News24

Huge dinosaur footprints found

2010-05-13 12:25

Buenos Aires - Dinosaur footprints up to 1.2 metres in diameter have been found in an area of Patagonia known as Argentina's "Jurassic Park", a scientist said on Wednesday.

Jorge Calvo of the National University of Comahue said the footprints are "sauropod dinosaur tracks of different sizes", and were "in good condition".

The scientist estimated that the footprints found "more than 90 million years old".

The area is considered one of the most important paleontological sites in South America, a region where in 1993 remains were found of the Giganotosaurus carolinii, the largest carnivorous dinosaur in the world.

The footprints were stumbled upon several days ago by a yoga instructor performing exercises in Los Barreales, in Neuquen province in southern Argentina.

Comments
  • Watcher - 2010-05-13 12:50

    Its a very nice article. Its always awesome to discover new dinosaurs however i'm a bit concerned on how the Scientist can determine that the footprints are 90 million years old?

  • muaythaifighter - 2010-05-13 13:36

    atheists win-we have the fossils! theists have a book written by primitive man who believed all the animals on earth lived within walking distance of Noahs ark.
    (Atheism is a non-prophet organisation)

  • darwin - 2010-05-13 14:37

    Dinosaurs is a pretty new word - bible uses the word dragons.
    Never heard of metaphors Bunny?
    Sneaky old palaentologist actually - been caught out with many lies trying to confuse poor humans!

  • ZION PAY - 2010-05-13 14:53

    I would hate to be a Christian in this day and age. Must someone, doing joga of all things , come along and burst our bubble?

  • GuyForks @Stinkvis @ Watcher - 2010-05-13 14:56

    Just to be more precise - carbon 14 testing cannot be done on specimens deemed to be older than about 50 000 years because the half-life of carbon-14 is around 5680 years. This means it can only go thru about 10 half lives before undetectable levels are present in any specimen. The 90Ma is determined by using index fossils which are supposed to have also occurred within that same area. If no index fossils are found it would be assumed that the footprint was created in igneous [volcanic, or virgin] rock and the age then measured using any of argon-argon or uranium 2 lead decay methods. AS for the "science" of determining the age of a rock - well, maybe it's more art than science because there are so many factors that could influence the accuracy of any measurements taken. The most important assumptions one needs to make are: 1. That the qtty of original product and resultant daughter products are known - even if you only measure the ratios after determining the qttys. 2. The rate of radio-active decay remained constant. 3. There was no leaking into or out of the system under investigation. Clearly for this footprint condition 3 negates any precise measurements, which is why the age is given as an estimate.

  • logic - 2010-05-13 15:02

    I'm a Christian and dont be4lieve the earth is just 6000 years old. It is probably about 4.7 bil years old..those that pay attention when they read the Bible would see that it says "a thousand years can be LIKE a day to the Lord" not IS. It could just have been said that a million years could be like a day to the Lord but the value million and billion hav'nt even been defined yet during those years so for them to have written a million years is like a day to the Lord would'nt have meant anything to them as they would'nt have understood the meaning of a million, but the value thousand have been assigned, so there explained to all these atheists trying to discredit the Bible because of fundamental Christians that dont read the word properly and by doing so pushes non-believers even more away from the faith. Go search Ron Wyatt and Noah's ark and you'll see the Ark has been found years ago, and the whole world was'nt under water but the remnant of noah's flood is the black sea...search "the deluge theory black sea" and you'll see that the word used in hebrew in the Bible world did'nt mean world as in planet but world as in nation or where the world was concentrated because in Noah's days the people did'nt even know the world was round and had no idea how big it was and where its boundries lay. So go look at these stuff and start to believe, because i know these are stumbling block for many atheists but these even have scientific explanations.
    I'll leave you with a quote from A. Einstein "In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognise, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."

  • GuyForks @The Beginner - 2010-05-13 15:03

    You should be amazed that the area was preserved for 90million years. Surely by now that area should have been covered by the results of loads of geologic activity?

    @ "@the Bunnies" - the bunnies are pure God haters - Atheists in other words.
    They're simply making sarcastic remarks aimed at Christians.


  • Kala@Watcher - 2010-05-13 15:04

    I am sure you are aware that all rocks on earth have different ages; these ages can be determined (in much the same way as carbon dating) by the radioactive decay of certain elements in the given rock. When you have, for instance, Niobium in a rock and you know the half life of this element you can calculate how long ago this rock has formed.
    Finding animal tracks in soft sediment, or rocks that used to be soft sediment, will only give a rough idea or the true age...give or take a million years. But I suppose in the bigger scheme of things this accurate enough.

  • Age of the Earth - 2010-05-13 15:07

    4.5 billion years
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_the_Earth

  • @Stinkvis - 2010-05-13 15:12

    So, its possible to carbon date a footprint? I'd like to know how they do this. If i put my thumbprint in some putty that was manufactured 20 years ago, we have the age of the putty and my age but neither of these can tell us how old the thumb print is. I'd be interested to know how they figure this out.

  • @all the flawed logic out there - 2010-05-13 15:16

    btw, for all those ignoramuses out there, you don't have to believe that the earth was created 6000 years ago to:
    a) believe that God exists
    b) believe that Jesus lived, was crucified, buried, raised from the dead and seen by several eye-witnesses.

  • notpickingsides - 2010-05-13 15:27

    well, its already been proven that earth's age does not prove the evolution theory. So im happy about that, as long as evolution loses, im good :P, and im not picking any side :P, Just as long as the pathetic idea of the big bang is neutrolized

  • Mormon - 2010-05-13 15:33

    Mormons believe that the earth was mad up out of material from prior earths gone by. Therefore fossils from other earths will still be found on this planet. Earth is not that old.

  • Ben - 2010-05-13 15:42

    Radio carbon dating is still a much discussed over matter. Dates are rarely accepted; which is why scientists call them "estimates". Some of the oldest accepted date estimates only go back to about 3000BC. Accurate estimations further back than that is basically impossible due to the exponential effect the environment has on the fossils/object. So... the 90 million could in actuality be 5 thousand... or 1 million... or whatever number you can think of. Interesting read... http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/Encyclopedia/06dat5.htm

  • QuintS - 2010-05-13 16:07

    @ the bunnies and stinkyfish ... so do the rocks/fossils have age tags on them? - 'This fossil is 60M years old'

    Carbon and radiometric dating has been shown to be totally inaccurate even by evolutionists. Anyway ... what does an 'old' rock look like compared to a new one. Even newly formed rocks (from volcanoes) often date to millions of years. Now thats telling. The evidence that science can observe and test constantly shows that a 6000 year old earth makes far more sense than 'millions of years' old.

  • muaythaifighter - 2010-05-13 16:14

    Oh, i get it now, you Christians only believe some parts of the bible, only the parts that havnt been explained by science. Next time, instead of reading the news on your comp, ask God to tell you it.
    As science expands, the need for religion diminishes, 2 hands working does more for society than 6 billion hands clasped in prayer.

  • @ Easter bunny - 2010-05-13 16:22

    Please explain to me where i mentioned God in my statement. i asked a question on how the footprints is determined by it been 90 million years old. i surgest you keep your bad personnel experience with God to yourself, you making a big fool out of yourself. thank you for the other people who commented on my question. im new at this and like to know some facts. As ive noticed a huge dedate over evolution and creation. the once thing ive notice with evolution is why is it that every year there is a new age of the earth, example the billions of years increase dromaticly such as it was 65 million years ago and now its 4,5 billions of years ago? and how accurate is carbon dating, i know the sciencetist have made mistakes from time to time. i love science but we got to determine between pure science and theories. Heres a good question, why do people that believe in evolution get very hot red necks when God comes into the subject. That doesnt sound like science, thats religion isnt it? I'm not trying to prove points, i would just like to know the truth.

  • muaythaifighter @ guyforks - 2010-05-13 16:24

    How could atheists hate God??? we dont even believe he exists!!! Get your facts straight. its like you hating the flying spaghetti monster.

  • Moaners - 2010-05-13 16:33

    My profound thanks to the people who found the 'dragon' 'dinosaur' footprints...as through your find you have enlightened me to the masses out there who cannot understand sarcasm!
    I had a nice chuckle!
    On a more serious note it is fantastic to know of such findings and shows that although we live in the 21st Century...there are yet many discoveries to be made if we look hard enough!

  • SP - 2010-05-13 17:01

    If you read Genesis which describes how everything was made in 6 days and you look at the order, first land and water were seperated, then plant life was created then sea life and then animals. Last of all Man was created. It is pretty much in the same order that scientists estimate that things evolved over time. Now Genesis was written a couple of thousand years ago so there was no way that the writers had any scientific knowledge at the time. How then did they dream up this order of things? If you take the six day time factor out and replace it with 4 bn years those writers actually wrote about evolution long before Darwin. Maybe there is more to it...

  • JC - 2010-05-13 17:22

    Most religious fundamentalists also believe that the universe was created about 6000 years ago, not only the earth. Thus none of them are able to see the Milky Way (being the outer rim of our saucer shaped galaxy). All the stars in the Milky Way are way more than 6000 light years away. I pity them because the Milky Way it is actually such a nice sight…

  • jc - 2010-05-13 17:37

    To those who are DETERMINED not to believe in evolution: how do you explain the development of e.g. drug resistant bacteria and the evolvement of the HIV virus strains? This is nothing but PURE Darwinism!. The denialists probably believe that sweet Jesus manufacture resistant bacteria and new strains of viruses on Tuesdays, then fly down and plant them where he wants to. If you do not understand evolution, do not criticize it. Study it (do not use your pastor as a tutor), then and only then form an opinion. Best book is “The greatest show on earth” by Richard Dawkins. Also “Almost like a whale” by Steve Jones.

  • Norma - 2010-05-13 18:07

    Interesting article. Yes of course there were dinosaur's. The age of the earth in dispute with bible scholars. Genesis 1 says "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was without form and void and darkness was was on the face of the deep. No mention as to when the beginning was, so the earth could have been millions of years old before God started putting vegetation, life etc. on the earth. Just another thought....

  • Leroy - 2010-05-14 00:53

    What makes you think your religion is correct and that all the others are false? Knowing there is something bigger than myself is not really faith bound, more like my observative conclution.

    Go ahead and flame as much as you want, trying to prove that you are right, when there is no proof is a utter waste of time.... for the both of us!

  • sceptic - @watcher - 2010-05-14 01:59

    Hey watcher- that's because ol Dino left a coin there and the local daily newspaper. maybe a lesson or two on palaeo-history would help!!

  • Gerald - 2010-05-14 07:14

    @Logic.
    I always wonder why people quote this "thousand years are like a day" but conveniently forget to also quote Exodus 20:11 where God himself says: "...for in six days the Lord created heaven and earth and all that in them is..". Note that the context here is within exact prescription for the six days in which man is supposed to work. So there's no ambiguity about it: SIX days. This is unlike the thousand years verse whose context is about the Lord being patient and not willing to let anyone perish.

    Don't let so-called scientific determination of age be your authority. Start from the bible - trusting that God knew what He was talking about since HE was there. Man wasn't.
    Determining age of rocks is not as straight forward and precise as people would like you to believe.

  • Gerald @logic - 2010-05-14 07:24

    Noah's ark has been found?!!! That would have been world news to say the least!

    On your description of the flood - why does the boble say that all humans, animals and birds perished? Why does Peter describe the flood in terms of global catastrophe?
    Why did Noah have to save the animals if it was only a local flood - surely there would have been other animals in other regions that could have re-populated that local area?
    The flood was global. Why do you think Jesus brings it up in His prediction of what is to happen at the last day? Because it will be exactly the same effect - only those who are right with God will be saved. Everyone else will perish - just as it was in the days of Noah.

  • leroy - 2010-05-14 07:55

    evolution is not a theory, its a fact! The reason why evolution happens is the theory, thus darwin's theory "Natural Selection"

    Hes claims are that evolution accures due to natrual selection, and its just observation that got him to this conclution. Amazing if u ask me!

    As for carbonradio dating, its not accurate at dating water related fossiles due to the effects. But if thats not enough, by calculating the distance of the furthest star one can calculate at least the age of the universe(at its youngest).

  • Ben - 2010-05-14 08:39

    @leroy - yup. Astronomers only recently found that the rate the universe is expanding at is speeding up, which totally throws a curve ball at that original calculation. Hence the whole quest to find "dark energy", which is the theoretical force scientists believe is behind this "acceleration" :)

  • Houx or not? - 2010-05-14 09:08

    Apparently they have also worked out the age of the dinosaur, height and sex from the 90 million year old foot print.. seriously, I know some of these scientists are good but I would love to know how did they work that out. And how does a foot print actually last that long? Surly 90 million years of corrosion will do something to it. And how does a yogo instructor actually know what a dinosaur foot print looks like. I think that this is just a formation on the ground that looks like a foot print. Is this a hoax? I’m a bit wary about this article.

  • logic@Gerald - 2010-05-14 09:20

    Hi Gerald, glad to see you are a believer, but our differences is that i look at the Bible not just from a spiritual but also a scientific point of view just as Einstein, Izaak Newton, Faraday, Planck, Gallilei that were scientists that believed in God. here is the verse: "3:8 Now, dear friends, do not let this one thing escape your notice, that a single day is LIKE a thousand years with the Lord and a thousand years are LIKE a single day. 3:9 The Lord is not slow concerning his promise, as some regard slowness, but is being patient toward you, because he does not wish for any to perish but for all to come to repentance." Also already above mentioned in Genesis it proves that God made life on earth long after earth existed. Genesis 1:21:2 Now the earth was without shape and empty, and darkness was over the surface of the watery deep, but the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the water.1:3 God said, “Let there be light.” And there was light!" Let there be light is when God let the Sun reach a critical mass so that its gravity produced enough pressure to start nuclear fusion producing the heat and light to make it a sun. The whole creation written of in Genesis is scientifically correct in order which proves that Moses that wrote Genesis received the knowledge from the devine, because otherwise Moses should have been the smartest, physicist, biologist , geologist, atsronomist etc etc that ever lived. Gerald please just look at ron wyatt archeaology findings of the ark(turkey has a visitor's centre at the site called "noah's boat" with all petrified wood etc samples, even the structure is the same lenght as the Bible mentioned..use google earth measuring tool) and the black sea deluge before you write it off. Download e-sword from www.e-sword.net and install the version with greek and hebrew strongs so you can see what the word "world" meant in its hebrew context. It surely was not the planet. Its misinterpretations like these that feed the atheist' fire and confuses so many about the faith. Noah took animals from the area of the black sea, he did'nt need to travel to south america to get a 2 jaguars and to china to get 2 pandas. But you are right the Last days would be like in the days of Noah, The wicked and godless will be wiped off the face of the earth (Rev 14) and it would be as unexpected as the people who drowned in the time of the great flood. Remember science and Religion goes hand in hand as God set all the laws of science and like old Eistein said "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind"

  • rudi - @notpickingsides - 2010-05-14 09:24

    You know the most expensive scientific experiment, the SKA array, which South Africa will probably host, is going to pick up the waves still left from the big bang? That's how much faith the world's scientists have in the theory, sorry...

  • rudi @logic - 2010-05-14 09:38

    I don't see any reason to doubt the Ark's existence. But the great flood was recorded in other cultures, such as the Japanese, as well, so it was a global catastrophe for sure, but people survived it everywhere, whether they had known about God or not.

  • The Easter Bunny - 2010-05-14 09:58

    @@ Easter bunny.... Ummm, I was not replying to your post, I was just commenting on the article... I do not think it is me that is making a fool of myself but your arrogance thinking that every post on here is directed at you....
    @Guy Forks... I am not a god hater... I just don't believe a god exists (at least not in the Judeo-Christian fashion)...

  • logic@rudi - 2010-05-14 11:09

    Rudi go read up on the deluge of the black sea and you'll see that its the greatest flood that occured in history, archeaologist found houses under the black sea, and they dated that the flood occured about 8000 years ago in the time of noah. I'll explain quickly to you the basics of how it happened. If you use a world map and look at the black sea (http://www.bellona.no/imagearchive/786px-Black_Sea_map-1..png) you'll see that it is connected to the mediterranean sea where Istanbul is located today. Now this was'nt always so 8000 years ago there was a ridge caused by huge glaciers between the Mediterranean sea and the aread where the black sea was, there was still much smaller lake but no black sea. The area of the Black Sea is LOWER than sea level but the ridge of glaciers kept the sea at bay. When it started raining for 40 days and 40 nights the glaciers started to melt and weaken up to the point where the mediterranean busrt through and flooded a the huge area where the now black sea is , this also explains why the other people could'nt run to their boat due to the rain and survive the flood...this was enormously powerful like a tsunami. also if you extent the boundries of the black sea a bit as a lot of water drained since then it extends to the mountians of ararat where the Bible says the ark came to rest.

  • Matthew - 2010-05-14 11:59

    For all those that believe the world is only around 8000 years old, let me sum up the big bang theory for you. "Let there be light"

  • GuyForks @rudi on the SKA - 2010-05-14 12:00

    Rudi, I suspect that when the scientists finally get back pictures from about 15 billion lights out what they'll find is that ALL clusters of ALL galaxies are in a mature state.

    There will not be any waves still left over from the big bang.

    They will be totally surprised and the big bang theory will be rocked to the core.

    Just check the latest on the www.physorg.com website for a small pre-taste of what's waiting in store for cosmologists.

  • Johnathan - 2010-05-14 12:00

    Funny stuff. May I quote Eddie Izzard? "40 days and 40 nights of rain is just 40 days of rain, isn't it? The nights are implicit! You wouldn't say it rained for 40 mornings and 40 afternoons and 40 tea times, would you?"

  • GuyForks @logic - 2010-05-14 12:13

    Logic, I'm not so sure about the reasoning for a local flood. Simple logic negates that kind of thinking. If the flood was local only, then surely within 100 years Noah and his family could have relocated to a place where there would NOT be a flood?
    The exact same logic applies for the animals - they wouldn't need an ark as protection - they would have only needed to move out of the area. Or otherwise the animals in the other areas would simply have re-populated the flooded area?
    All indications in the bible point to a Global flood.
    The spiritual implications for only a local flood are immense - Peter would not then be able to say that the world was baptised [destroyed] by water and in the same breath then mention that the same world would be destroyed by fire. Surely you are not expecting some local fire to break out as well?

  • GuyForks @logic - 2010-05-14 12:51

    I notice that in replying to Gerald you seem to have missed his point about exodus 20:11. There it clearly states that everything was created in six days. Which part of that verse indicates anywhere that it took billions of years before earth was populated? Then also in exodus 31:17 it's mentioned again. Six days for creation. I think Gerald's point is that you should rather accept God's word as your reference and then use that to test what man's science comes up with rather than the other way around as it seems you are doing here. The 4.5 billion years for the age of the earth is based on sheer evolutionary assumptions - that the rocks and dust that formed the earth are still in pristine condition in the meteorites - which is what they used to calculate the age of the solar system from. There's no proof that that way of calculating the age of the earth is sound. It could just as well have been a piece of rock from Table mountain or the Drakensberg. Take your pick. Again - calculating the age of anything unknown is not pure science, it's much more an art in how you duck and dive the assumptions you have to make to interpret your data.

  • rudi - @GuyForks - 2010-05-14 12:53

    I cannot access that link at present. But, I gather you are suggesting that the universe has always been in its current state? Yet, you cannot deny the 2nd law of thermodynamics and the way in which energy is being expended as heavenly bodies are equally moving away from each other, thus "growing" the universe? This means at some or other time there was a vast amount of energy released, and it is still being used, it was merely of such a large scale, that the process is taking billions of years to use up all the energy and reach the maximum level of unavailable energy, ie. entropy.

  • GuyForks @ JC - 2010-05-14 13:10

    JC, By using the 6000 light year problem, you are assuming that the Big Bang theory is the only explanation for how the universe came to be. Here's another viewpoint: All the galaxies[and stars] were created within a 2 light DAY distance from earth, already in the mature state we see them in, just highly compressed. This allowed the light from the furthest point in the universe to reach earth by the time Adam and Eve were able to see it on the 6th day. Then - God expanded [stretched out, as in Isaiah 40] the universe in a highly patterned fashion to the size we [think we] can see today. This accounts fully well for the red-shift phenomenom as well as for the billions of years that have passed in the outer reaches of space - using Einstein's theory of relativity that predicts time passing slower deeper in a gravity well than outside. OK, that's a bit heavy. Point is that there does exist other ways of thinking about the universe instead of the Big Bang. Big bang cannot be proven and right now most of the evidence simply creates more and more problems for it.

  • logic@GuyForks - 2010-05-14 14:45

    Hi GuyForks, personally i understand God's day as being like Peter said it is like that it could be thousands even millions of years. Dont get me wrong i do believe God is almighty and if He really wanted to create everything in 6 human days He could but i think the verse of peter was specifically put in the Bible to explain this to us better, but it's not important we'll know when Christ returns. The problem is those that get confused by it contradicting science which with peter' reference it does'nt. The same with the great flood please download e-sword at the above mentioned link with hebrews strongs in which the Bible was originally written and go look at the hebrew word "world" and you'll see it does'nt mean planet. the 4.7 billion years is not based on evolution its based on geology...i dont believe in evolution as it is stupid to think all complex life happened by chance. everybody can see that a car has been designed, but even a single celled bacteria is a 1000 x more complex than a car and how complex is a eagle for example but evolutionists try to make you believe this just happened by change. Anyway its true what you say that they could just have walked a couple hundred kilometers and be outside the range of the flood with the black sea concept but do you think they could herd all the animals also for a few hundred km and carry all their food?? obviously God could have made animals move from the area on their own but He wanted to test Noah and his family' obedience...while they where building the ark for many years they where being mocked and laughed at but the kept doing what God told them and that was their test. God also showed by this in the Bible that if you listen and put your faith in God nothing is imposible for Him. Just to give you something to think of that if you really think the whole planet was under water where did the branch come from that the dove brought to Noah?? If all plants were submerged under water there would have been no green leaved branch in the doves beak. please download e-sword and have a look at the orgiginal hebrew and all will fall into place. I know god is almighty and everything is possible to Him but even things like Noah' ark can be proven scientifically but miracles like curing the blind and walking on water obviously can not. Enjoy the weekend and keep the faith.

  • pages:
  • 1
Report Comment