re: #126 BigDana

What I’m seeing in this photograph looks like something ginned up for the Smithsonian gift shop. Or else something helped along greatly by Photoshop.

I’ve not handled any fossils, but I’ve read about this sort of thing in books, and seen photographs, for years. Stuff that’s millions of years old seldom looks this clean, if ever. Oh, sure, in childrens’ pop-up books, where dinosaurs look cute and cuddly.

This is supposed to be reality. I think we need to see if this thing passes the Time Test. There have been fakes in recent years — we’ve all read about them. Let’s hope this is not one of them.

Sorry, I have to sign off now — wife is ringing the dinner bell.

I don’t know where to start with this comment above. It is evident that this person know absolutely nothing about fossils, their preservation, their composition, what they look like when found “in situ,” the amount of science and testing that goes behind the study of an artifact of this nature.

They have been studying this one fossil for over two years. It would not even get to this point of publication without peer review, INCLUDING peer review from scientist that believe in creationism.

I have unremarkable fossils with in reach of my hands right now that are as well preserved and intact as this one above.

You must have taken a page from another non-scientist’s book, Rush Limbaugh.

Geeessshhhh…