Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: GodGunsGuts
The ICR article misrepresents the original findings. This wasn't 'meat' like a steak that was found, it was fossilized.

Better source here:.

”We noticed that there had been very little degradation since it was originally fossilised about 18 million years ago, making it the highest quality soft tissue preservation ever documented in the fossil record.”

In other words, these were soft tissue fossils, not "fresh meat".

8 posted on 12/11/2009 8:47:36 AM PST by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: mnehring

I have read several articles and papers on this find now, and they all say the flesh was “organically preserved.”


14 posted on 12/11/2009 8:51:47 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: mnehring

PS Supposedly ancient organically preserved soft tissue discoveries are known as “fresh meat” finds.


18 posted on 12/11/2009 8:53:55 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: mnehring

from the article you quoted:

“According to the University College Dublin geologists, the muscle tissue is organically preserved in three dimensions, with circulatory vessels infilled with blood.”

That means it is not petrified, does it not?


36 posted on 12/11/2009 9:10:48 AM PST by lbama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: mnehring

“According to the University College Dublin geologists, the muscle tissue is organically preserved in three dimensions, with circulatory vessels infilled with blood”

I don’t know it sounds like it is still fleshy but very tiny little pockets and parts.


40 posted on 12/11/2009 9:14:57 AM PST by GulfBreeze (Palin 2012 - For The Change You Wanted!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: mnehring
"The ICR article misrepresents the original findings."

Not so!

"Scientists have extracted organically preserved muscle tissue from an 18 million years old salamander fossil. The discovery by researchers from University College Dublin, the UK and Spain, reported in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B shows that soft tissue can be preserved under a broader set of fossil conditions than previously known."

Their use of the term "fossilized" simply means encased in rock in this case.

"We came across the muscle tissue during our analysis of several hundred fossil samples taken from an ancient lake bed in Southern Spain. It was immediately identifiable by the sinewy texture visible under the microscope"

Soft tissue! Not mineralized. Were this sample even 20,000 years old it would have mostly converted to methane and leaked out of the rock by now.

89 posted on 12/11/2009 10:22:58 AM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bomb-a administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: mnehring; GodGunsGuts
In other words, these were soft tissue fossils, not "fresh meat".

You're speculating, mnehring. The article that you linked to says "According to the University College Dublin geologists, the muscle tissue is organically preserved in three dimensions, with circulatory vessels infilled with blood." It doesn't say infilled with organic minerals creating a stone replica of blood. These articles clearly go much farther than lauding the details that have been captured in the fossilization process. They are clearly indicating the preservation of soft tissue.

You're allowing your faith to get in the way of the facts.
114 posted on 12/11/2009 10:42:16 AM PST by Sopater (I'm so sick of atheists shoving their religion in my face.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson