70 million year old soft tissue found on T-Rex....

NoSeRider · Mar 2005

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683/

050324_trex_softtissue_hlg10a.hlarge.jpg

Jurassic Park here we come! I never get bored of this stuff......oh, me so geeky.

Neo_God · Mar 2005

[ QUOTE ]
Jurassic Park here we come

[/ QUOTE ]

I was thinking the same thing when I read the title of the thread. And it figures they would find the flesh of one of the killer dinosaurs. I mean why couldn't they find the flesh of a nice docile dinosaur, so if they ever do decide to clone, it won't run amok and go off eating and stomping everything it sees.

Mishra · Mar 2005

is it me, or does that middle picture look delicious

iMag · Mar 2005

if a t-rex is ever cloned I hope they're smart emough to let it accidentially escape into congress

Daz · Mar 2005

hhhhmmmmmm, the BBC tells a somewhat less sensationalist story If you read the fine details http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4379577.stm

Ruz · Mar 2005

Its probably an old big mac meal that someone discarded

JKMakowka · Mar 2005

I seriously doubt that they will find much usable DNA- or protein fragments, it is just too old. Even in perfect storage conditions, it would be sensational to find some usable stuff after 70 million years.

Thegodzero · Mar 2005

Looks like someone on the dig site had one nasty ass scab fall off, and didnt have the guts to say it was from him.

Ruz · Mar 2005

Uggh!! I was just going to eat a chicken burger as well

DH_ · Mar 2005

i read about this on the something awful forums and initially thought it was cool, apparentely a notoriously bullshit scientist is involved with this so now im a bit sceptical. especially after seeing the pictures, how the hell does soft tissue survive 70 million years and still look like that. even under optimal enviromental conditions i dont see how anything that is the first thing to go in decomposition would survive 70 million years.

jzero · Mar 2005

I'm laying odds that when they analyze the soft stuff, it turns out to be something other than dinosaur tissue. Just because you find it stuck to two bones doesn't mean it's the gristle.

/jzero

usagi · Mar 2005

[ QUOTE ]
I'm laying odds that when they analyze the soft stuff, it turns out to be something other than dinosaur tissue. Just because you find it stuck to two bones doesn't mean it's the gristle.

/jzero

[/ QUOTE ]

of course, theres a million reasons how some flesh from some modern day animal can be found inside a tyrannosaurus femur buried in 70 million year old sandstone

shotgun · Mar 2005

heh,
like i said in another thread,
dont trust the damn media!

tpe · Mar 2005

there is a fair chance it is not a con, it was published in Journal reference: Science (vol 307, p 1952) which is very reputable and the peer review is hard as nails when trying to get into it.

tpe

sal_manilla · Mar 2005

It reminds me of a great Q3 model one of our Polycounters did back in the day.

There is scientific specualtion about the actual color of the skin in that it may not be the dull, drab colors of our Alligator, Rhino or Elephant. Our artists experimented with several skins.....take a look here.

Hollowmind · Mar 2005

Ah Noserider's good old fang model. Seems old nosie has a thing for ancient giant lizards.

frosty · Mar 2005

Maybe t rex is not that old?

70 million year old soft tissue found on T-Rex....

Replies