Animal thought dead 11 million years ago...found alive

[Kevin Roegele]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5082264.stm

Holy......!!!

 

[Sarge 2.0]

Holy crap.

 

[black_dust]

Yeah right, thats just a rat with a bushy tale!

 

[DOG LIPS]

The end is near! Repent!

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Yeah right, thats just a rat with a bushy tale!

It's a living fossil. It's amazing. Just think what else is out there....

 

[black_dust]

It's a living fossil. It's amazing. Just think what else is out there....

OH MY GOD! Mini dinos!

 

[dr venture]

That's crazy

 

[Mic]

I bet the ****er just pinned a tail on some fat rat.

 

[Lackey]

I had this guy as my avatar back when it was first discovered

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laotian_Rock_Rat

 

[The Lizard]

Next someone will find a live a saber-toothed cat, then a wooly mammoth....


...and then it will be T-Rex back from extinction and up in yo grill!

 

[Equint77]

OH MY GOD! Mini dinos!

it's not good when the dinosaur is prettier than you.

 

[Symbiote Hulk]

I bet the ****er just pinned a tail on some fat rat.

Trust me, no. And if it is the only one of it's kind left, THEY NEED TO TAKE DNA SAMPLES QUICKLY!!! (I think DNA has a better quality if taken from a live animal)

 

[jaguarr]

OH MY GOD! Mini dinos!

I want a mini-dino! I'll train it to keep cats off my front lawn!

jag

 

[VideoGames]

(I think DNA has a better quality if taken from a live animal)

Wouldn't that be obvious

 

[Symbiote Hulk]

Next someone will find a live a saber-toothed cat, then a wooly mammoth....

Unlikely, Mammoths and Saber-tooth Cats are too big to have been hidden for all these years.

...and then it will be T-Rex back from extinction and up in yo grill!

Maybe by cloning, but paleontologists have be barely any good DNA samples. Maybe in a few decades though *Hopes that his dream comes true*

 

[THWIP*]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5082264.stm

Holy......!!!

I FIND IT VERY HARD TO BELIEVE THAT LITTLE RODENT IS 11 MILLION Y.O.

 

[Symbiote Hulk]

I FIND IT VERY HARD TO BELIEVE THAT LITTLE RODENT IS 11 MILLION Y.O.

The one that they found is probably a year old, it just came from a species that existed 11 000 000 years ago. It hasn't evolved much though.

 

[Kent]

It's a living fossil. It's amazing. Just think what else is out there....

Technically not so. The article swings around the "Living fossil" thing a bit, but then goes on to say you can trace the creatures line back to a species thought to have gone extinct 11 mille years ago. It's not the same species, just a decendant of it.

Still cool though... but the term "living fossil" or "fossil rat" seems a bit misplaced.

 

[dpm07]

Unlikely, Mammoths and Saber-tooth Cats are too big to have been hidden for all these years.

Actually, that is what the mainstream would like you to believe. Many species are found all the time. In fact, there are many remote areas of the world that animals might still exist, but have yet to be discovered in smaller quantities.

Remember, the Komodo dragon was not discovered until 1910. Some people believe that the animal depicted on the Dragon Gate of Istar is actually a Sirrush dinosaur that was a holdout that survived the ice age. If a Komodo Dragon, Deepwater Crocodiles, or other forms of Crocodylinae could survive this, then it is entirely feasible for primates who were prominent in the Pleistocene period to have survived. In fact, I have given talks on this very issue with regard to art pieces that present possible depictions.

As we all know, the Native American Thunderbird is often speculated to have been or (possibly still be) an Airornis Incrediblis that survived through the years.

I feel that it is very improper, unprofessional, or lacking dignity and epic grace for the mainstream to advocate views as absolute that can be neither proven unequivocally or disproven with absolute certainty.

We must all keep an open mind to the animals which permeate throughout the world. Just because we may not be privy to their knowledge because we haven't seen them, does not mean they do not exist.

 

[Lackey]

Technically not so. The article swings around the "Living fossil" thing a bit, but then goes on to say you can trace the creatures line back to a species thought to have gone extinct 11 mille years ago. It's not the same species, just a decendant of it.

Still cool though... but the term "living fossil" or "fossil rat" seems a bit misplaced.

it's a little too early to be making this point seeing as how much disagreement there is among scientists concerning this animal.

 

[Iceman]

OH MY GOD! Mini dinos!

I want a mini-dino! I'll train it to keep cats off my front lawn!

jag

I actually own that mini dino

He's cool.

 

[Symbiote Hulk]

Actually, that is what the mainstream would like you to believe. Many species are found all the time. In fact, there are many remote areas of the world that animals might still exist, but have yet to be discovered in smaller quantities.

Remember, the Komodo dragon was not discovered until 1910. Some people believe that the animal depicted on the Dragon Gate of Istar is actually a Sirrush dinosaur that was a holdout that survived the ice age. If a Komodo Dragon, Deepwater Crocodiles, or other forms of Crocodylinae could survive this, then it is entirely feasible for primates who were prominent in the Pleistocene period to have survived. In fact, I have given talks on this very issue with regard to art pieces that present possible depictions.

As we all know, the Native American Thunderbird is often speculated to have been or (possibly still be) an Airornis Incrediblis that survived through the years.

I feel that it is very improper, unprofessional, or lacking dignity and epic grace for the mainstream to advocate views as absolute that can be neither proven unequivocally or disproven with absolute certainty.

We must all keep an open mind to the animals which permeate throughout the world. Just because we may not be privy to their knowledge because we haven't seen them, does not mean they do not exist.

I guess your right on that one.