Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Spider 'is 20 million years old'
BBCNews ^ | 9/30/05 | BBCNEWS

Posted on 09/30/2005 9:17:27 AM PDT by bigmac0707

A scientist has described a spider that was trapped and preserved in amber 20 million years ago.

Palaeontologist Dr David Penney, of the University of Manchester, found the 4cm long by 2cm wide fossil during a visit to a museum in the Dominican Republic.

Since the discovery two years ago, he has used droplets of blood in the amber to reveal the age of the specimen.

It is thought to be the first time spider blood has been found in amber and scientists hope to extract its DNA.

Dr Penney, of the School of Earth, Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences, said he had used the blood droplets to trace how, when and where the spider died.

It is a new species from the Filistatidae family commonly found in South America and the Caribbean.

Dr Penney believes it was climbing up a tree 20 million years ago when it was hit on the head by fast flowing resin, became engulfed in the resin and died.

He claims the shape and position of the blood droplets revealed which direction the spider was travelling in and which of its legs broke first.

"It's amazing to think that a single piece of amber with a single spider in it can open up a window into what was going on 20 million years ago," he said.

"By analysing the position of the spider's body in relation to the droplets of blood in the amber we are able to determine how it died, which direction it was travelling in and even how fast it was moving."

He first saw the fossil during a visit to the Museo del Ambar Dominicano, in Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic.

Dr Penney reports his findings in the latest issue of the journal Palaeontology.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: amber; archeology; crevolist; fossils; godsgravesglyphs; lookbackinamber; palaeontology; paleontology; science
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-213 next last
To: Alter Kaker
The dating of the amber is published in Science, Vol 273, Issue 5283, 1850-1852 , 27 September 1996. It's basically stratigraphic/palaeogeographic, although NMR results on the exomethylene signals are in approximate agreement.

Abstract:The age and depositional history of Dominican amber-bearing deposits have not been well constrained. Resinites of different ages exist in Hispaniola, but all of the main amberiferous deposits in the Dominican Republic (including those famous for yielding biological inclusions) were formed in a single sedimentary basin during the late Early Miocene through early Middle Miocene (15 to 20 million years ago), according to available biostratigraphic and paleogeographic data. There is little evidence for extensive reworking or redeposition, in either time or space. The brevity of the depositional interval (less than 5 million years) provides a temporal benchmark that can be used to calibrate rates of molecular evolution in amber taxa.

61 posted on 09/30/2005 9:52:23 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: TheGhostOfTomPaine

BCE is nothing more than the latest new age crap! The years mark the time in reference to the Birth of Jesus Christ!

What do you think this "common era" is? other than "common ignorance" of history promulgated by the anti-Christina anti-American leftists of the world.


62 posted on 09/30/2005 9:53:10 AM PDT by hombre_sincero (www.spadata.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan
A closer look:


63 posted on 09/30/2005 9:53:25 AM PDT by quark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: hombre_sincero
It is very odd that for some strange reason, a monkey became a man instantaneously by chance and was suddenly smart enough to have language and record his history.

Evolution says nothing of the sort, but you probably knew that.

64 posted on 09/30/2005 9:53:37 AM PDT by ThinkDifferent (That's great. What?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: hombre_sincero
The years mark the time in reference to the Birth of Jesus Christ!

Which is now thought to have been in 6 B.C.? :-)

65 posted on 09/30/2005 9:55:17 AM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: bigmac0707
As I understand it, C-14 half life is about 5,700 yrs. It seems that that would make it impossible to date something over 11,400 yrs old using this method.

Not exactly. "Half life" means, statistically speaking, half of the C14 has decayed. at 5700 years, there would be 1/2 as much as at 0. At 11,400 years, there would be half of that, or 1/4 what there was at time 0. At 17,100 years, half of that (1/8 of time 0), etc. At least until the amount left was so small that the method would be no longer reliable for comparison.

The method also assumes the C12 to C14 ratio to be constant through time, at least up until people started popping nukes.

Contamination can be a problem, too.

66 posted on 09/30/2005 9:56:17 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: newcats

Well, we agree on something.


67 posted on 09/30/2005 9:56:35 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: hombre_sincero
And maybe his last day WAS only 4004 BC

I'm sorry, it wasn't. I don't know how else to respond. What kind of evidence do you want? Historical, geological, paleontological, archaeological, anthropological, cosmological... I'm really not sure how to debate this. No serious person can believe that the world was created 6000 or 12000 years ago.

(What is this BCE? leftist atheist terms?)

I am not a leftist nor am I an atheist nor am I a Christian. I do not consider Jesus to be the Messiah, so I will not refer to the era as "before Christ." I'd refer to dates as BJ (before Jesus) but that would evoke too much confusion and snickering.

a monkey became a man instantaneously by chance

Who says a monkey became a man instantanoeusly by chance? I've never heard such nonsense. How can you hope to argue with evolutionary biology if you so clearly can't understand even its rudiments?

68 posted on 09/30/2005 9:56:57 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Whatever tears one may shed, in the end one always blows one’s nose.-Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MeanWestTexan

So, this old boy was down to his last 1.5 PPM, eh?


69 posted on 09/30/2005 9:57:17 AM PDT by Old Professer (Fix the problem, not the blame!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: ThinkDifferent

Yeah, it was gradual, over millions of years, yet no transitional ape/human fossils. But we'll find them one of these years. Keep the faith.


70 posted on 09/30/2005 9:58:52 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: hombre_sincero
The years mark the time in reference to the Birth of Jesus Christ!

I will use the Gregorian calendar, but I will not refer to Jesus as "Christ". You have a choice: BCE or BJ (before Jesus).

71 posted on 09/30/2005 9:59:05 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Whatever tears one may shed, in the end one always blows one’s nose.-Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: hombre_sincero; Alter Kaker

BCE is nothing more than the latest new age crap! The years mark the time in reference to the Birth of Jesus Christ!

What do you think this "common era" is? other than "common ignorance" of history promulgated by the anti-Christina anti-American leftists of the world.

You need to calm down. "Common era" refers to the era in which Judaism and Christianity have coexisted. It is indeed supposed to date from the birth of Jesus, but it omits the Christian reference to Jesus as "the Christ" out of respect for the fact that Jews don't regard him as such.

72 posted on 09/30/2005 10:00:07 AM PDT by TheGhostOfTomPaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: ThinkDifferent

Yeah - but they keep insisting that man was a monkey (ape or whichever) --- and they will NEVER find a missing link for that connection. A real one I should say since the anti-Judeo/Christians will eventually create their missing link "god" in their own image.

If there was one, it would have been much easier to find than even 'java man' - 'lucy' - etc since it would have been much later and in much higher numbers.


73 posted on 09/30/2005 10:00:32 AM PDT by hombre_sincero (www.spadata.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger

Most of the people I date are suspects....


74 posted on 09/30/2005 10:02:22 AM PDT by When do we get liberated? ((God save us from the whining, useless, irrelevent left...))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
"How do you suppose he came to the conclusion it was 20 million years old?"

Because it was 19,999,997 years old when he found it, and that was three years ago.

75 posted on 09/30/2005 10:03:16 AM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: When do we get liberated?

All of my daughter's dates are suspects........or convicts......


76 posted on 09/30/2005 10:03:16 AM PDT by Red Badger (In life, you don't get what you deserve. You get what you settle for...........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Joe 6-pack

Oh, ok. Now I understand!


77 posted on 09/30/2005 10:03:53 AM PDT by mlc9852
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852

> yet no transitional ape/human fossils

Except, of course, that a multitude of such fossils have been found.


78 posted on 09/30/2005 10:03:56 AM PDT by orionblamblam ("You're the poster boy for what ID would turn out if it were taught in our schools." VadeRetro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
Bishop Ussher tells us the world was formed as it is in the year 4004 BCE.

Do you believe everything he tells you?

79 posted on 09/30/2005 10:05:13 AM PDT by AppyPappy (If you aren't part of the solution, there is good money to be made prolonging the problem.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mlc9852
Yeah, it was gradual, over millions of years, yet no transitional ape/human fossils.

What on earth are you talking about? "Archaic" Homo Sapiens, Homo erectus, Homo ergaster, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo antecessor, Homo rudolfensis, Homo habilis, Australopithecus garhi, Australopithecus robustus, Australopithecus bosei, Australopithecus aethiopicus, Australopithecus bahrelghazali, Australopithecus africanus, Australopithecus afarensis, Kenyathropus playops, Australopithecus anamensis, Ardipithecus ramidus, Orrorin tugenensis... you mean other than these there are no transitional species?

I'm not sure I understand.

80 posted on 09/30/2005 10:05:53 AM PDT by Alter Kaker (Whatever tears one may shed, in the end one always blows one’s nose.-Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 201-213 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson