Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Canada Science

Alberta Scientists Discover Largest-Ever Cache of Dinosaur Bones 154

Posted by Soulskill from the dino-mother-lode dept.
Cryolithic writes "The largest cache of dinosaur bones ever found has been unearthed in Alberta. From the article: '... officials at the Royal Tyrrell Museum say the Hilda site provides the first solid evidence that some horned dinosaur herds were much larger than previously thought, with numbers comfortably in the high hundreds to low thousands. ... Rather than picturing the animals as drowning while crossing a river, a classic scenario that has been used to explain bonebed occurrences at many sites in Alberta, the research team interpreted the vast coastal landscape as being submerged during tropical storms or hurricanes. With no high ground to escape to, most of the members of the herd drowned in the rising coastal waters. Carcasses were deposited in clumps across kilometers of ancient landscape as floodwaters receded.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Alberta Scientists Discover Largest-Ever Cache of Dinosaur Bones More

Alberta Scientists Discover Largest-Ever Cache of Dinosaur Bones

Comments Filter:

  • It's not what it would seem. (Score:5, Funny)

    by migla ( 1099771 ) on Friday June 18, 2010 @05:06PM (#32619006)

    "God put those there to test our faith."

    • Ha! That's what you think! It's just proof there was a world wide flood!

      • "Oh look, the earth went through a global warming period in the 2000s just like this ancient book says! The rest must be true too!"

    • Re:It's not what it would seem. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Monkeedude1212 ( 1560403 ) on Friday June 18, 2010 @05:32PM (#32619428) Journal

      I'm about 99% certain you were doing that for the lolz and you're not some bible-thumping-hick, but regardless I'm going to go ahead and troll a response that is related to the article.

      First and foremost, I'm going to have to say that the Royal Tyrrell Museum is quite possibly the most badass museum on the face of the planet. Let me go ahead and also go out on a limb and say that Drumheller (the city/town in which the Royal Tyrell Museum resides) would probably be the best place for a kid to grow up. Do a google image search if you don't believe me, but the town is literally littered with dinosaur tourist traps. Dinosaurs everywhere. It's not uncommon for people to go on random excursions and find a dinosaur bone or two sticking out of the hills, which have ever-shifting mud and dirt being in the badlands region that they are. I grew up in Calgary so I was about an hour and a half away from Drumheller, but I still don't think I go there often enough, even though I go at least once a summer.

      So, to say that the biggest cache of dinosaur bones found in Alberta does not at all strike me surprised. I think we probably held the previous 3 records as well. Even in the mountain ranges people find dinosaur bones, which always kind of struck me as odd, but I guess it suggests how young some mountains really are. You may have heard of these fossilized things called ammonites [fossilmuseum.net] - they are pretty common in mountain ranges all over the world. Old reminents of ancient sea life. However, only in this certain region in Alberta do they get this rainbowy colour. I found it kind of interesting. Alberta is also known for its Oilsands, one of Canada's sources for oil nowawdays, and if I had to venture a guess, its because we had lots and lots of dinosaurs.

      In response to the whole "test our faith" - anyone who believes that HAS to go to the Tyrell Museum. They have set up an amazing display of how we've actually linked the timeline. Aside from the first exhibit, which is sort of their "Prize displays" - everything is in chronological order. You go back hundreds of millions of years and see some of the marine life fossils, then you work your way into dinosaurs, mix in marine reptiles every now and then, then you get a mix of neanderthals and ice age and tribal stages of life, working into today.

      All in all, by the end of it, if you don't believe in dinosaurs, you've managed to ignore rock solid (pun intended) evidence presented to you before your eyes.

      • All in all, by the end of it, if you don't believe in dinosaurs, you've managed to ignore rock solid (pun intended) evidence presented to you before your eyes.

        Five minutes in the primate house of any major metropolitan zoo should be enough to convince any thinking person that humans are part of the same evolutionary tree, but it's obviously not. If you've been indoctrinated as a child to believe certain absurd things in order to save your soul from an eternity of torment, you may not be able to shake off t

        • Religion is nothing but child abuse, and no truly enlightened society would tolerate it.

          Yes. Enlightened people. They just won't tolerate intolerance.

          • Responses like this have always struck me as moronic, and I hope that you were just joking. There's a difference between tolerant and fully permissive. Tolerance has limits.

            • But those limits have nothing to do with many people's religious beliefs. As long as they continue to make it their business, and not others' (not that this always happens by a long shot), tolerance is in order.

              Not to mention that calling religious teachings "child abuse", or insinuating that it is as bad as racism (as the above AC did) is pathetic. Ironic that such mindless fanatics are the ones so loudly denouncing mindless religious fanaticism.

        • No truly enlightened person would claim that someone else's honest, peaceful attempt to teach their children truth (as they see it, however wrong they may be) is child abuse. Just saying.

          • No truly enlightened person would claim that someone else's honest, peaceful attempt to teach their children truth (as they see it, however wrong they may be) is child abuse. Just saying.

            Really? How much do you know about Fred Phelps and his family, out of curiosity?

            • Only what a cursory reading of Wikipedia gives, but it doesn't matter. There are good religious people, and bad religious people. There are good atheistic people, and bad atheistic people. It's not too hard to see that if religion (or lack thereof) was the cause of people's good/bad character, there would be no people with similar religious beliefs, but opposite moral characters. Religion, then, while no doubt an important factor in a person's development (as are any number of other things), is not the sole

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by jamesh ( 87723 )

            That's a tricky one. I've listened to a few radio interviews with a guy who was previously the highest ranking member of the kkk. He's enlightened now, but has a good understanding of how he came to hate certain people as much as he did. In his case he was brainwashed by people other than his parents, but if those people had kids you can bet that's what they'd do, and IMHO that's abuse even if it's done in the spirit of a perceived 'truth'.

            You stuck the words 'honest', and 'peaceful' in there as a sort of d

            • I agree that people can be warped, but I mean actually peaceful, not someone who is twisted into believing that they are doing good while they do evil. When you talk about certain beliefs full of hate and vitriol, I can understand denouncing them, but the GP's claim was simply "religion". I refuse to acknowledge a statement as truthful which says that ALL religion is child abuse. There are plenty of religious people out there whose beliefs are truly harmless (although you or I may find them silly). For ever

              • I agree that people can be warped, but I mean actually peaceful, not someone who is twisted into believing that they are doing good while they do evil

                That's just more weasel-language, though. What's "evil"? To me, the fact that Leonardo da Vinci didn't have his own 8-core Mac Pro is "evil."

                Teaching kids ridiculous things backed up with threats they're too young to understand has an effect that goes beyond the immediate families involved. All of civilization suffers when we indulge superstition. Sound ra

                • That's just more weasel-language, though. What's "evil"? To me, the fact that Leonardo da Vinci didn't have his own 8-core Mac Pro is "evil."

                  Oh, please. The fact that a term is difficult to nail down precisely doesn't mean it can't be used to communicate effectively. If that were the case, we would have stopped using the term "art" long ago.

                  Religion, being opt-in stupidity, certainly costs us all...

                  Speak for yourself. It's never cost me a thing. Furthermore, your assertion that it's "stupidity" isn't really well-founded, since the fundamental concept behind religion (existence of a deity) is purely a matter of opinion, and can neither be proven nor disproven. Certain tenets of certain religions may be a

                • Oh, and I should add that even if I were to accept as true everything you say here (which I don't, obviously)... that still would not make religion "nothing more than child abuse". Child abuse, in my book, requires the intent to harm the child. At worst, you could say that a parent is guilty of negligence for passing their religious beliefs along to their children.

                  • At worst, you could say that a parent is guilty of negligence for passing their religious beliefs along to their children.

                    A negligence charge might be a good first step. In the US, failure to send your child to school or otherwise account for his/her K-12 education is indeed a criminal matter, and I think it's fair to apply the reasoning behind truancy laws here as well. If your child grows up without the knowledge that 2+2=4, or who George Washington was, or what a cell is -- or with the knowledge that a

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by TheLink ( 130905 )
                  > All of civilization suffers when we indulge superstition.

                  Really?
                  1) The placebo effect works very well (google if you don't believe me).
                  2) People who believe in some unseen thing/being who/that can help, even if that unseen thing/being doesn't exist can more easily tap into the placebo effect.
                  3) Taking into account #2, if a particular religion causes less net harm/loss, the adherents to that religion would have an advantage over "strict atheists" - who certainly aren't going to be asking for help from a

                  • The placebo effect works very well (google if you don't believe me).

                    The placebo effect is only meaningful if you don't have a real treatment. Next time you come down with a serious illness, how about we just give you a glass of Kool-Aid and let the placebo effect take its course?

                    Atheists are just as prone to delusions, after all even Richard Dawkins incorrectly claims that "atheism is evidence of a healthy, independent mind" - you can go to a hospital to find atheist patients with unhealthy minds.

                    Truly, yo

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by TheLink ( 130905 )
                      People do not always have timely access to real medical treatment.

                      So over many generations it is likely that a group of people who can more easily tap the placebo effect will do better than a group of people who can't.

                      > Well, sure. Newton was an alchemist, but his irrational thinking in that field didn't limit his other work. It didn't help, either, but hey, we all need our hobbies.

                      Yes and hence people with such issues may not actually negatively affect the long term survivability of the group. In contra

                    • Yes and hence people with such issues may not actually negatively affect the long term survivability of the group.

                      I used to think the same way, until Bush II used his faith to justify starting optional wars with my tax dollars, and in my name. The stem-cell funding brouhaha and the advent of taxpayer-funded "faith based initiatives" pushed me the rest of the way over the edge.

                      Eventually I realized that religion posed a more general problem: in an age of nuclear weapons, the idea that it's acceptable for o

                    • Re: (Score:2)

                      by TheLink ( 130905 )
                      1) Show me evidence that Bush started started the optional wars because of his religion. He did have backing from many others at the top for the war, so what makes you think he started those wars because of his religion?

                      2) You really believe atheists are significantly less likely to start optional wars? You may be right but given what I see from Stalin and Mao, it's not great comfort if the Great Atheist Leader starts killing millions of his own citizens rather those of some other country.

                      3) As for Galileo,

                    • 1) Show me evidence that Bush started started the optional wars because of his religion. He did have backing from many others at the top for the war, so what makes you think he started those wars because of his religion?

                      There are various quotes floating around, some of them apocryphal -- such as this [bbc.co.uk] one reported by the BBC.

                      Personally I'm not convinced that he believed he was starting the Afghan and Iraqi wars at God's prompting, even if he claimed he did. He just sold them as modern-day crusades (literall

                  • Re: (Score:2)

                    by epine ( 68316 )

                    If the placebo effect works, it has no link with superstition. Superstition is the belief in things that don't exist or don't work.

                    To really test the placebo effect, you'd have to test people who don't even know they are being tested (sneak the placebo into their diet). Or perhaps they need to perform the placebo study on total amnesiacs. Unfortunately, if the subjects suddenly began to recall everything, that would mess the protocol up.

                    I grew up near Calgary. Tyrrell rocks. It's also neat how you swoo

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by wisty ( 1335733 )

          All in all, by the end of it, if you don't believe in dinosaurs, you've managed to ignore rock solid (pun intended) evidence presented to you before your eyes.

          Five minutes in the primate house of any major metropolitan zoo should be enough to convince any thinking person that humans are part of the same evolutionary tree, but it's obviously not. If you've been indoctrinated as a child to believe certain absurd things in order to save your soul from an eternity of torment, you may not be able to shake off the bullshit just by reading author X, taking course Y, or visiting exhibit Z.

          Religion is nothing but child abuse, and no truly enlightened society would tolerate it.

          Five minutes in any middle school should be enough to convince any thinking person that humans are part of the same evolutionary tree, but it's obviously not.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by snowraver1 ( 1052510 )
        These wern't actually found that close to Drumheller. They were found near the tiny village (hamlet?) of Hilda, which is about 50 KM NE from Medicine Hat.

      • Sure like I'm gonna believe some monkey

      • Be sure to hit the Big Valley Creation Science Museum [bvcsm.com] on the way home to set yourself straight again.

        • I've decided I have to visit that place this summer.

          I mean I'll feel weird having to fork over $5 to someone I think I'll disagree with, but it'll be interesting to see what evidence they have. My girlfriend has studied human history quite a bit and has a few geology courses under her belt, so she'll be my guiding star.

      • And this comment, defensive as it is, is a perfect example right here of why the religious retards are gaining ground:
        Defensive means that the defender thinks that without his defense, he would lose the argument. Or else he would not have to defend it.
        Which means he himself puts himself in the weak position, even though there is absolutely no reason to do so in the first place.
        We don’t have to defend our claims.
        They have to defend theirs.

        Just remember that one thing when arguing with an idiot: The mor

        • We don’t have to defend our claims.

          Everyone has to defend their claims. Maybe you're trying to say that said claims have already been sufficiently defended, but that's different.

      • Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)

        by Randle_Revar ( 229304 )

        >Drumheller (the city/town in which the Royal Tyrell Museum resides) would probably be the best place for a kid to grow up

        Except for the part where it is in Alberta, the Texas of the North.

        Don't get me wrong, I love the Tyrell (only went there twice as a kid, it's a fair drive from Montana), and Canada is pretty cool, but Alberta in general is only suitable for visiting (sorry, I'm just more of a BC/Washington coastal type of guy).

        >Alberta is also known for its Oilsands, one of Canada's sources for oi

      • Re:It's not what it would seem. (Score:4, Funny)

        by ladadadada ( 454328 ) on Saturday June 19, 2010 @05:00PM (#32627620) Homepage

        The good man is not a troll and was indeed quoting one of funniest comedians of our time who is also conveniently mentioned in his sig. The follow up line was:

        Bill: "I think God put you here to test my faith, Dude. You actually believe that?"
        Young earth creationist: "Uh huh."
        Bill: "Does that trouble anyone here? The idea that God.. might be...fuckin' with our heads? I have trouble sleeping with that knowledge. Some prankster God running around: "Hu hu ho. We will see who believes in me now, ha HA.”

        And now, for some more dinosaur based humour from Bill:

        Bill: “You believe the world's 12 thousand years old?"
        YEC: "That's right."
        Bill: "Okay I got a question to ask you."
        YEC: "Okay"
        Bill: "It's a one word question."
        YEC: "Uh huh."
        Bill: "Dinosaurs."

        Bill: " You know the world's 12 thousand years old and dinosaurs existed, they existed in that time, you'd think it would have been mentioned in the fucking Bible at some point. "And lo Jesus and the disciples walked to Nazareth. But the trail was blocked by a giant brontosaurus...with a splinter in his paw. And O the disciples did run a shriekin': 'What a big fucking lizard, Lord!' But Jesus was unafraid and he took the splinter from the brontosaurus's paw and the big lizard became his friend.”

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hkmwbz ( 531650 )
      There are probably quite a few people who are like that :)

      "God exists because there's evidence to the contrary!"

    • A massive flood...don't get me started.

    • God made the world just like it is He made the fossils just to tease us Old bones to test our faith in Jesus Yeah, this'll all be on the quiz http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uIwiPsgRrOs [youtube.com] Great guy, great guy. I especially like his "Ted Haggard Is Completely Heterosexual" song.

    • No! You got it wrong Dummy! SATAN put them there to turn peopel away from God and the Bibble.

      • No! You got it wrong Dummy! SATAN put them there to turn peopel away from God and the Bibble.

        I actually had someone say that to me in all seriousness. Totally unexpected and coming as it did from an otherwise pretty smart guy, it left me speechless.

  • "they seem to have died in some kind of dino org ... uhm, you know."
    "what was the exact cause?"
    "crushed pelvises."

  • They died in the great flood (Score:3, Funny)

    by aristotle-dude ( 626586 ) on Friday June 18, 2010 @05:14PM (#32619136)
    They discovered a large herd of animals which died in a a large flood event.

    What did this remind you of?

    Put away your bullshit anti-religious rhetoric and look at the evidence honestly. Mitochondrial Eve, this flood evidence are all examples of science rediscovering what people have known for centuries. Scientist see something right in front of them but they just have to change a few details around to keep themselves from sounding like "creationists" to their colleagues.

    Science now knows that it is possible for humans to live for centuries if their Telomeres were to not deteriorate. There have been examples this phenomenon. Google "immortal cells" for a story about cancer cells that are still alive when their original host had passed on long ago.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by zill ( 1690130 )
      Damn you Noah! Why didn't you bring some dinosaurs on your ark?

      Now I'll never fulfill my childhood dreams of having a pet velociraptor.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Chih ( 1284150 )
      Mod Parent YHWH

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Relic of the Future ( 118669 )
      "See! See! If you squint real hard and ignore all the details, it looks like I could maybe have been right."

      Or:

      "See! See! A flood happened once, and there's also a flood in the Bible, therefore it must all be true!"

      Or: I have been epically trolled, in which case, well done. Either way, I have to admit that the use of He-La as an appeal to biblical-infallibility, that's the first time I've seen that; a most impressive stretch, and kudos on it as well.

    • The religious have always managed to adapt their pet mythologies to the evidence of the day. Scientists avoid sounding like creationists in front of their colleagues by following the evidence, rather than exclaiming "GODIDIT!", rolling around on the floor, and speaking in tongues. Nice try, tho.

      • I'll bite. What disproves - not Biblically speaking, but just the simple idea - the idea that there was a global flood? Because it seems like a lot of fossils are created during "great floods." Nobody seems to ever even suggest the idea that there was a global flood... every other idea is proposed (numerous "great floods," meteors hitting the earth, etc) but why is a global flood not proposed?

        Is it simply because a particular religion has that in their beliefs, or is there actual evidence for numerous "g

        • Re: (Score:1, Informative)

          by Anonymous Coward

          What disproves [...] the idea that there was a global flood? Because it seems like a lot of fossils are created during "great floods." Nobody seems to ever even suggest the idea that there was a global flood... every other idea is proposed (numerous "great floods," meteors hitting the earth, etc) but why is a global flood not proposed?

          Because there simply isn't enough fucking water on the planet?

        • Re:They died in 'a' great flood, not The Great Flo (Score:5, Informative)

          by JoshuaZ ( 1134087 ) on Friday June 18, 2010 @06:07PM (#32619870) Homepage

          I'll bite. What disproves - not Biblically speaking, but just the simple idea - the idea that there was a global flood? Because it seems like a lot of fossils are created during "great floods." Nobody seems to ever even suggest the idea that there was a global flood... every other idea is proposed (numerous "great floods," meteors hitting the earth, etc) but why is a global flood not proposed?

          Many different reasons:

          First, there's not enough water on Earth. So if it did occur, where did the other water go?

          Second, we don't see in the geological record evidence for a flood all at the same point in history. We see at different levels in the geologic column floods in different locations and some with no floods at all. If there were a global flood we'd see a universally dated flood (much as we see a universal iridium layer at the major asteroid impact 65 million years ago). This by itself should be enough.

          Third, and related to the above, we don't see any global die off that is closely connected to flood deposits.

          Fourth, we don't see the genetic bottlenecking that would have wiped out that many species. The genetic diversity of many species shows us that a global flood could not have occurred in the last 50,000 years at least, on genetic evidence alone.

          So the upshot? No global flood in the last 50,000 years just by easy genetic evidence. No global flood at all given lack of water. No global flood at all based on the geologic columns. If it turned out there had been a global flood anytime in the last billion years, we'd have to be so wrong about so much of basic science that it is difficult to find a good analogy for how wrong we'd have to be. We'd have to be about as wrong as it turning out that Julius Caesar never existed.

          • First, there's not enough water on Earth. So if it did occur, where did the other water go?

            Didn't you pay attention in 2nd grade history and science classes? Until like a thousand years ago, the Earth was flat, and the Earth is 70% water. That means water was once like 9000 miles deep. We're just lucky God dug such big holes for the oceans.

        • I'll bite. What disproves - not Biblically speaking, but just the simple idea - the idea that there was a global flood? Because it seems like a lot of fossils are created during "great floods." Nobody seems to ever even suggest the idea that there was a global flood... every other idea is proposed (numerous "great floods," meteors hitting the earth, etc) but why is a global flood not proposed?

          Is it simply because a particular religion has that in their beliefs, or is there actual evidence for numerous "great" floods as opposed to one global flood?

          Because to be a global flood it has to happen everywhere at the same time.

          And for a biblical flood the water has to be 5-1/2 miles deep.

          As for what disproves it, other than the utter lack of evidence, is the fact that every living creature would show an extreme genetic bottleneck in the recent past.

          But let's cut to the chase: For those of you who believe in the biblical flood, why did God try to fix the stated problem with a solution that didn't work. Forget the fact that He drowned all those babies and kit

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by mellestad ( 1301507 )
      So the world was flooded for months with over a mile of water, then all the bodies, still whole, settle in the same region, then they are trampled and eaten by dinosaur scavengers (presumably they just ran really fast from Noah's ark back to Alberta). Awesome, that explains everything.

    • Okay I'm not surprised or upset some nut job decided to post the usual whackjob theories. I'm surprised that multiple modded him. I'm upset that you modded him "interesting" and not "funny".

      WTF is wrong with you people today?

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by hkmwbz ( 531650 )
      Do you even know what Mitochondrial Eve is? Never mind that she and her "Adam" lived thousands of year apart. Never mind that ME lived 200K years ago. That's slightly more than the "less than 10K" thing YECs are talking about.

      A flood is evidence of God? Major local floods have occurred throughout history. That's why all creation myths mention global floods at some point. Because the humans who wrote them didn't know that there was more to the world than their tiny speck of land.

      What examples of humans l

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Yunzil ( 181064 )

      They discovered a large herd of animals which died in a a large flood event.
      What did this remind you of?

      All the other large herds of animals which have died in large flood events separated by thousands or millions of years?

      Put away your bullshit anti-religious rhetoric and look at the evidence honestly.

      OK.... done.

      Mitochondrial Eve

      Explain what you think Mitochondrial Eve means, and then we'll tell you why you're wrong.

      Science now knows that it is possible for humans to live for centuries if their Telomere

      • Science now knows that if my aunt had testicles, she'd be my uncle.

        I think I'll be stealing this line and altering it slightly for future use.

    • They discovered a large herd of animals which died in a a large flood event.

      What did this remind you of?

      It reminded me of dinosaurs that die in a lot of ways many people died.

      Are you seriously trying to spout the idea that our species lived along side dinosaurs? Do you have any idea exactly how much evidence there is to refute such a claim?

      I seriously don't see how you're linking long living Cancer cells to humans somehow living longer. You do know that Cancer is a BAD thing and that most people who get it are not going to live longer, right?

      I feel like you've somehow managed to drop the IQ of everyone in sla

    • Re:They died in the great flood (Score:5, Insightful)

      by bmo ( 77928 ) on Friday June 18, 2010 @05:46PM (#32619612)

      A creationist stands on his hind legs and says thusly:

      look at the evidence honestly.

      I've debated with Young Earth Creationists such as yourself.

      Newtonian physics doesn't mention God. Relativistic physics doesn't invoke God. Maxwell's equations don't involve God. Astronomy doesn't involve God. Electronics theory doesn't involve God. None of the sciences involve God. The biological sciences don't invoke God. Medicine doesn't invoke God. But Creationists such as yourself have no problem benefiting from the results of such science and the technology it helps create.

      It's more productive talking to a toothbrush. I'm tired of people such as yourself trying to drag us all back to the 12'th century with regards to knowledge. I've heard it for most of my 44 years on this planet.

      No. You're willfully stupid. Go away. And stop using all that Godless science and technology you rely on every day to get through modern life.

      Hypocrite.

      --
      BMO

    • They discovered a large herd of animals which died in a a large flood event.

      What did this remind you of?

      Scientifically, you make sense. Scientistically, there will be many, many other interpretations. ;)

    • They discovered a large herd of animals which died in a a large flood event.

      What did this remind you of?

      It reminds me of that one time when Zi-ud-sura had a premonition that the gods decided to destroy mankind in a flood, and so he built an arc and saved humans and lots of animals. Then, when the flood was happening, he chanced on seeing the sun-god, Utu, so he decided to kill a bunch of the critters he brought with him, to show Utu how happy he was to have seen him. And THEN, after the flood was all done, he got a reward of eternal life from An and Enlil for all the cool crap he did (including killing the an

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Mysund ( 60792 )

      Yeah! Intelligent Flooding.

    • Poe's law makes it difficult to tell, but just in case you aren't trolling...

      "Mitochondrial Eve" is not the ancestor of everyone alive on earth today [talkorigins.org]. Therefore, she could not be the biblical Eve.

      The fact that it may be possible to genetically modify humans to live longer does not support the biblical creation story. It just doesn't contradict it.

      Finding evidence of localised floods, each of which happened at completely different times does nothing to support the notion of a global flood. Will you put

    • They discovered a large herd of animals which died in a a large flood event.
      What did this remind you of?

      http://spaghettovolante.files.wordpress.com/2010/02/one-more-theory-theory-ark-noah-flood-demotivational-poster-1232649120.jpg [wordpress.com]

  • Stop digging up my yard (Score:3, Funny)

    by Cyclloid ( 948776 ) on Friday June 18, 2010 @05:16PM (#32619162)
    Fido I told you to stop burying your leftovers in the yard.

  • Curator (Score:5, Funny)

    by Dr. Eggman ( 932300 ) on Friday June 18, 2010 @05:17PM (#32619188)
    Former Curator and original collector of many of the bones in the cache, "Skippy," was unavailable for comment. However his lawyers, have stated that he is not pleased with this "discovery" by the human scientists and will be submitting an injunction against removal of any bones after his "walkies."

  • There are a lot of crap comments so far but I know I'd like to say to those involved that this is an outstanding find, way to go!

    I was heading to Drumheller later this summer anyway but I should see what kind of stuff they might have open to the public now.

    Awesome stuff!

  • Site of (Score:5, Funny)

    by JustOK ( 667959 ) on Friday June 18, 2010 @05:31PM (#32619402) Journal

    They were found near a site that has been described as a prehistoric drive in, along with what appears overturned car.

  • With a State of Emergency declared in most places East of Medicine Hat all the way to the Saskatchewan border, flooding is a bit of a sore spot at the moment. Not that I'm bitter or anything.
  • ...largest ever cache of dinosaur remains continues to flow from Deepwater Horizon as crude oil.

    Study that, archaeologists!

    • ...largest ever cache of dinosaur remains continues to flow from Deepwater Horizon as crude oil.

      Dinosaurs are killing fish in the Gulf of Mexico!

      Hmmm... the well isn't far from where the KT meteor struck. I think it just smushed the dinosaurs underground, and now they're leaking back out.

    • ...largest ever cache of dinosaur remains continues to flow from Deepwater Horizon as crude oil.

      Just to be boring : the target horizons in most of the Mexican Gulf are no earlier than mid-Tertiary (for the examples that get cited endlessly, regardless of how irrelevant they are to pore pressure engineering in the rest of the USA, let alone the rest of the world) and so post-date the non-avian dinosaurs ; secondly, organic tracer molecules and kerogen analysis has fairly conclusively demonstrated that the ma

  • I hear a lot more from you guys that babble about what religious people would say than I do from the people you're talking about. There's not one mention of religion in the summary or article, but there's over 50 out of 65 comments about that severely beaten topic. Way to be super cool, guys. Love your priorities.

    • There's not one mention of religion in the summary or article, but there's over 50 out of 65 comments about that severely beaten topic. Way to be super cool, guys. Love your priorities.

      Slashdot is as much about social commentary as it is about technology.

      We even make fun of ourselves here.

  • Living in Alberta it is generally pretty self evident that there are a lot of dinos in these parts. The most common dino bones we have are Conservativasorous, Republicansorous, and Stelmachochasorous. Most TriKleinotops have been put in museums by now along side the Deficitosaurus.

    • Some of them even moved to Ottawa, where they loosely roam around the city to this day.

      I heard through the grapevine that a specimen of a late evolution of the Manningodactyle will someday be exposed at the Canadian Museum of Nature rather than at the Museum of Civilization, on the other side of the Ottawa river, in order to avoid controversy.

  • This is really great news (Score:3, Funny)

    by caywen ( 942955 ) on Friday June 18, 2010 @08:49PM (#32621314)

    This is great! Now we can have far quicker access to dinosaur bones without high latency.

  • I mean, doesn't it imply something having been buried deliberately in order to dig it up again? I hereby reject 'cache' in favor of 'deposit' - oh that isn't much better.

Slashdot Top Deals

Two can Live as Cheaply as One for Half as Long. -- Howard Kandel

Close