Cavemen and 12,000 year old puppies?

Forum rules
Here, you can discuss Atheism and Agnosticism, post inspirational Atheist and Agnostic memes and quotations, ask questions of an Atheistic or Agnostic nature, and discuss your Atheist or Agnostic views on Life and the Outdoors. If you don't want to see Athesim and Agnosticism being discussed, please respect the rights of the people here to do so in peace. We respect that right, that's why this forum was created. Discussion should always be respectful of the people here and thier beliefs. This Forum was not created for the purposes of you talking people out of thier beliefs or insult their intelligence. We respect your right to do so, but will not allow that kind of discussion here.
Post Reply
User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Cavemen and 12,000 year old puppies?

#1

Post by BillyBob66 » Mon Mar 28, 2016 9:06 pm

I am not sure what this says about the ongoing debates between evolutionists(and regarding dating techniques) and creationists, or young earth creationists if there is a difference. I'm not sure which side it bolsters if either. But, regardless, I find it very interesting.

http://news.yahoo.com/cavemans-best-fri ... 35084.html
Moscow (AFP) - The hunters searching for mammoth tusks were drawn to the steep riverbank by a deposit of ancient bones. To their astonishment, they discovered an Ice Age puppy's snout peeking out from the permafrost.

Five years later, a pair of puppies perfectly preserved in Russia's far northeast region of Yakutia and dating back 12,460 years has mobilised scientists across the world.

"To find a carnivorous mammal intact with skin, fur and internal organs -- this has never happened before in history," said Sergei Fyodorov, head of exhibitions at the Mammoth Museum of the North-Eastern Federal University in the regional capital of Yakutsk.

And the discovery could contribute to the lively scientific debate over the origin of domesticated dogs.......................
Last year he returned for a more thorough look and found the second puppy close to the same spot, farther down the slope. Both had died when they were about three months old.

They most likely come from the same litter, said Fyodorov............................
Last week he oversaw the removal of the second puppy's remarkably well-preserved brain -- "the first in the world", he said.

"Puppies are very rare, because they have thin bones and delicate skulls," he said. ...............................
What makes the dog particularly intriguing is that it managed to become "man's best friend" even before humans became settled farmers. .......................The second puppy's preserved brain will be compared with that of modern dogs and wolves. Parasites found on its body will be analysed, as will the contents of its stomach, which Fyodorov is particularly excited about.

"When we opened it, we were very surprised. The second puppy's stomach is mostly full of twigs and grass," he said, wondering if perhaps the animals were not exclusively carnivorous or whether they started eating grass after they were trapped by a mudslide and began to starve...................................
"This material is really exceptional and unique," said Mietje Germonpre, a palaeontologist from the Royal Belgian Institute who partnered up with Fyodorov on the project and came to Yakutsk to oversee the autopsy of the second puppy earlier this month.

"The fact that soft tissue is preserved will give much more information compared to information that can be obtained from 'normal' fossils," she said, meaning bones and teeth.
This reminds me somewhat of when they found red blood cells(RBCs) in the remains(fossils?) of a T Rex in Montana. The scientists were quite astounded to find preserved soft tissue inside a creature that was supposed to have lived 65 million years ago. Of course, for someone like me, findings like that simply throw more doubt on the accuracy of their dating methods and their abiity to work accurately over millions, or billions, of years. The ones who discovered this were so surprised that they did a good bit of work trying to come up with an explanation. I think they decided that there was so much iron in the RBCs that it could keep them from decomposing. But I am not impressed. RBCs and soft tissue reserved by nature for 65 million years. Not likely.

But, any thoughts on this article? Skin and fur and brains and stomach contents preserved out in nature for 12,000 years?


Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
GregD
Reactions:
Posts: 513
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2016 1:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Hammock:
Tarp:
Suspension:
Insulation:

Re: Cavemen and 12,000 year old puppies?

#2

Post by GregD » Tue Mar 29, 2016 8:50 am

Hasn't soft tissue been preserved for thousands of years at least a handful of times?

For example:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech ... oolly.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96tzi

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: Cavemen and 12,000 year old puppies?

#3

Post by BillyBob66 » Tue Mar 29, 2016 10:53 am

GregD wrote:Hasn't soft tissue been preserved for thousands of years at least a handful of times?

For example:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech ... oolly.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96tzi
Yes they have, at least twice, if the dating methods are accurate. And for 68 million years, again, assuming dating techniques are accurate:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur
Soft tissue and DNA

One of the best examples of soft-tissue impressions in a fossil dinosaur was discovered in Pietraroia, Italy. The discovery was reported in 1998, and described the specimen of a small, very young coelurosaur, Scipionyx samniticus. The fossil includes portions of the intestines, colon, liver, muscles, and windpipe of this immature dinosaur.[55]

In the March 2005 issue of Science, the paleontologist Mary Higby Schweitzer and her team announced the discovery of flexible material resembling actual soft tissue inside a 68-million-year-old Tyrannosaurus rex leg bone from the Hell Creek Formation in Montana. After recovery, the tissue was rehydrated by the science team.[56] When the fossilized bone was treated over several weeks to remove mineral content from the fossilized bone-marrow cavity (a process called demineralization), Schweitzer found evidence of intact structures such as blood vessels, bone matrix, and connective tissue (bone fibers). Scrutiny under the microscope further revealed that the putative dinosaur soft tissue had retained fine structures (microstructures) even at the cellular level. The exact nature and composition of this material, and the implications of Schweitzer's discovery, are not yet clear.[56]

In 2009, a team including Schweitzer announced that, using even more careful methodology, they had duplicated their results by finding similar soft tissue in a duck-billed dinosaur, Brachylophosaurus canadensis, found in the Judith River Formation of Montana. This included even more detailed tissue, down to preserved bone cells that seem even to have visible remnants of nuclei and what seem to be red blood cells.
Since these were found in the USA, I'm guessing these were not frozen. But even if frozen, soft tissue and blood cells being preserved for thousands, or even multiple millions, of years seems quite a stretch. But, I'm sure to others it seems quite plausible. But, I would bet a dollar that the paleontologist Mary Higby Schweitzer and her team never, even in their wildest dreams, expected to find red blood cells in animals that- in their opinion- last roamed the earth 60-70 million years ago.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

User avatar
BillyBob66
Reactions:
Posts: 689
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 10:43 am
Location: Tupelo, MS
Hammock: Claytor/JRB/HH/SB
Tarp: JRB 11X10
Suspension: CinchBuckle/WS/TriG
Insulation: HHSS,P.Pod,MWUQ,Yeti

Re: Cavemen and 12,000 year old puppies?

#4

Post by BillyBob66 » Tue Mar 29, 2016 3:54 pm

Edit: see new thread on Unicorns

Here is a link that might be somewhat related to the title of this thread. I just saw it today:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... kazakhstan
Scientists said that creature, which looked more like a rhino than a horse, went extinct 29,000 years ago instead of 350,000 after finding skull in Kazakhstan.........................Scientists believed Elasmotherium sibiricum went extinct 350,000 years ago. But the discovery of a skull in the Pavlodar region of Kazakhstan provides evidence that they only died out about 29,000 years ago.

Unfortunately, despite its sizable horn, the “Siberian unicorn” looked more like a rhinoceros than the mythical creature its nickname refers to. It was about 6 feet tall, 15 feet long, and weighed about 9,000 pounds, making it more comparable to a woolly mammoth than a horse.
So it would seem they have been off on their extinction date by a factor of 12. That raises the question of: could they be off by even more than that, maybe a lot more? We now know that their knowledge of past events related to when this creature last lived was nothing more than wild guessing. I wonder if anything like that could possibly apply to T. Rex, who even though the last one lived about 70 million years ago, they have still been able to find red blood cells and collagen in the remains right here in Montana? Maybe T. Rex actually lived at some date closer to us than 70 million years? Or maybe it's really hard to know.
Rom8:21the creation itself also will be set free from its slavery to corruption23..but..we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit.. groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body

Post Reply

Return to “Atheism and Agnosticism”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest