Dinosaur "Mummy"...This is Amazing!

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**BigWaaagh**

So cool!

https://weather.com/news/trending/video/dinosaur-mummy-makes-debut?cm_ven=TaboolaPd_MummyDebut_8162017_1&par=MK_Tab

**jhe90**

Full mummified dinosaur!

OK. That is cool. Take my Internet cookies now.

**Hanskrampf**

This is pretty cool.

Here's a link with better pictures, the shaky video doesn't do it justice imo.

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/magazine/2017/06/dinosaur-nodosaur-fossil-discovery/

**Inquisitor Gideon**

As an amateur Palaeontologist...Neat!

**MechaEmperor7000**

I thought this was either a hoax or some kind of performance art. Is this actually real? I'm quite serious. If it is it's revolutionary, since I remember back when I was a kid most of what we knew about dinosaurs were guesses at best, and their appearances were of much debate (try guessing what an elephant looks like from it's skull alone) since we were more or less stretching skin over the bones and making educated guesses. If this thing is as well preserved, it is pretty much a lense into prehistory, which is nothing short of amazing (winning the lottery indeed).

**whembly**

...any extractable DNA there???

<cues Jurassic Park theme song>

**Desubot**

Wait Weather.com? what does that have to do with dinos?

**Easy E**

Try the Nat Geo link provide.

Chemical tests of the dinosaur’s skin have hinted at the presence of reddish pigments, contrasting with the horns’ markedly light coloration.

That's very cool. We have never really known what color a dinosaur would/could be.

**jhe90**

That's amazing what e could learn from this.

This very very cool find.
The real colour. Skin, flesh of a dinosaur.

**Crazy_Carnifex**

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
I thought this was either a hoax or some kind of performance art. Is this actually real? I'm quite serious. If it is it's revolutionary, since I remember back when I was a kid most of what we knew about dinosaurs were guesses at best, and their appearances were of much debate (try guessing what an elephant looks like from it's skull alone) since we were more or less stretching skin over the bones and making educated guesses. If this thing is as well preserved, it is pretty much a lense into prehistory, which is nothing short of amazing (winning the lottery indeed).

Can confirm that this thing is real (Personal observation).

**Frazzled**

Looks like a Texas sized anteater. awesome!

**redleger**

Take that creationists!

**nareik**

So would the shape of the soft tissue be preserved?

Most depictions on dinosaurs seem to focus on the skeletal/muscle structure as these are the things we can easily recreate, making modern representations very lean and strong.

I wanna see a fatasaurus!

**MechaEmperor7000**

It seems like that was the case, although the soft tissue isn't exactly the same as the living thing as it has become dessicated (but not completely decomposed).

**Mad Doc Grotsnik**

redleger wrote:
Take that creationists!

Don't worry, they'll just turn their wilful ignorance up to 11 and somehow claim this supports the bibble.

**Hanskrampf**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
redleger wrote:
Take that creationists!

Don't worry, they'll just turn their wilful ignorance up to 11 and somehow claim this supports the bibble.

110 million years old? Please. Even mummified it wouldn't stay this preserved for more than (idk, whatever number creationists think the earth is old) years!

**Inquisitor Gideon**

Can we please knock it off with the religious side tracking and keep to the interesting parts? Thanks. The most important part of this will be the actual organs themselves. How well preserved they are and hopefully give us some definitive data about warm vs cold blooded.

**Mozzyfuzzy**

Something about fake fossils being put there by a Creator with nothing better to do than upset archaeologists and give them silly ideas.

**Frazzled**

How many s the tissue preserved? I thought the bones were preserved as they were actually stone which replaced the bone.

**Orlanth**

One can believe in the divine plan without literalist seventh day adventism. I worked that out while I was a child.

**Frazzled**

Orlanth wrote:
One can believe in the divine plan without literalist seventh day adventism. I worked that out while I was a child.

Yesterday the Wife, dogs and I celebrated our utter mammalian dominance over the dinosaurs by FEASTING ON THEIR DEAD CARCASSES! Mmm turkey dinosaur...

**Iron_Captain**

Mozzyfuzzy wrote:
Something about fake fossils being put there by a Creator with nothing better to do than upset archaeologists and give them silly ideas.

Paleontologists. Archaeologists are people who study the Human past, paleontologists are the people who study fossils (and the general pre-holocene past). They are separate disciplines (although they come together in the study of Human evolution).

Also, most christians believe in evolution, including all christian archaeologists and paleontologists I know. However, they'd probably still be upset or get silly ideas if they found a fake fossil: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piltdown_Man

**amanita**

Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
redleger wrote:
Take that creationists!

Don't worry, they'll just turn their wilful ignorance up to 11 and somehow claim this supports the bibble.

Ha ha! Pot, meet Kettle. Willful ignorance isn't what it used to be. Since there still isn't a single viable methodology for the origination of life without a creator, let's assume there is one because golly...here we are!

In other words, the result proves the premise. Except that it doesn't.

**Frazzled**

Excellent, we haven't had a good bash religion in so long.. .

**Galas**

amanita wrote:
Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
redleger wrote:
Take that creationists!

Don't worry, they'll just turn their wilful ignorance up to 11 and somehow claim this supports the bibble.

Ha ha! Pot, meet Kettle. Willful ignorance isn't what it used to be. Since there still isn't a single viable methodology for the origination of life without a creator, let's assume there is one because golly...here we are!

Theres not a single viable methodology for the origination of life without a creator? Nonsense. I believe in Fortuna. She did it.

**MechaEmperor7000**

Back on topic:

On the issue of the preserved tissue; according to the article there is technically no tissue left; apparently the tissue themselves fossilized, which means that they got replaced by rock particles over time just like bones. It's why they're having a hard time doing an internal scan of the things. However some pigmentation survived despite this.

Basically, aside from knowing the general shape and connections the soft tissue had, there's not much else there is. Certainly there is no way to extract DNA from this, as it seems anything remotely organic has since been replaced with stone. Still though, merely learning the internal structure and biology of the dinos would still be a huge leap forward.

**amanita**

That's a shame no DNA can be extracted from this find though it's hardly surprising. I'm still disappointed nothing has come of the attempt to regenerate a woolly mammoth from a few years back. Any news about that?

Although the Jurassic Park idea is great fun, the atmospheric pressure and composition was quite different than the one we have today, not to mention the food it would eat. If we were able to clone a specimen the poor thing would have to spend its life in some kind of pressure chamber or iron lung.

It would still be awfully cool though!

**nareik**

(redacted)

**timetowaste85**

Well, most of us intelligent (reasonable) Christians recognize that God determined what "a day" was...and a single day could have been what us humans consider 100 million years. The ones who limit God's determination of a day are actually being poor practitioners of their own religion. This understanding enables God and dinosaurs to exist.

This is only hampered if you believe the world was really created in 144hrs according to a current, traditional clock. I'm willing to bet "God's time" is different from your time or mine.

**insaniak**

MechaEmperor7000 wrote:
Back on topic:

There's a good idea.

Take the Creation discussion elsewhere, folks.