I wish in the headlining photo a person was standing next to the fossil to give a sense of scale. That thing is probably > 10 feet long! No wonder it took 7000 hours to separate from the rock.
A Dinosaur So Well Preserved It Looks Like a Statue
21–30 of 31 posts
Re: A Dinosaur So Well Preserved It Looks Like a Statue
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
So we have more in common with all land animals than a fish has with any other fish?
I vaguely remebering reading (I think it was in The Selfish Gene) that we are more closely related to salmon than salmon are to sharks.
This is absolutely true, and to be expected from the fact that the inheritance splits like a tree. For one thing both we and salmon have bones, sharks only have cartilage.
But we're more closely related to sharks than either is to the jawless fishes like the hagfish. The hagfish are just plain weird.
Re: A Dinosaur So Well Preserved It Looks Like a Statue
#23Actually kudos to the mine workers and mine management for halting operations and letting archaeologists access the site. The cost involved here is enormous with this, so such an operations often decide to ignore the bones instead.
I've met some folks involved in quarrying and have heard stories about seeing fossils and blowing them up to avoid stopping work. It's terribly sad and should have large consequences.
I'm really glad this mine did it the right way and stopped!
Re: A Dinosaur So Well Preserved It Looks Like a Statue
#24Actually kudos to the mine workers and mine management for halting operations and letting archaeologists access the site. The cost involved here is enormous with this, so such an operations often decide to ignore the bones instead.
I've met some folks involved in quarrying and have heard stories about seeing fossils and blowing them up to avoid stopping work. It's terribly sad and should have large consequences. I'm really glad this mine did it the right way and stopped!
Consequences, yes. But surely it would help to have appropriate positive incentives toward doing the right thing, for example mandated insurance for an archeological event, that pays out in the event that one occurs.
Re: A Dinosaur So Well Preserved It Looks Like a Statue
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've met some folks involved in quarrying and have heard stories about seeing fossils and blowing them up to avoid stopping work. It's terribly sad and should have large consequences. I'm really glad this mine did it the right way and stopped!
Consequences, yes. But surely it would help to have appropriate positive incentives toward doing the right thing, for example mandated insurance for an archeological event, that pays out in the event that one occurs.
Always better to set up a win-win than to try to create fear over getting caught.
Re: A Dinosaur So Well Preserved It Looks Like a Statue
#26I wish in the headlining photo a person was standing next to the fossil to give a sense of scale. That thing is probably > 10 feet long! No wonder it took 7000 hours to separate from the rock.
There are images with a 10cm scale bar here: http://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822(17)3...
The hi res image: http://www.cell.com/cms/attachment/2102978684/2080439624/gr1...
Re: A Dinosaur So Well Preserved It Looks Like a Statue
#27Original discussion here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14326913
Re: A Dinosaur So Well Preserved It Looks Like a Statue
#28>So paleontologists have debated whether giant dinosaurs had trunks
That's my biggest takeaway from the article
Re: A Dinosaur So Well Preserved It Looks Like a Statue
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
This was the most remarkable part about the whole thing as well. 7,000 hours just working on a single fossil. This man must have extraordinary patience
Still 30%-ish away from being an expert! On a serious note, compare that rhythm with our field...
it's a type of work where one can call herself an expert after just two projects... just like web development ;)
Re: A Dinosaur So Well Preserved It Looks Like a Statue
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
And dinosaurs are reptiles, mammals and reptiles are amniotes [1], both amniotes and amphibians are tetrapods, tetrapods are actually fish[2], and there's no such thing as a fish[3]! [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amniote [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrapodomorpha [3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Such_Thing_as_a_Fish
So we have more in common with all land animals than a fish has with any other fish?
Humans (and all tetrapods) are more closely related to lungfish and coelacanths than either of those two types of fish are to other living fish.