T-Rex Dinosaur is Found Un-Fossilized

by Perry 25 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  Perry

  Scientists recover T. rex soft tissue

  70-million-year-old fossil yields preserved blood vessels

  Science via AP Tissue fragments from a Tyrannosaurus rex femur are shown at left, when it is flexible and resilient and when stretched (arrow) returns to its original shape. The middle photo shows the bone after it is air dried. The photo at right shows regions of bone showing fibrous character, not normally seen in fossil bone. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/
• 

  AlmostAtheist

  Man! How cool is THAT? I got crap in my fridge that's fossilized and this baby stayed soft for millions of years... amazing.

  Jurrasic Park, here we come!

  Dave
• 

  horrible life

  So Perry, What are you saying? So Jehovah didn't put the bones around so little kids could find them? HL
• 

  in a new york bethel minute

  oh man i can't wait to go to the dinosaur petting zoo! it's gonna be wicked rad
• 

  Qcmbr

  er Hoax alert. If dinosaurs are millions of years old you won't get any fresh tissue period. If dinosaurs are
  6000 years old you'd only get tissue if it was deep frozen or utterly dessicated. Either way - unlikely in the extreme.
• 

  Joel Wideman

  Actually, we don't know that about fossils, do we? They've always been preserved whole, rather than broken open and studied. I'll have to ask an archeologist.
• 

  Leolaia

  It's not a hoax...it's been published and well-documented, tho I am not clear on the details. The main thing tho to keep in mind is that it is not at all inherently impossible for such tissue to be preserved. That anything is preserved at all is an accident of the conditions in which the organism has been buried and decayed. Most organisms are not fossilized at all. Yet, there are some well-known examples of fossils in which soft tissue is frequently preserved....insects caught in amber. Here, the soft tissue is preserved because of the properties of the amber itself...it has just the right kind of stable conditions to allow such tissue to be survive decay even for millions of years. To consider whether it is "impossible" for certain tissue to remain "unfossilized" in bone, again we need to look at the specific circumstances in which the bone came to be preserved. To answer that, one would need to discuss the geology of the site, ancient climatic conditions, and so forth which would bear on preservation of bone. As far as I know, such matters are still not fully understood.
• 

  SeymourButts

  1. The reports of the soft tissue, though remarkable, have been sensationalized further. The tissues were not soft and pliable originally. The tissues were rehydrated in the process of removing the surrounding mineral components of the bone (Schweitzer et al. 2005). Moreover, it is unknown whether the soft tissues are original tissues. Fossil flexible tissues and nucleated cells have been found before in which the original material was not preserved (Stokstad 2005).
  2. The age of fossils is not determined by how well they are preserved, because preservation depends far more on factors other than age. The age of this particular bone was determined from the age of the rocks it was found in, namely, the Hell Creek Formation. This formation has been reliably dated by several independent methods (Dalrymple 2000).
  3. DNA has never been recovered from any dinosaurs nor from anything as old as them, and researchers do not expect to find DNA from these soft tissues (though they can still hope). DNA has been recovered, however, from samples much more than 10,000 years old (Poinar et al. 1998), even more than 300,000 years old (Stokstad 2003; Willerslev et al. 2003). If dinosaur fossils were as young as creationists claim, finding soft tissues in them would not be news, and recovering DNA from them should be easy enough that it would have been done by now.
• 

  sonnyboy

  Cool.
• 

  peacefulpete

  Yeh, I posted a thread about this last year when "Dinosaur DNA" was in the headlines all over. Reality once again is something else. The bones and the "tissue" within IS fossilized. Creationists are once again misleading the public. What is of value is that the fosilized soft tissue provides new insights into the biology of these animals. Also rather than just one exmple there are a number. The chances of fossilization in the first place is so small and even rarer are the conditions wherein the bone interior details are preserved. If you want TRex DNA just go to the store and buy some chicken wings, they are their cousins.