[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Soft Tissue Preservation




Mike,
I too was a little surprised at the lack of comment on the "coupled oviraptors". But given the controversy over the dinosaur "heart", I am not surprised that there would be some hesitant skepticism toward these claims of a male reproductive organ being preserved.
If it is true, it will be an astounding find, but I'm just going to wait and see. I doubt that it is any kind of hoax, but there is certainly the possibility it is not what they think it is, and as more people can evaluate it, the more likely a consensus can be reached one way or the other. I hope it is true, but don't want to get my hopes up too much.
---------Ken
********************************************


From: Mike Taylor <mike@tecc.co.uk>
Reply-To: mike@tecc.co.uk
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Soft Tissue Preservation
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 14:40:09 +0100

> Date: Mon, 9 Jul 2001 16:50:40 +0000
> From: bh480@scn.org
>
> Because of at least one personal request, here's a quick
> (and less than perfect) translation of the German text of
> the article (somebody else may do better!):
> [...]
> The preparation of the fossil was done entirely under
> ultraviolet light.  Besides the excellently preserved skin
> impressions of the wing and flight surfaces, previously
> unknown soft-tissue structures in the head region and on
> the feet were brought to light. Thus the researchers not
> only exposed the remains of  the bizarre dermal comb on
> top of the head --similar to that known from other
> pterosaurs-- but could detect for the first time a horny
> beak-sheath on the tips of the jaws.

I've been wondering for a while whether it's possible that soft-tissue
preservation is much more common than we realise, and the problem is
mainly one of knowing what to look for.  Then I came across this
oldish DML message (I'm catching up on some stuff that I missed) which
seems to indicate that there may be something in this.  Anyone care to
comment?

If preparing under UV light is one way to help identify soft tissue,
then might there be others?

BTW., speaking of soft tissue (er, or probably quite hard tissue,
under the circumstances :-) I'm surprised no-one's commented yet on
the alleged copulating oviraptors.  It seems too good to be true.  Is
it?  Is the whole thing just a hoax so obvious that everyone except me
is just discarding it?

... and just as the _Thescelosaurus_ with the alleged heart got its
own website, www.dinoheart.org, someone should start thinking about a
site for the oviraptors.  I've checked and www.dinowilly.org is still
free -- better snap it up before it gets squatted :-)

... and once this specimen is properly prepared, it can go on display
alongside the famous _Velociraptor_-and-_Protoceratops_ fossil, in the
"F****ing Dinosaurs" exhibition.  (I mean "Fornicating", of course :-)

[OK, enough with the jokes already.  I'll stop now before Mickey or
Mary comes down on me!]

 _/|_  _______________________________________________________________
/o ) \/  Mike Taylor   <mike@miketaylor.org.uk>   www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\  "Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good" --
       Romans 12:21



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp