this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2024
247 points (97.0% liked)

science

14617 readers
186 users here now

just science related topics. please contribute

note: clickbait sources/headlines aren't liked generally. I've posted crap sources and later deleted or edit to improve after complaints. whoops, sry

Rule 1) Be kind.

lemmy.world rules: https://mastodon.world/about

I don't screen everything, lrn2scroll

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
all 24 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 70 points 2 months ago

it's a worm larva btw

[–] [email protected] 67 points 2 months ago (4 children)

Here's a much better source for this than Popular Mechanics.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Ty for this by the by =) I see it's teeny-tiny, and that it's not so much that the soft tissue was found, but that the outline of its internal organs were left on record from lack of compression. I'm not sure how that happened, let alone how someone found such a small thing.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

Could you maybe edit the original post to include this better source?

[–] [email protected] 16 points 2 months ago

Oddly enough, that source doesn't imply soft tissues were preserved. They can tell some things about its brain and guts based on outlines left behind. And also from what they know of other arthropod fossils from the same era - undercutting the uniqueness.

This one is special because it isn't smushed flat like most fossils in this deposit.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 2 months ago

Yes, the title is complete BS. The half life of DNA alone is ~500 years.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 2 months ago

Hey thanks. Didn't notice that article about this. It's much better

[–] [email protected] 13 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Intact butts you say?

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Someone can probably fill me in here. There are always so many wondrous finds coming out of China. I think I once heard why, but I can't exactly remember why. Is it because of the exposed striations in sandstone faults x difficulty to develop in the desert x lack of humidity x overall mass of area that has given rise to this? I am pretty sure someone can give me a clearer picture here somewhere between a paleontologist or a geologist.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

A lot of wondrous finds in China are because they made it the fuck up.

It's a meme in science circles to double check studies that come from China.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago

I know that there are a series of faux-findings. Because I believe I read one in a book...? About chicken bones being used. And I know that there is a black fossil market including fake fossils. But the west went through their own bone wars and it makes me think that perhaps this is just an alternative of that. But I think there are so few great discoveries here in America exclusively by this point on account of everything being so moist and developed (although I know bogs can preserve things). I believe all the latest findings coming out of China are all from a desert portion of the country. And that perhaps being under-developed in that space and perhaps faults being exposed by say...earthquakes or something make the striation more visible which in turn leads to more fossils being detectable? I am not sure though, because I know very little about China as a whole and am not a geologist or a paleontologist.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Just last month I was thinking about asking somewhere if there was any chance we could ever find more than the usual stuff or if there would be no way for a perfect preservation to happen naturally. Guess I have my answer now.