Could this be a bit of a blow to Darwinists?
Despite being 155 million years old (or so the scientists say) this squid fossil is so perfectly preserved it looks as though it died much more recently (maybe it did).
In fact, scientists have even been able to extract the ink from the animal and used it to paint a picture of what the animal looked like.
The animal died in what is now Wiltshire during the Jurassic period.
The odds on finding a squid’s ink sac intact after so long are put at a billion to one.
155million years old and still inky: The perfectly preserved squid fossil amazing scientists
By David Derbyshire
19th August 2009
Daily Mail
The inky squid fossil was found in Wiltshire
The squid-like creature perished some 155million years ago.
But despite the vast passage of time, experts who unearthed the fossilised remains were able to extract ink from its perfectly-preserved sac and use it to paint a picture of the ancient animal.
The odds of finding something as delicate as a squid’s ink sac intact after so long are put at a billion to one.
An eye on history: A palaeontologist views the fossil found in inland Wiltshire
The key is the speed with which it was fossilised in rocks in Wiltshire that were under the sea during the Jurassic period.
Scientists describe it as the Medusa effect, after the monster in Greek mythology whose face was so terrible to behold that anyone gazing at her was turned to stone.
Dr Phil Wilby, who led the team which found the fossil, said: ‘The decomposition process usually means only the hard parts of an animal are preserved.
‘It is extremely rare to find any fossil with the soft parts preserved. We call it the Medusa effect - specimens turn to stone within a matter of days, before the soft parts can be eaten away.’
Pen and (very, very old) ink: The squid's pigment is used to draw a description of it
The inch-long ink sac had become separated from its owner - Belemnotheutis antiquus - which Dr Wilby said was ‘squid-like but not the same as a modern-day squid’.
However the black ink was of exactly the same structure as that of today’s version. Although solidified, some was ground up with an ammonia solution to make paint.
The ink sac was among several thousand fossils removed from the site by Dr Wilby, of the British Geological Survey.
He hopes that analysing them will reveal why so many creatures perished in the area and how some have been so well-preserved they look as if they have only just died.
Artist's impression: How the creature would have looked during the Jurassic era
The site was known about in the Victorian era and was one of the first in the world to yield fossils of fragile muscle and stomach tissue.
But its exact location became lost until rediscovered recently by Dr Wilby.
READERS' COMMENTS
Wow. I thought only the United States had any vocal fundamentalists.
- Rick Box, Glenview, Illinois
**********************************
It doesn't really matter what these scientists say about the age of a fossil. 'it must have fossilised very quickly' or 'it took millions of years'.
They age fossils from the rocks that they are in. And they age rocks from the fossils they contain.
Scientists say what they want about the age of fossils. As long as it suits their religion that it all occurred by pure chance, and for that faith they need very long time periods.
How is it that there are so many creatures alive today which are also found in the fossil record?.
- michael dean, brentwood, essex
**********************************
wahahaha155million years old!!! More pseudo science from the evo-fan boy camp!!
That's made my day
- XY, Earth
************************************
"The key is the speed with which it was fossilised in rocks in Wiltshire that were under the sea during the Jurassic period."
Why are we consistently told fossils take millions of years to form, when searching the ocean's floor cannot produce one single half-formed fossil under construction?
Why am I in the minority in thinking - yes this makes perfect sense that fossils were formed under water (see quote above); how the Cambrian rock layer contains both complex creatures and simplistic bacterium (even containing millions of cells) together?
I wonder what catastrophic event produced so many fossils at once, worldwide, with the pressure of water, in such a moment of time that a mother ichthyosaur was caught giving birth (did her labour take a million years to fossilise?)
After hundreds of millions of years of ice ages, volcanoes and incinerating meteors you can still write with ink from this creature? It DEFINITELY takes more blind faith to believe in this than Creation.
- Lynz, Antrim, N.Ireland
**********************************
From time to time, new methods of dating are developed. How reliable are these? Regarding one known as thermoluminescence, The New Encyclopædia Britannica (1976, Macropædia, Vol. 5, p. 509) says: "Hope rather than accomplishment mainly characterizes the status of thermoluminescence dating at the present time." Also, Science (August 28, 1981, p. 1003) reports that a skeleton showing an age of 70,000 years by amino acid racemization gave only 8,300 or 9,000 years by radioactive dating.
Popular Science (November 1979, p. 81) reports that physicist Robert Gentry "believes that all of the dates determined by radioactive decay may be off-not only by a few years, but by orders of magnitude." The article points out that his findings would lead to the conclusion that "man, instead of having walked the earth for 3.6 million years, may have been around for only a few thousand."
What proof do they offer that this find is 155m years old. My guess is they guessed it or imagined it.
- P Timings, Hampton, London
***********************************
Another example of the facts fitting the theory from our Darwinian friends.
If it is so "fresh", then maybe it isn't quite so old as you think.
But that would be unthinkable wouldn't it, so it is "amazingly well preserved for its age".
Nice one.
- steve, yarm, north yorkshire
********************************
A trully amazing find, I like the fact the ink was used to draw a picture of the actual creature they found.
- Neil, Dunfermline, Scotland
dailymail.co.uk
Despite being 155 million years old (or so the scientists say) this squid fossil is so perfectly preserved it looks as though it died much more recently (maybe it did).
In fact, scientists have even been able to extract the ink from the animal and used it to paint a picture of what the animal looked like.
The animal died in what is now Wiltshire during the Jurassic period.
The odds on finding a squid’s ink sac intact after so long are put at a billion to one.
155million years old and still inky: The perfectly preserved squid fossil amazing scientists
By David Derbyshire
19th August 2009
Daily Mail
The inky squid fossil was found in Wiltshire
The squid-like creature perished some 155million years ago.
But despite the vast passage of time, experts who unearthed the fossilised remains were able to extract ink from its perfectly-preserved sac and use it to paint a picture of the ancient animal.
The odds of finding something as delicate as a squid’s ink sac intact after so long are put at a billion to one.
An eye on history: A palaeontologist views the fossil found in inland Wiltshire
The key is the speed with which it was fossilised in rocks in Wiltshire that were under the sea during the Jurassic period.
Scientists describe it as the Medusa effect, after the monster in Greek mythology whose face was so terrible to behold that anyone gazing at her was turned to stone.
Dr Phil Wilby, who led the team which found the fossil, said: ‘The decomposition process usually means only the hard parts of an animal are preserved.
‘It is extremely rare to find any fossil with the soft parts preserved. We call it the Medusa effect - specimens turn to stone within a matter of days, before the soft parts can be eaten away.’
Pen and (very, very old) ink: The squid's pigment is used to draw a description of it
The inch-long ink sac had become separated from its owner - Belemnotheutis antiquus - which Dr Wilby said was ‘squid-like but not the same as a modern-day squid’.
However the black ink was of exactly the same structure as that of today’s version. Although solidified, some was ground up with an ammonia solution to make paint.
The ink sac was among several thousand fossils removed from the site by Dr Wilby, of the British Geological Survey.
He hopes that analysing them will reveal why so many creatures perished in the area and how some have been so well-preserved they look as if they have only just died.
Artist's impression: How the creature would have looked during the Jurassic era
The site was known about in the Victorian era and was one of the first in the world to yield fossils of fragile muscle and stomach tissue.
But its exact location became lost until rediscovered recently by Dr Wilby.
READERS' COMMENTS
Wow. I thought only the United States had any vocal fundamentalists.
- Rick Box, Glenview, Illinois
**********************************
It doesn't really matter what these scientists say about the age of a fossil. 'it must have fossilised very quickly' or 'it took millions of years'.
They age fossils from the rocks that they are in. And they age rocks from the fossils they contain.
Scientists say what they want about the age of fossils. As long as it suits their religion that it all occurred by pure chance, and for that faith they need very long time periods.
How is it that there are so many creatures alive today which are also found in the fossil record?.
- michael dean, brentwood, essex
**********************************
wahahaha155million years old!!! More pseudo science from the evo-fan boy camp!!
That's made my day
- XY, Earth
************************************
"The key is the speed with which it was fossilised in rocks in Wiltshire that were under the sea during the Jurassic period."
Why are we consistently told fossils take millions of years to form, when searching the ocean's floor cannot produce one single half-formed fossil under construction?
Why am I in the minority in thinking - yes this makes perfect sense that fossils were formed under water (see quote above); how the Cambrian rock layer contains both complex creatures and simplistic bacterium (even containing millions of cells) together?
I wonder what catastrophic event produced so many fossils at once, worldwide, with the pressure of water, in such a moment of time that a mother ichthyosaur was caught giving birth (did her labour take a million years to fossilise?)
After hundreds of millions of years of ice ages, volcanoes and incinerating meteors you can still write with ink from this creature? It DEFINITELY takes more blind faith to believe in this than Creation.
- Lynz, Antrim, N.Ireland
**********************************
From time to time, new methods of dating are developed. How reliable are these? Regarding one known as thermoluminescence, The New Encyclopædia Britannica (1976, Macropædia, Vol. 5, p. 509) says: "Hope rather than accomplishment mainly characterizes the status of thermoluminescence dating at the present time." Also, Science (August 28, 1981, p. 1003) reports that a skeleton showing an age of 70,000 years by amino acid racemization gave only 8,300 or 9,000 years by radioactive dating.
Popular Science (November 1979, p. 81) reports that physicist Robert Gentry "believes that all of the dates determined by radioactive decay may be off-not only by a few years, but by orders of magnitude." The article points out that his findings would lead to the conclusion that "man, instead of having walked the earth for 3.6 million years, may have been around for only a few thousand."
What proof do they offer that this find is 155m years old. My guess is they guessed it or imagined it.
- P Timings, Hampton, London
***********************************
Another example of the facts fitting the theory from our Darwinian friends.
If it is so "fresh", then maybe it isn't quite so old as you think.
But that would be unthinkable wouldn't it, so it is "amazingly well preserved for its age".
Nice one.
- steve, yarm, north yorkshire
********************************
A trully amazing find, I like the fact the ink was used to draw a picture of the actual creature they found.
- Neil, Dunfermline, Scotland
dailymail.co.uk
Last edited:
