prior discussion (linked to above) this evidence is controversial and may simply be modern contaminant.

Here’s a related article that’s a little more recent than the last post in the prior discussion:

Soft Dinosaur Tissue Dispute - Probably Just Biofilm

Good catch, Axegrrl. Thanks for that link.

 Signature 

Doug

-:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:- -:—:-

El sueño de la razón produce monstruos

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2008 05:15 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 13 ]
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  31
Joined  2008-09-09
dougsmith - 09 September 2008 08:01 PM
atlantis - 09 September 2008 07:31 PM

who said anything about God putting fossils in the ground?  All I said is it makes it laughable that this creature the soft tissue was taken from died 70 million years ago.

Well, “laughable” is a bit strong. (Who knows what sort of stuff can get preserved in rock?) But at any rate, as you will see in our prior discussion (linked to above) this evidence is controversial and may simply be modern contaminant.

no, it’s laughable.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2008 11:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 14 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2457
Joined  2008-06-03
atlantis - 10 September 2008 05:15 AM
dougsmith - 09 September 2008 08:01 PM
atlantis - 09 September 2008 07:31 PM

who said anything about God putting fossils in the ground?  All I said is it makes it laughable that this creature the soft tissue was taken from died 70 million years ago.

Well, “laughable” is a bit strong. (Who knows what sort of stuff can get preserved in rock?) But at any rate, as you will see in our prior discussion (linked to above) this evidence is controversial and may simply be modern contaminant.

no, it’s laughable.

I spot a troll.

 Signature 

Some people can read War and Peace and come away thinking it’s a simple adventure story. Others can read the ingredients on a chewing gum wrapper and unlock the secrets of the universe.    - Lex Luthor

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 September 2008 04:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 15 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  342
Joined  2008-06-23
atlantis - 10 September 2008 05:15 AM

no, it’s laughable.

I like to think I respect everyone’s opinions, but if you don’t provide evidence for your reasoning than why bother posting on a forum dedicated to reasoned inquiry?

 Signature 

“There is a single light of science, and to brighten it anywhere is to brighten it everywhere.”   

..............-Isaac Asimov

Profile