M. Møhl
M. Møhl
Or are we are the start of that hunt?
/johnny
Dinosaurs, humans, and everything else, are less than 10,000 years old. If you don’t agree I pray for your soul.
But now, if this research is accurate, if we found viable dinosaur DNA, I imagine that would have people scratching their head. Because it shouldn't be possible -- but what if we find it?
Great find! Thanks.
Politics and the Fourth Dimension are commonly knee-jerk, emotional topics of discussions.
This article is interesting also from the standpoint that the mechanism for the half-life is not based on radioactivity or the change in ratio between isotopes or elements.
It will be interesting to watch as other paleontologists publish half-life data on other animal species.
Amimals in Arctic permafrost from the late Pleistocene would be an excellent baseline for a climate far removed from New Zealand.
so then, what does this do to the supposed 90 Million year old soft tissue/blood with recoverable DNA found that supposedly belongs to T-REX?
If you believe this report, it can’t be 90 million years old, but if you believe other reports, the T-REX is 90 Million years old.....
Bad problems for the old-earth “billions and billions” crowd.
With the “Jurassic park” movie the first thought to cross my mind was the passenger pigeon and the moa. They have not been extinct very long so DNA could be obtained. Scientists could try to reintroduce them instead of velociraptors.
Sorry. It seems we are hijacking the thread with ‘religion’.
I’m guilty too.
I’m working on it , though.
This is incredibly bad science writing.
What the writer should have said is the following.
ON AVERAGE, the average DNA molecule is unreadable after 1.5 million years. BUT, AND I EMPHASIS BUT. If you have 1 million cells with preserved DNA, you have a decent chance of finding a few cells with nearly perfect DNA even after 10 million years. AND if you are really lucky, you might even find something interesting at 100 million years.
The human body contains about 50 trillion cells so 1 million cells is not all that big a sample.
Things to make you go hhhmmm...
DNA has a half-life less than 1/10 of carbon dating [5,000 years], yet carbon dating is only accurate to about 50,000 years, but DNA can range from 1/2 million to 6.8 million years.
All righty then!?!?!
Science is too deeply in bed with long ages, evolution and global warming errr cooling errr I mean climate change - yeah that’s the ticket.
If you want to retrieve this thread, the keyword is paleogenetics.
Might be enough DNA in a Woolly Mammoth’s bones to clone one though. One can hope. That would be swell. And after that, the Tasmanian Tiger would be really neat.
