DrmDoc Posted May 3, 2017 Posted May 3, 2017 "The tail of a 99-million-year-old dinosaur, including bones, soft tissue, and even feathers, has been found preserved in amber, according to a report published today in the journal Current Biology." That was from a National Geographic article published December 8, 2016. How did I miss this incredible find? Enjoy! 4
Moontanman Posted May 3, 2017 Posted May 3, 2017 "The tail of a 99-million-year-old dinosaur, including bones, soft tissue, and even feathers, has been found preserved in amber, according to a report published today in the journal Current Biology." That was from a National Geographic article published December 8, 2016. How did I miss this incredible find? Enjoy! Awesome find! 1
koti Posted May 3, 2017 Posted May 3, 2017 Soft tissue and feathers? Wow. Is it possible theres intact DNA in the tissue? 1
StringJunky Posted May 3, 2017 Posted May 3, 2017 Wow! It's amazing that something so fragile has survived such a passage of time. . 1
DrmDoc Posted May 4, 2017 Author Posted May 4, 2017 Soft tissue and feathers? Wow. Is it possible theres intact DNA in the tissue? I read somewhere that amber doesn't preserve DNA very well. But it remains a remarkable discovery. Awesome find! Wow! It's amazing that something so fragile has survived such a passage of time. . Equally as awesome and amazing to me was that 99 million year old ant apparently trapped in the pictured amber sample along with those dinosaur remnants. It must have certainly been a thrilling find for its discoverers.
StringJunky Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 (edited) I read somewhere that amber doesn't preserve DNA very well. But it remains a remarkable discovery. Equally as awesome and amazing to me was that 99 million year old ant apparently trapped in the pictured amber sample along with those dinosaur remnants. It must have certainly been a thrilling find for its discoverers. ...In a market! Everything lies before our eyes, if only we could see it. How many fabulous things do naive people see and not notice, like the amber traders. "You, can have this cheap, there's a bit of dirt and mucky old feather in there." Edited May 4, 2017 by StringJunky 1
DrP Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 Looks legit - there was a spate of fakes coming out of China that flooded the market a while back from what I was told - they take some amber and melt it over a modern day insect or something and try to pass it off as a preserved fossilised animal in amber so as to sell it for lots of money. I'm not saying these recent feathered finds from China are fake... it just seems suspicious that after a decade or 2 of our suspecting these ancient animals to have feathers, there are a lot of feathered dino's being found all of a sudden in China.... why didn't we find any with feathers on any before? - it is 'almost' as if they have realised they will get more for the fossils if they are exciting enough to prove a new theory, so they make them and sell them. DISLAIMER - I believe dino's had feathers, that is well supported, and I am sure for the most part the Chinese people are very honourable and would shun anyone who fakes amber captured insects or feathered dinosaur fossils - I am just saying it is suspicious that all of a sudden they are all over China. Their T- Rex cousin is covered in feathers and so are their raptors all of a sudden - where were these 2 decades ago?
DrP Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 PS - maybe that was a bit harsh - but Chinese fakes are well know about - the lack of finds is mentioned in that article about disputes between governments and the independence army... so they expect more finds to come in the near future. I just find it odd that we have loads of dinosaur fossils from China from the 90's that do not have a single feather on them - now every fossil from China seems to be covered in feathers. (again - I'm not disputing feathers on dino's - that is undisputed now... I am questioning the number finds all of a sudden when there were none before, from a country known to have faked many many fossils in the past ).
koti Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 Just the other day I spoke to a local chinease bar owner and he was complaining about fake squid which be bought in bulk somewehere. Aparently when he was frying them the plastic started to melt. After hearing this I can certainly believe any fake story
DrmDoc Posted May 4, 2017 Author Posted May 4, 2017 Looks legit - there was a spate of fakes coming out of China that flooded the market a while back from what I was told - they take some amber and melt it over a modern day insect or something and try to pass it off as a preserved fossilised animal in amber so as to sell it for lots of money. I'm not saying these recent feathered finds from China are fake... it just seems suspicious that after a decade or 2 of our suspecting these ancient animals to have feathers, there are a lot of feathered dino's being found all of a sudden in China.... why didn't we find any with feathers on any before? - it is 'almost' as if they have realised they will get more for the fossils if they are exciting enough to prove a new theory, so they make them and sell them. DISLAIMER - I believe dino's had feathers, that is well supported, and I am sure for the most part the Chinese people are very honourable and would shun anyone who fakes amber captured insects or feathered dinosaur fossils - I am just saying it is suspicious that all of a sudden they are all over China. Their T- Rex cousin is covered in feathers and so are their raptors all of a sudden - where were these 2 decades ago? Just the other day I spoke to a local chinease bar owner and he was complaining about fake squid which be bought in bulk somewehere. Aparently when he was frying them the plastic started to melt. After hearing this I can certainly believe any fake story I found this Paleo Direct article on a proliferation of "FAKE CHINESE FOSSILS" that doesn't specifically discuss a proliferation of fake amber fossils. However, I did find this eBay article that describes fake amber, as the "Biggest Scam No One Talks About", which does indeed discuss China and India as major suppliers. That National Geographic article contains a link to a paper published in Current Biology that, presumably, regards peer-reviewed tests and findings legitimizing this particular amber fossil from China. Presently, I don't believe forgers have the ability to encase bogus specimens in amber that can pass the fossil dating rigors paleontologist currently employ; therefore, IMO, it's likely this specimen is a genuine find. 1
DrP Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 therefore, IMO, it's likely this specimen is a genuine find. ...and an amazing one at that. Beautiful! 1
StringJunky Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 I've just read there's one thing you can't fake, if the fossil is an artful inclusion, is that, during the natural encapsulation, the animal will release gases and these will be arrayed and entombed around it. Likely a microscope job and a skilled eye but it would be extremely difficult to fake that AND pass the other tests, i would think.
koti Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 It does look beautiful. How do you estimate age of something so old? If Im not mistaken C14 works only up to 200K years or so?
DrmDoc Posted May 4, 2017 Author Posted May 4, 2017 It does look beautiful. How do you estimate age of something so old? If Im not mistaken C14 works only up to 200K years or so? It's likely that the age of this particular specimen was determined by radiometric dating methods other than radiocarbon dating. In this case, the age of the of the amber was used to determine the age of the fossil it contained. For example, radiometric dating methods such as uranium-lead dating can yield dates between 2 million to 2 1/2 billion years. 1
StringJunky Posted May 4, 2017 Posted May 4, 2017 It's likely that the age of this particular specimen was determined by radiometric dating methods other than radiocarbon dating. In this case, the age of the of the amber was used to determine the age of the fossil it contained. For example, radiometric dating methods such as uranium-lead dating can yield dates between 2 million to 2 1/2 billion years. But you can get prehistoric amber and put in a prehistoric fossil, that's why I mentioned the bubbles, which are an artifact of the presence of the fossil; it ties them together.
DrmDoc Posted May 4, 2017 Author Posted May 4, 2017 But you can get prehistoric amber and put in a prehistoric fossil, that's why I mentioned the bubbles, which are an artifact of the presence of the fossil; it ties them together. I do think it's preferable and more expedient to look for those types of bubble inclusions before purchasing amber. I cringe at the thought of having to atomize a sample for authentication.
Recommended Posts