0
   

Nature Journal article wrt dinosaur remains

 
 
Reply Tue 28 Jul, 2015 06:39 pm

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/150609/ncomms8352/pdf/ncomms8352.pdf

Quote:
.......
Abstract: Exceptionally preserved organic remains are known throughout the vertebrate fossil record, and recently, evidence has emerged that such soft tissue might contain original components.

We examined samples from eight Cretaceous dinosaur bones using nano-analytical techniques; the bones are not exceptionally preserved and show no external indication of soft tissue.

In one sample, we observe structures consistent with endogenous collagen fibre remains displaying B67 nm banding, indicating the possible preservation of the original quaternary structure.

Using ToF-SIMS, we identify amino-acid fragments typical of collagen fibrils. Furthermore, we observe structures consistent with putative erythrocyte remains that exhibit mass spectra similar to emu whole blood. Using advanced material characterization approaches, we find that these putative biological structures can be well preserved over geological timescales, and their preservation is more common than previously thought.

The preservation of protein over geological timescales offers the opportunity to investigate relationships, physiology and behaviour of long extinct animals........



  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 756 • Replies: 3
No top replies

 
gungasnake
 
  0  
Reply Wed 29 Jul, 2015 07:56 pm
Notice that the authors still insist that the materials are millions of years old. But this is the first time any sort of an official science organ has acknowledged the existence and legitimacy of these materials.
farmerman
 
  0  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2015 03:34 am
@gungasnake,
No thats incorrect. (You arent aware of the literature in this subject )e. There have been several reports re: chemicals preserved in other kinds of fossils in recent years. Even Dr Shweitzers T rex discovery was reported in the real scientific literature in 2005. Later , in 2007 had been other such dicoveries and then a whole batch of papers re: the "Mechanisms" of preservation (possible surface chem reactions and chelation of iron porphorins in dino blood ). There was even a report
regarding porphirins in mosquito fossils preserved in Eocen "amber". Yes, the blood of mosquito victims was preserved in amber just as Creighton theorized in "Jurassic Park"
erNothing beyond the iron porphyrins was preserved, no DNA or greater.


What e iweve got here is a new method of fossilization that involves prganic chemicals. Its not a basis to "believe" that all fossil dates are wrong.

The evidence on the Hell Creek Formation is very robust. The ash beds,(where all these theropod fossils were found), have been dated to 67 to 66 m.y. dates.

I realize your wacky worldview embraces Creationism, but the real evidence says youre full of crap.

Youve gotta get over this belief that "soft tissue" means "young"

farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 30 Jul, 2015 04:02 am
@farmerman,
Also, the peptides associated with bird proteins were isolated from the collagen that was ppreserved in Schweitzer's T rex fossils.

20 amino acids associated with birds (not amphibians) were isolated . These further demonstrate the evolutionary relationship between birds and dinos
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Nature Journal article wrt dinosaur remains
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/18/2019 at 08:04:56