Posted on 03/09/2006 2:46:21 PM PST by new yorker 77
It has the face of a rat and the tail of a skinny squirrel — and scientists say this creature discovered living in central Laos is pretty special: It's a species believed to have been extinct for 11 million years.
The long-whiskered rodent made international headlines last spring when biologists declared they'd discovered a brand new species, nicknamed the Laotian rock rat.
It turns out the little guy isn't new after all, but a rare kind of survivor: a member of a family until now known only from fossils.
Nor is it a rat. This species, called Diatomyidae, looks more like small squirrels or tree shrews, said paleontologist Mary Dawson of Pittsburgh's Carnegie Museum of Natural History.
Dawson, with colleagues in France and China, report the creature's new identity in Friday's edition of the journal Science.
The resemblance is "absolutely striking," Dawson said. As soon as her team spotted reports about the rodent's discovery, "we thought, 'My goodness, this is not a new family. We've known it from the fossil record.'"
They set out to prove that through meticulous comparisons between the bones of today's specimens and fossils found in China and elsewhere in Asia.
To reappear after 11 million years is more exciting than if the rodent really had been a new species, said George Schaller, a naturalist with the Wildlife Conservation Society, which unveiled the creature's existence last year. Indeed, such reappearances are so rare that paleontologists dub them "the Lazarus effect."
"It shows you it's well worth looking around in this world, still, to see what's out there," Schaller said.
The nocturnal rodent lives in Laotian forests largely unexplored by outsiders, because of the geographic remoteness and history of political turmoil.
Schaller calls the area "an absolute wonderland," because biologists who have ventured in have found unique animals, like a type of wild ox called the saola, barking deer, and never-before-seen bats. Dawson describes it as a prehistoric zoo, teeming with information about past and present biodiversity.
All the attention to the ancient rodent will be "wonderful for conservation," Schaller said. "This way, Laos will be proud of that region for all these new animals, which will help conservation in that some of the forests, I hope, will be preserved."
Locals call the rodent kha-nyou. Scientists haven't yet a bagged a breathing one, only the bodies of those recently caught by hunters or for sale at meat markets, where researchers with the New York-based conservation society first spotted the creature.
Now the challenge is to trap some live ones, and calculate how many still exist to tell whether the species is endangered, Dawson said.
Copyright © 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. The information contained in the AP News report may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without the prior written authority of The Associated Press.
Copyright © 2006 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Yeah, in Virginia we tend to fixate on the 'possum.
Wow, that really instills confidence in evolution theory! (sarc)
Radiocarbon dating is only good back to about 50,000. Most of evolution relies on other forms of radiometric dating.
In general these methods are quite accurate, but as always, you need to exercise care in sample selection and avoid contamination. Even so, there is always an occasional wrong date. Doesn't mean a thing.
I'm not saying it is, but if you read the abstract from the actual Science article, it only says that the discovered species is a surviving member of the thought to have been extinct FAMILY, not that it is the same SPECIES as one from 11 million years ago. There is nothing that says this SPECIES has been around for 11 million years.<<
Thanks for the link. What you say is extremely telling. We have a live example of a fossil, but we cannot determine it's species, just family.
The locals are toasting 'em on a stick, have been for years, biologists wouldn't go there, even though that was it's habitat but were willing to claim extinction.
I would also make the wild guess that if you looked in the area that this tasty morsel was found, you might find some fossils of it. It is common enough to be food.
I don't expect biologists to prove a negative. I do expect them to look first.
DK
But of course I fully expect this spicy little number to be declared a different species than the bones, something catchy like "Laonastes aenigmamus"...oops those pesky scientists did it already.
It took you half an hour to come up with that?
Could be because I don't hang on line, waiting for replies. It must be sad to be that lonely.<<
But you do perfessor. I've had you so hopping mad, you whined to the mods I was stalking you. You said an incredibly dumb thing, I called you on it, and you defended the position to the point of idiocy.
Arrogance has a few drawbacks, and egos your size hate being proven wrong, even on a minor point.
Epistemology is not important in science.
LOL.
That'll keep you up tonight.
DK
DC 2000
Bullies are always insecure, and never want you to pierce their veil of bravado. I wonder if he will be able to wait three hours before replying?
"when a wrong date is given it almost always turns out to be far older than the carbon dating suggested"
"Even so, there is always an occasional wrong date. Doesn't mean a thing."
OK, if you say so.
Credibility.
OK, if you say so.
Credibility.
You challenge my credibility in dating? I have done hundreds of radiocarbon dates, and have been studying the field for many years. And your expertise is... ?
The reason I say that an occasional wrong date doesn't mean a thing is that these things sometimes happen. There are always slight chances of sample contamination, collection mistakes, or even (rare) laboratory mix-ups. Anytime humans are involved there is the potential for error.
What we do when this happens is run more dates, to see if it can be repeated or if it is an isolated occurrence. On a site I am currently working on there was a gap between the two oldest dates of about 1200 years. That made me question the accuracy of that older date, so I submitted some more samples and got one right in between the two oldest ones. This gives that old date a lot more confidence.
By the way, this site has 18 radiocarbon dates currently, with 9 more being processed. That will be a total of 27 dates. This lets us establish the regularities of the occupation, identify any breaks in the occupation, and identify any problem dates.
Credibility? Yes, I think I have some.
Your turn.
Thank you, DN. ;o)
It will be interesting to see what
the answer to your question will be.
This rat was in Laos. It has been cooked up for supper for generations. Many large habitat areas are not being studied by naturalists rigorously. It's a tough job, no doubt. But they are to busy talking about evolution, rather than studying it.
DK
"They are called scientists."
Yes. But they have been known to have been as wrong as they have been right.
I am not trying to argue this case. I was just having fun with the idea that (according to scientists) rats were here before us. I don't follow this, but that doesn't matter.
Rats are pretty smart, ya know???????
I fought one over a bag of chips, and I had a knife, but he had a semi-auto. (sarcasm : )
Seriously, the rats were stealing various crackers from the tavern I was working in.
In the back room, below the flooring, we found the rats had stacked the crackers up in piles, unwrapped, BY TYPE.
I kid you not.
The niche didn't change for 11 million years?
(Shrug) Science is self-correcting. Up until this species was re-discovered, all the evidence supported the claim that it went extinct 11 million years ago. We now know that it didn't.
Certainly interesting, but wholly irrelevant to the question of whether or not the TOE is correct.
Prove it.
LOL
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.