It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dinosaur Tail Discovered Trapped in Amber is Once in Lifetime Find

page: 6
118
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 04:15 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 




posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 04:16 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 10 2016 @ 04:18 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 06:42 AM
link   
While dinosaurs may not have sported scales like a reptile, the dinosaur descendants (birds) sport something similar like on these ostrich feet -





I can imagine dinosaurs without feathers with bare skin like this.



posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 07:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Butterfinger

YES SHE IS



posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   
a reply to: nOraKat I THOUGHT THAT WAS A DINOSAUR FOOT



posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 10:38 PM
link   
a reply to: EchoesInTime




The amazing specimen was discovered at an Amber Market in Northern Myanmar near the Chinese border. The tail is from a 99 million year old dinosaur known as a young Coelurosaur. They come from the same group as the predatory velociraptors and the tyrannosaurus.


Couple of things that got me curious

So it's an Amber Market where they found the specimen. I'm curious how was it originally found? Dug up or was just lying around? Who found it and where did he/she found it?

If per claim the specimen is "from a 99 million year old dinosaur" would it be correct to say then the amber is of the same age as the "feather"?

Curious.


edit on 11-12-2016 by edmc^2 because: cc



posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 10:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
Amazing find, so fascinating.

But, are we going to ignore the fact that ants have not changed what so ever for almost 100 million years?


I can't really say whether ants have changed in the last 100 million years (I'd need to go research that, and it's late), but there are lots of animals that haven't changed for 100 million years.

There are also animals that did lead to other branches on the tree of species, but which didn't go extinct and are still here. Lots of examples of this, in fact.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that no one needs to ignore anything. There is nothing contradictory about one animal changing and another one staying the same.



posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 10:53 PM
link   
Birds actually are dinosaurs. They are a group of therapod dinosaurs.

Even though Avia is within Dinosauria, some still find it controversial to say so, but generally this controversy is not found within scientific circles.

This clip makes me want to say, "Clever girl."


edit on 11-12-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 10:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers
Birds actually are dinosaurs. They are a group of therapod dinosaurs.

Even though Avia is within Dinosauria, some still find it controversial to say so, but generally this controversy is not found within scientific circles.

This clip makes me want to say, "Clever girl."



Like Climate Change?



posted on Dec, 11 2016 @ 11:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: edmc^2


Like Climate Change?


I guess there is some similarity, but it's caused by different things. Generally speaking, the reason it's not controverial within the sciences to refer to birds as dinosaurs is because those in the field are familiar with the changes in cladistics that have taken place in the last 30 years, while those outside the relevant branches of science often are not.

Most non-paleontologists would say that birds evolved from dinosaurs. A paleontologist would point out that avia is within dinosauria, and would also point out the gravitation of the field toward monophyletic clades.
edit on 11-12-2016 by Greggers because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2016 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: Bluntone22
What's truly amazing is that it looks like ants haven't changed much in 100 million years.


There goes evolution out the window.


You mean, here is more evidence confirming what we already knew that birds and dinosaurs are much more related than we realized. But yeah your silly conspiracy theory is real, and all the 300,000 research papers are made up. LMAO.



posted on Dec, 12 2016 @ 11:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: Justoneman

originally posted by: strongfp
Amazing find, so fascinating.

But, are we going to ignore the fact that ants have not changed what so ever for almost 100 million years?


I second that

AND we have a snapshot of time we can all peer into with this find.


You second something that was pure speculation and flat out wrong? Okay then.



posted on Dec, 12 2016 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Oh do tell
Prove that puts evolution out the window



posted on Dec, 13 2016 @ 08:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Crumbles
a reply to: EchoesInTime

Jurassic Park here we comes. The DNA was preserved aswell?

Did you read it?



posted on Dec, 20 2016 @ 01:59 PM
link   
a reply to: EchoesInTime

Dinosaurs were more interesting than we thought! Thanks for sharing



posted on Dec, 25 2016 @ 07:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Greggers
Birds actually are dinosaurs. They are a group of therapod dinosaurs.

Indeed. Brids are closer related to the T-Rex than the T-Rex is related to sauropods (those big herbivorous dinos).



new topics

top topics



 
118
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join