Yet another example of astonishing fossil preservation

[Howlin Mad Missy]

that's one big cap.

[Andre]

that's one big cap.

Did they find it in a dinosaurs ass?

[Kirkland Laing]

that's one big cap.

It'd be really difficult to walk round wearing a necklace of them.

[brucelee]

No, there's no mixed up Andre.

I know Miles is in south east asia specifically in Korea where there are many transvestites and I have long known that Bilbo likes asian ladies.

I just don't know if it was Miles who instilled this predilection of perversity to many Koreans or the other way around.

WTF is all this about? You always seem to be stirring things up whenever I am not around.

There is nothing perverse about me at all. I am a guy who can mock himself quite freely. I can call myself a big gay and be quite comfortable in the knowledge that I am not a big gay. But if you want to think otherwise to keep your fantasy alive then that is okay by me.

And where are these Korean transvestites? You are thinking about other countries there. You don't get anything so exciting as a transvestite out in this neck of the woods.

PrOOF!

LOL.

To Andre,

You're quite perceptive.lol


To Miles,

Just returning the favor bro. LOL. Remembering the stalking you've been doing on me? LOL. Just returning the favor.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

that's one big cap.

Did they find it in a dinosaurs ass?

wouldn't it be great if they did?

Maybe it went next to the exhibit that said T-Rex was vegetarian.

[CGM]

that's one big cap.

Did they find it in a dinosaurs ass?

wouldn't it be great if they did?

Maybe it went next to the exhibit that said T-Rex was vegetarian.

I'm hanging in for Cro-Magnon soft tissue inside a velociraptor, frozen nearly fully formed in a glacier.

[Andre]

that's one big cap.

Did they find it in a dinosaurs ass?

wouldn't it be great if they did?

Maybe it went next to the exhibit that said T-Rex was vegetarian.

I meant sticking out of the back of ones ass,(The megasore-ass) but I see your meaning both would be great.

I wish.

Or if they found it swinging off a petrified vine around some groovy T Rex's neck with fossilized giant ugg boots made from a wooly mammoth.

If I was a prankster God setting up million year old bones everywhere to fool the faithless, I'd be arranging them into some very funny situations.

[Kev]

Rather incredibly the BBC news website reports today how palaeontologists have actually drawn using ink from a 150 million year old squid.

BBC NEWS | UK | England | Wiltshire | Ink found in Jurassic-era squid


So not only is this squid unevolved in over 150 million years of evolution it's ink sac full of ink has remained nice and wet for of all that time, no small achievement considering the nozzles on my last printer clogged and went dry after just a few months

Am I the only person here who is sceptical that ink can remain in a liquid form for over 150 million years? That's one hell of a fucking shelf life I'd like to see Epson manage that

Which part do you have problems with understanding? The fact that is hasn't evolved or they found ink?

Sharks haven't 'evolved' either, there's a very simple reason for this, hope you're paying attention - there is no need - they are top predators (apart from us) and their environment hasn't really forced change either. Same with squid hope that helps.

Actually the only real change they need to make to kill more humans.

They have evolved, they got smaller.




Of course that tooth is only 6000 years old.

No that tooth is just a massively oversized man made replica and is probably around 3 maybe 4 years old

[Kirkland Laing]

Which part do you have problems with understanding? The fact that is hasn't evolved or they found ink?

Sharks haven't 'evolved' either, there's a very simple reason for this, hope you're paying attention - there is no need - they are top predators (apart from us) and their environment hasn't really forced change either. Same with squid hope that helps.

Actually the only real change they need to make to kill more humans.

They have evolved, they got smaller.




Of course that tooth is only 6000 years old.

No that tooth is just a massively oversized man made replica and is probably around 3 maybe 4 years old

BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | Dinosaurs had 'earliest feathers'

[Kev]

They have evolved, they got smaller.




Of course that tooth is only 6000 years old.

No that tooth is just a massively oversized man made replica and is probably around 3 maybe 4 years old

BBC NEWS | Science & Environment | Dinosaurs had 'earliest feathers'

Yeah I've read it mate. It's 'interesting' that as the possibility of therapod to bird evolution has been questioned by the latest scientific research into the differences between birds and dinosaurs that more and more of these feathered dinosaurs are appearing, and always from Liaoning, that notorious hotbed of fraud and deception.

As a learned man I know you will be aware of the Archaeoraptor hoax that the National Geographic proudly put on the front cover of their magazine as the final 'proof' of dinosaur-bird evolution a decade or so ago and that turned out to be a forgery, rather embarrasingly for the scientific community.

These fossils havn't been properly assessed yet. Over the next few years if you keep following the journals then you'll see what they really are.

Either forgeries, the latest link you gave, was after all not discovered by paleontologists but as is usually the case, bought at market from the locals, who are very adept at forging fossils, it's a multi million pound industry after all.

Or else it's just misidentification, the creatures will likely just turn out to be birds after all.

It's always the way, they will announce the find with much fanfare and state that they have definitely found a missing link and proved their theories, then over the intervening years the finds will (very slowly as nobody gets access to the original material unless they agree witht the discovers viewpoint) be evaluated and critiqued and eventually rejected, but in total silence as far as the public are concerned, who will just remember that science 'proved' birds are dinosaurs.

Give it time, and remember me a few years from now when you'll see I was right, although by then of course it won't matter about this fossil as they will found an even better one with even more convincing proof.

[Kirkland Laing]

Fossil Ardi reveals the first steps of the human race


Ardi evolved from the common ancestor we share with chimpanzees and was equally at home walking on the ground and swinging through the trees

• Comments (57)
• Buzz up!
• Digg it

• Ian Sample, science correspondent
• Latest news, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk, Thursday 1 October 2009

The remains of a woman who lived and died at the dawn of humanity have been uncovered in Ethiopia, giving the clearest picture yet of the origin of our species.
The partial skeleton belonged to a female who walked on two legs but was adept at climbing trees and moving through the forest canopy some 4.4m years ago.
The woman, named Ardi by the researchers who worked on her, belongs to a new species Ardipithecus ramidus and may be the earliest human ancestor ever discovered that was capable of walking upright.
The finding sheds light on a critical but unknown period of evolution at the root of the human family tree, shortly after our ancestors split from chimpanzees more than six million years ago.





Fossil hunters first glimpsed the new species in 1992 when a tooth belonging to Ardipithecus was spotted among pebbles in the desert near Aramis. Over the next two years, the researchers scoured the area on hands and knees and slowly uncovered pieces of bone from the hand, ankle and lower jaw, and finally a crushed skull.
A total of 47 researchers then spent a further 15 years removing, preparing and studying each of the fragments ahead of the publication tomorrow of an in-depth description of the species in 11 papers in the US journal Science......................................






Fossil Ardi illuminates the dawn of humanity | Science | guardian.co.uk

[Kev]

Fossil Ardi reveals the first steps of the human race


Ardi evolved from the common ancestor we share with chimpanzees and was equally at home walking on the ground and swinging through the trees

• Comments (57)
• Buzz up!
• Digg it

• Ian Sample, science correspondent
• Latest news, comment and reviews from the Guardian | guardian.co.uk, Thursday 1 October 2009

The remains of a woman who lived and died at the dawn of humanity have been uncovered in Ethiopia, giving the clearest picture yet of the origin of our species.
The partial skeleton belonged to a female who walked on two legs but was adept at climbing trees and moving through the forest canopy some 4.4m years ago.
The woman, named Ardi by the researchers who worked on her, belongs to a new species Ardipithecus ramidus and may be the earliest human ancestor ever discovered that was capable of walking upright.
The finding sheds light on a critical but unknown period of evolution at the root of the human family tree, shortly after our ancestors split from chimpanzees more than six million years ago.





Fossil hunters first glimpsed the new species in 1992 when a tooth belonging to Ardipithecus was spotted among pebbles in the desert near Aramis. Over the next two years, the researchers scoured the area on hands and knees and slowly uncovered pieces of bone from the hand, ankle and lower jaw, and finally a crushed skull.
A total of 47 researchers then spent a further 15 years removing, preparing and studying each of the fragments ahead of the publication tomorrow of an in-depth description of the species in 11 papers in the US journal Science......................................






Fossil Ardi illuminates the dawn of humanity | Science | guardian.co.uk

Lol, so you think this is finally the big one eh, unlike Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Neanderthal Man, Java Man, and the recent Homo Florensius, you think this one will be finally be the missing link we've waited for

Five years and they will have moved on to something else.

Nice that they waited 17 years to 'research' this one, unlike every other find that they announce to the world even whilst it is still in the ground.

You know Lubenow's book 'The Bones of Contention' is worth a read if you actually want to seriously assess the hominoid fossil record.

Immediately jumping on every find as 'evidence' which will doubtless be thrown out within the next decade (as everything else has) is rather unbecoming for a supposed intelligent person.