289-Million-Year-Old Cave System Preserves Oldest-Known Fossilized Skin

289-Million-Year-Old Cave System Preserves Oldest-Known Fossilized Skin
www.sci.news...
January 15, 2024

A fragment of fossilized skin collected from the Richards Spur limestone cave system in Oklahoma, the United States, is at least 21 million years older than previously described skin fossils.

It’s the oldest example of preserved epidermis, the outermost layer of skin in terrestrial reptiles, birds, and mammals, which was an important evolutionary adaptation in the transition to life on land.

Now looking at the above scalely picture this is a pretty cool find! However according to this article..

The skin fragment, which is smaller than a fingernail, has a pebbled surface and most closely resembles crocodile skin.

These are little tiny skin fragments...so I am thinking okay cool...but I wonder what sort of reptile did these come from?

The newly-described fossilized skin belonged to Captorhinus aguti, a species of early reptile that lived during the Permian period, around 289 million years ago.

SO I'm thinking this sounds like a beast of a reptile and soon come to find out... NOPE! Just a wee little guy hahah. I drew in the arrow in the comparison photo


LIzard

Pardon me, but if it is 21 million years older than other skin samples, just how the hell do they know what it comes from?

(Not directed at you OP, just thinking out loud)

originally posted by: chiefsmom
Pardon me, but if it is 21 million years older than other skin samples, just how the hell do they know what it comes from?

(Not directed at you OP, just thinking out loud)

I think it has to do with carbon dating? I'm no expert either, but that is a good question.

Ancient lizard people.

On the real, some carbon dating will place it at 20,000 years old, and another will date it at a million years old.

I've never trusted carbon dating. It seems as biased at all this other controlled science we've been dealing with.

Not sure what is true or not.

So I say, ancent lizard people.

a reply to: chiefsmom

They probably have fossils of that reptile, that are found in that region, and found within that specific geological timescale that would put those creatures in. Narrowing it down I suppose.

It’s actually skin from our reptilian overlords that bioengineered us, and now they have to cover it up.

😁

originally posted by: chiefsmom
Pardon me, but if it is 21 million years older than other skin samples, just how the hell do they know what it comes from?

(Not directed at you OP, just thinking out loud)

They assume the date of the cave where it was found and then extrapolate the date of the organism to that time period. If you have a degree in science you can just make up numbers and get published as long as it goes along with the mainstream narrative

S&F.... really interesting!
Thank you
Rainbows
Jane

originally posted by: Skywatcher2011

originally posted by: chiefsmom
Pardon me, but if it is 21 million years older than other skin samples, just how the hell do they know what it comes from?

(Not directed at you OP, just thinking out loud)

I think it has to do with carbon dating? I'm no expert either, but that is a good question.

Is carbon dating accurate?

Seeing this and the other thread about the mantis in amber, I thought everything was supersized in the dinosaur ages ‘shrug’ . My first thought too was also how the hell they know what animal it belongs to.

originally posted by: Leftiris13
Ancient lizard people.

On the real, some carbon dating will place it at 20,000 years old, and another will date it at a million years old.

I've never trusted carbon dating. It seems as biased at all this other controlled science we've been dealing with.

Not sure what is true or not.

So I say, ancent lizard people.

Carbon dating on pure samples is pretty accurate, what you talk about is when there are impurities from newer times interfering.
However the place where something is found will also be taken into consideration.
If they found in in a mine, embedded in a millions of years old strata deep underground, chances are it is the same age.

Any illogical variation like a test showing it to be much younger should be treated as an error and after eliminating possible contamination should be repeated.