Jump to content


Photo

Another "amazing" Discovery! 70 "million Year Old" Eggs With Perfectly Preserved Embryos Inside!

DINOSAURS

  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#21 popoi

popoi

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 790 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 33
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Kentucky

Posted 07 December 2017 - 12:54 PM

How can they be a problem for you when you can tell us that red blood cells can last for "100,000,000" years?

Oh, it is a BIG problem.. Literally an 800 lb gorilla in the room that you cant see for some reason

Maybe you could ask Past Blitzking why he thought it was a problem? He seemed a lot more optimistic about being able to successfully make his case. I'm not sure what could have happened in the meantime to transform the problem from an 800lb Gorilla that can't be ignored to some pencil marks on a page that can easily be erased.

#22 wibble

wibble

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 819 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Dorset

Posted 07 December 2017 - 04:14 PM

Maybe its actually dawned on Blitz that he has fired another blank with his OP, notice how quickly he diverts off with rants about abiogenesis and Big Bang, he can't even stick to the topic that he started. This is what happens when opinions are shaped by emotion rather than intelligence.

Perhaps he should pay heed to his own words
 

I have a simple question.. Dont you EVER get embarrassed and apologize when you get caught and called out for your posts?



#23 Blitzking

Blitzking

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,010 posts
  • Age: 55
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • California

Posted 08 December 2017 - 01:36 AM

Maybe its actually dawned on Blitz that he has fired another blank with his OP, notice how quickly he diverts off with rants about abiogenesis and Big Bang, he can't even stick to the topic that he started. This is what happens when opinions are shaped by emotion rather than intelligence.
Perhaps he should pay heed to his own words
 

I have a simple question.. Dont you EVER get embarrassed and apologize when you get caught and called out for your posts?




You and Piasan must think you are so clever as you mock God's truth while slowly sliding into the abyss... Assuredly you are not much different then the people during the days of Noah...


"First of all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires." 2 Pet 3

"For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths." 2 Tim 4

#24 wibble

wibble

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 819 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Dorset

Posted 08 December 2017 - 03:11 AM

You and Piasan must think you are so clever as you mock God's truth while slowly sliding into the abyss... Assuredly you are not much different then the people during the days of Noah...


Where have I mocked "God's truth" in this thread ? I'm simply asking you to explain how fossilized eggs present a problem for deep time (as opposed to 4400 years since your supposed flood). Not too much to ask is it since you actually started this topic ?



#25 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,770 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 12 December 2017 - 12:11 AM

 

 

 

I went to the link and found the contents of the eggs were fossilized.
 
This isn't the first time fossilized dino eggs have been discovered with preserved (and fossilized) contents.
 
Why is this a "problem?"

The title of the article referenced Jurassic Park, which implies something very different than the actual discovery that was made, but that seem much more like a reason to be careful about how you interpret press coverage of scientific findings than any problems with the actual scientific work.
It's amusing.  I present an article from a widely respected peer reviewed scientific journal and Blitz dismisses it out of hand.  Then, with a straight face (as much as we can tell such things on the internet) he presents an article from the "Daily Star." ...  a rag with about the seriousness of the "National Enquirer."  Here are some of the (now) current headlines on the home page:
"Giant 'Super Earth' discovered just 111 light years away could be home to ALIEN COLONY."
"Ancient hidden ice city FOUND under Canadian metropolis."
"'The s@x was AMAZING' single woman romped with GHOST from painting."
(Emphasis in original)
 
 
I went back to the article.  This is the complete report:
 
A total of 215 pterosaur eggs were found with some revealing tiny developed skeletons – something being described by experts as “astounding”.
 
Pterosaurs were flying reptiles that went extinct during the Cretaceous-Paleogene period mass extinction event.
 
They were alive during the dinosaur age but are classed as reptiles – not dinosaurs.
 
David Unwin, a pterosaur expert, said: “I’ve been 35 years in palaeontology and seen a lot of great fossils. But this is certainly one of the three or five most interesting and probably most important specimens I’ve ever seen.
“It’s absolutely astounding.”
“They look like hatchlings except they’re inside an egg.
“In terms of proportions, they look very much like they’re ready to go.”
The findings shed light on scientists’ understanding of the mysterious ancient reptiles.
 
Daily Star Online previously revealed how dinosaurs could have survived if the huge asteroid that killed them had hit anywhere else on Earth.
The nine-mile wide asteroid that smacked into the Earth caused a radiation fireball which wiped out 75% of the Earth’s animal species – and everything within 600 miles.
But scientists believe if the asteroid, which lifted the Earth’s crust higher than the Himalayas, had struck anywhere else, the dinosaurs may well have survived.
The asteroid struck 66million years ago 24 miles off the Yucatan Peninsula in Mexico, causing a crater 111 miles wide and 20 miles deep
 
That's it.  Not even a reference to the primary paper.
.... 
But since the Daily Star posted it as well it MUST be false right?
I believe that Mike the Wiz would point this out as being a classic logical fallacy of "Poisoning the Well"

First: Notice in my original comments, I made no reference at all to the source.  Those remarks came in response to Popoi's statement about relying on "press coverage."  Like it or not, it is ALWAYS best to reference the primary article whenever possible.

 

Second:  I presented the entire article .... it wasn't all that long and there was little real content.  In fact the entire second paragraph wasn't even relevant to the OP.

 

Third:  Most importantly with relevance to the "perfectly preserved embryos" it is noteworthy they are completely fossilized.  No "100,000,000 year old blood cells" here.

 

Fourth:  Yes, the Daily Star can publish true articles.  So does the National Enquirer.  Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.  That does not change the fact that there are better sources. 

 

Finally:  Given your comments about the journal "Nature" when I posted a reference to that source, you have no room to complain about "poisoning the well."  Especially since I previously addressed the contents of the article .... something you never did with the information I presented.

 

 

 

It's amusing.  I present an article from a widely respected peer reviewed scientific journal and Blitz dismisses it out of hand.  Then, with a straight face (as much as we can tell such things on the internet) he presents an article from the "Daily Star." ...  a rag with about the seriousness of the "National Enquirer." 

Yes,  but what is amusing is why you think ANY reasonable person should take anything seriously that was written by fools who believe in the Big Bang, Abiogenesis, and That they are merely an Accidental Ape that evolved from pond scum for no reason...

"Widely Respected" by WHOM exactly? People who share the neurotic agreement because "We cant let a divine foot in the door"? And "Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled Atheist"?

DAMN ! ! !

 

There goes another irony meter. Less then three hours after Blitz accuses me of "poisoning the well." he goes on this ad hominem laden tirade which does nothing more than ...... you guessed it ...... poison the well.

 

Hypocrisy much?

 

 

 

 This isnt about Science.. Never was and never will be...

Not to you, it isn't.



#26 piasan

piasan

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,770 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oklahoma
  • Age: 71
  • Christian
  • Theistic Evolutionist
  • Oklahoma

Posted 12 December 2017 - 12:27 AM

Here is the same info from Sciencemag.org..
....
http://www.sciencema...-trove-suggests

Thank you, that's much better.  It was far more informative and It included a link to the primary paper.

 

From the abstract of that paper in the journal Science:

Fossil eggs and embryos that provide unique information about the reproduction and early growth of vertebrates are exceedingly rare, particularly for pterosaurs. Here we report on hundreds of three-dimensional (3D) eggs of the species Hamipterus tianshanensis from a Lower Cretaceous site in China, 16 of which contain embryonic remains. Computed tomography scanning, osteohistology, and micropreparation reveal that some bones lack extensive ossification in potentially late-term embryos, suggesting that hatchlings might have been flightless and less precocious than previously assumed. The geological context, including at least four levels with embryos and eggs, indicates that this deposit was formed by a rare combination of events, with storms acting on a nesting ground. This discovery supports colonial nesting behavior and potential nesting site fidelity in the Pterosauria.

 

Unfortunately, the paper itself is behind a pay wall....

 

What we do get that wasn't in the Daily Star article is that these eggs were fossilized; 16 had fossilized embryonic remains;

 

 


I am not sure what your complaint is.. Are you saying you dont agree with the findings or there WERE NO eggs found that belonged to Pterosaurs OR?... What is your point?

The complaint is that finding fossilized eggs is not some kind of 800 pound gorilla as you allege.

 

So far as I can tell, this entire discovery simply lets us fill in some holes in our understanding of the embryonic development of these ancient creatures.

 

Fascinating, but a non-problem.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: DINOSAURS

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users