Posted on 07/30/2009 8:48:55 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
The remains of a dinosaur found in the Hell Creek Formation of North Dakota are so well preserved that some scientists are just “gobsmacked.”
The mummified remains belong to a hadrosaur nicknamed “Dakota” and were the subject of a recent study that appeared in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B.[1] About the size of a hippo, the dinosaur is supposedly 66 million years old. But its skin says otherwise, a find that paleontologist and the study’s co-author Phil Manning called “absolutely gobsmacking.”[2]
Like many other young-looking dinosaur remains,[3,4,5,6] this specimen was “extremely well preserved” and contained “soft-tissue replacement structures and associated organic compounds.” Using various advanced techniques, the researchers established the “survival and presence of macromolecules.”[1] They were even able to compare the dinosaur’s skin structure with that of living creatures, finding that it is similar to the two-layered structure of modern birds and reptiles.
What is “gobsmacking” about this find is that...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
Ping!
(in before helen thomas).
Give us this day our creationist spam...
Are you starting to get the idea that the 65,000,000 years we’ve heard about all our lives was never anything more than a bunch of bullshit?
The ICR article misrepresents the report
ICR claims this was 'mummified', however, the original report doesn't say that. It says: retains soft-tissue replacement structures and associated organic compounds. Mineral cements precipitated in the skin apparently follow original cell boundaries, partially preserving epidermis microstructure. Infrared and electron microprobe images of ossified tendon clearly show preserved mineral zonation, with silica and trapped carbon dioxide forming thin linings on Haversian canals within apatite.
Mineralization is very different than mummification.
And optical measurements of the distances of astronomical bodies, in the ranges of millions of light years, are all false, too?
Just a note of clarification on 7, it seems the word mummification came from the editorialized title, not the actual technical report.
A century ago on the plains of the North-West Territories my grandpappy fashioned his own dinosaur-skin clothing when moose and deer were unavailable.
The moccasins wore especially well...
OCD?
I am SHOCKED! SHOCKED, to find that creationists are misrepresenting scientific findings in an attempt to prop up their ludicrous scriptural interpretation!
I'm shocked.
“Are you starting to get the idea that the 65,000,000 years we’ve heard about all our lives was never anything more than a bunch of bullshit?”
I so love cogency. :-)
..and the forty or so radiometric dating methods, and the different calcification dating methods, and the eolian dating methods.. yadda, yadda.. all put in place to trick us into thinking the world is really, really old.
Don’t confuse the issue with facts.
All designed to test your faith of course.
Or label you a non-believing, liberal-in-hiding, Darwin-is-your-god, evolutionist.
Just by the skin of her jowls!.
never trust anything containing this "word."
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.