Dinosaur feathers found preserved in amber

dinos could not live on the surface of the planet today , i suggest you read this thread specifically what Catastrophist Ted Holden has to say. elephants are about the biggest land animal possible today.Teds math says in order for dinos to live on land the atmosphere would need to be 2/3 the density of water to support their giant weight . and whales get so big cause the water supports their weight, on land they die.

edit on 16-9-2011 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)

EU theory strikes again. Actually dino bone's cellular structure is honeycombed which is one of the strongest structural systems that exists in nature.

Please learn what theropods, abelisaurids, and ceratosaurs are.

Then you will realize how wrong you are.

It's a transition from one (reptile) to the other (bird). Please review the data in depth.

Google those 3 keywords.

"Reptiles are animals in the (Linnaean) class Reptilia. They are characterized by breathing air, laying shelled eggs (except for some vipers and constrictor snakes that give live birth), and having skin covered in scales and/or scutes. Reptiles are classically viewed as having a "cold-blooded" metabolism." LINK

Reptiles are cold-blooded, 'exothermic'-reliant upon the temperature of their environment to regulate their body temperature. Dinosaurs were not, they were 'endothermic'-reliant upon their metabolism to regulate their body temperature.

Realize the difference before you berate others about how wrong they are.

Originally posted by gamesmaster63

dinos could not live on the surface of the planet today , i suggest you read this thread specifically what Catastrophist Ted Holden has to say. elephants are about the biggest land animal possible today.Teds math says in order for dinos to live on land the atmosphere would need to be 2/3 the density of water to support their giant weight . and whales get so big cause the water supports their weight, on land they die.

edit on 16-9-2011 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)

EU theory strikes again. Actually dino bone's cellular structure is honeycombed which is one of the strongest structural systems that exists in nature.

bone structure has little to do with it. its muscle weight that kills them on land. unless they had honeycombed muscle. and what does EU have to do with it ? the atmosphere was simply denser than now. that could have happened for a few reasons.

Originally posted by Soulece

Originally posted by chi_z
'bout to debunk your scienterrific method good sir OP, according to my Bible got sititin' hurr, the universe is only 6000 years old, God put dinosaur fossils here to test our faith.

I really hope that's you joking and just not being detected by me.

Good catch Soulece.

Even "IF" the Bible interpretation of 6000 years age is correct, the Dinosaur bones would not be a hoax.

You could easily say that 'dinosaurs lived during the early period and were killed in the great flood'. This would be a better interpretation than merely denying everything and saying it's a 'trick God invented to test our faith'. That would insinuate that God is malevolent and untrustworthy. I highly doubt such explanations.

I would prefer if people at least matched up the facts with their Bible interpretations more reasonably, as I suggest with the reference to the flood causing their extinction.

Originally posted by atomicn
reply to post by Nicolas Flamel

 

The feathers have DNA? If yes please implant it into a chicken egg. I want a pet dino.

Trust me you don't. It's a highly dangerous invasive species which would have to be contained 100% or else it could quickly disrupt the ecosystem.

All of the feathered theropods appear to have been rather vicious meat-eaters, and that would be the worst choice for recreating one. If you want a pet dinosaur, let's aim for the herbivores just to play it safe. But even then I would highly advise caution as it could become an invasive species as well.

Originally posted by Another_Nut

Originally posted by gamesmaster63

dinos could not live on the surface of the planet today , i suggest you read this thread specifically what Catastrophist Ted Holden has to say. elephants are about the biggest land animal possible today.Teds math says in order for dinos to live on land the atmosphere would need to be 2/3 the density of water to support their giant weight . and whales get so big cause the water supports their weight, on land they die.

edit on 16-9-2011 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)

EU theory strikes again. Actually dino bone's cellular structure is honeycombed which is one of the strongest structural systems that exists in nature.

bone structure has little to do with it. its muscle weight that kills them on land. unless they had honeycombed muscle. and what does EU have to do with it ? the atmosphere was simply denser than now. that could have happened for a few reasons.

edit on 17-9-2011 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)

I agree that the air pressure / density of the atmosphere was most likely far greater than it is today. I will have to go look it up, but there are some really interesting videos and papers written about the subject of ancient "Gigantism", and the higher pressure/density of the atmosphere is by far the leading explanation.

Not only that but I recall there is geological evidence that points in this direction. Maybe later today I will go try to find some good documents/videos on the subject to share. Stuff like this gets buried rather quickly so it could take awhile.

[snip]
i have been reading this all day long lol. thanks to MysterE in this thread for the link.

is there any evidence that the atmosphere was denser in the past?


like a bubble trapped in amber, that can give us an idea of what its composition was at the time.

Originally posted by snarfbot
is there any evidence that the atmosphere was denser in the past?


like a bubble trapped in amber, that can give us an idea of what its composition was at the time.

Interesting question. There are samples of amber with trapped air and even water in them. Reviewing some articles it seems that in the late 1980's scientists thought the trapped air was not meaningful, but more recent studies indicate otherwise.

Recently, USGS scientists have used a gas QMS to determine the oxygen level of ancient samples of Earth's atmosphere from a most unlikely place - amber.

They were able to calculate the amount of oxygen in a 67 million year old air sample trapped in amber when dinosaurs still roamed the earth using a quadrupole mass spectrometer (QMS).

Analyses of the gases in these bubbles show that the Earth's atmosphere, 67 million years ago, contained nearly 35 percent oxygen compared to present levels of 21 percent.

This hints at two things:

1. The higher oxygen content increases the metabolic efficiency in animals. This could have allowed them to grow larger on average than animals today.
2. When the asteroid hit around 65 mya, and oxygen levels started to decrease, did this make it harder for the surviving larger animals to survive?

This article also states that DNA from ancient amber samples has already been extracted!

The recent extraction by scientists, of ancient DNA from organisms entombed in amber much like in the science-fiction novel and movie, Jurassic Park is an example of why scientists are intensely interested in amber.

Source

Originally posted by snarfbot
is there any evidence that the atmosphere was denser in the past?


like a bubble trapped in amber, that can give us an idea of what its composition was at the time.

Our Planet's Leaky Atmosphere

As Earth's air slowly trickles away into space, will our planet come to look like Venus?
www.scientificamerican.com...

Atmosphere of Earth
en.wikipedia.org...

Evolution of Animals and Plants Changed Planet Earth
Since the dawn of life, it has been changing the atmosphere and climate
syzygyastro.hubpages.com...

I have watched a documentary that had a few scientist that created an environment within a Fish tank that had the Atmospheric proprieties of it Once was during the Jurassic & Cretaceous Period as the Fish they Used Im not Sure what they were but they were claim to be 25% to 35% bigger than normal of their Species From having a Climate Controlled Setting of an Early Atmosphere.

?
Paleoclimatology - The Study of Ancient Climates
www.lakepowell.net...

Originally posted by Another_Nut

Originally posted by gamesmaster63

dinos could not live on the surface of the planet today , i suggest you read this thread specifically what Catastrophist Ted Holden has to say. elephants are about the biggest land animal possible today.Teds math says in order for dinos to live on land the atmosphere would need to be 2/3 the density of water to support their giant weight . and whales get so big cause the water supports their weight, on land they die.

edit on 16-9-2011 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)

EU theory strikes again. Actually dino bone's cellular structure is honeycombed which is one of the strongest structural systems that exists in nature.

bone structure has little to do with it. its muscle weight that kills them on land. unless they had honeycombed muscle. and what does EU have to do with it ? the atmosphere was simply denser than now. that could have happened for a few reasons.

edit on 17-9-2011 by Another_Nut because: (no reason given)

Ted's behind the times -- which is not surprising, since Creationists don't really keep up with what's going on in paleontology labs.

The large dinosaurs (titanosaurs) have honeycombed bone structures AND air sacs throughout their bodies (yes, there's actually visible traces of these) -- so comparing them to an elephant (with denser bones and no air sacs) isn't quite accurate. Sauropod bones are actually fairly delicate (thin outer plate, honeycombed throughout inside) and lightweight. For Alamosaurus (the size of a 3 story building), the huge, 4 foot tall vertebra (neckbone) weighed no more than 200 lbs. It looks like a Cheeto inside.

Although they were bulky, they didn't need the same mass of muscle to move as, say, the Pachyrhinosaurus, which has fairly dense bones.

They really are quite similar to birds in many ways.

This doesn't mean raptors and the dinosaurs that we would think as reptiles have feathers by any chance.

As far as I'm concerned it is another disinformation hoax on the public news, like saying birds sing just because they are looking for a mate. It is a partial true fact meant to confuse the public into think it is true.

The amber feather could be of anything.

The holes in the raptor bones could have been spikes, they probably were not feathers.