Posted on 08/19/2009 9:40:47 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Palaeontologists have drawn with ink extracted from a preserved fossilised squid uncovered during a dig in Trowbridge, Wiltshire.
The fossil, thought to be 150 million years old, was found when a rock was cracked open, revealing the one-inch-long black ink sac.
A picture of the creature and its Latin name was drawn using its ink...
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
“thought to be 150 million years old”
Think again.
Guess we had the same printer.
I completely believe this story, knowing the stupidity of the avg human being.
(I trust you're referring to the possibility that the ink from a 150 MYO could be/made viable?)
natural (stone) pigments
http://www.stonepigment.com/
Good point! All they did was rehydrate the contents of the ink sack with ammonia and voila, ink! So clearly, the ink sack was not completely fossilized.
OK, let me try again. In the fossilization process organic material is replaced with minerals. So, if it was fossilized, it would not be the ink but simply a pigment made out of the minerals that replaced the organic material. On the other hand, perhaps the ink is not an organic material to begin with, and simply dried out, so it then COULD be reconstituted.
I’m clearly not explaining this very well.
==That micrograph is suspiciously familiar. It’s archaebacteria.
Survey says XXX. The electron micrograph came from a so-called “Jurassic” squid.
If you hydrate any solid you can write with it - ochre anyone?
Precisely!
I doesn’t matter what they sampled - that is the result. Wishing it’s something else doesn’t change it.
I don't know about that, but I have a dot-matrix printer that is 150 MYO. At least that is what the repair shop said.
Scientists are so stupid. They are supposed to keep these discoveries secret so they can maintain the Old Earth conspiracy.
Didn't Mary Schweitzer rehydrate the marrow portion of a partially fossilized bone (thought to be from a T-rex) to find 'soft-tissue'???
She demineralized the contents of the dino bone, and found soft tissue still intact.
“God’s revelation to us through his wonderful creation shows us that the universe is about 14.5 billion years old and the earth about 4 billion years old.” Why or how do you attribute this ‘revelation’ to God? Are you talking about the God of Jesus, or the Intelligent Designer? And what is the ‘revelation’ of which you speak?
“I’m sticking with God’s revelation instead of a man-made age for the earth”
The Bible has painstakingly named geneological ‘begats’, including the ages of each, as an historical record (archaeological finds verify some of them, such as King David). I contend that billion years assertion is man-made. The Bible manuscripts found at Dead Sea show that the Bible has stayed virtually the same for 2000 years.
Sir, Are you questioning the truth of the Bible?
Compare for yourself see figure 1-27.
Really, triple G, you can’t possibly be so foolish as to think that you can’t reconstitute any solid - even the solid mineralized contents of a fossil.
Well seing how the Evos are one of the most superstitious and alarmist segments of our population, I would not be surprised that you believe in a grand conspiracy in the slightest.
I read that she found dessicated 'tissue' and rehydrated it.
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.