Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

New Type of Dinosaur Unearthed

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 4 years ago | from the everything-is-better-with-explosives dept.

Science 160

MileHighScience writes to mention that a new type of sauropod has been discovered by scientists from Utah's Brigham Young University. Dubbed Abydosaurus mcintoshi, the new addition to the long necked dinosaur family was discovered at Dinosaur National Monument. "The circumstances of its discovery were both unusual and dramatic. The researchers stumbled on four skulls in a quarry at the preserve. Two were still intact. Sauropod skulls are rarely found in the fossil record because the soft tissue from which they are constructed is unlikely to be preserved after death. 'Their heads are built lighter than mammal skulls because they sit way out at the end of very long necks,' Brooks Britt, a BYU paleontologist said in a news release. 'Instead of thick bones fused together, sauropod skulls are made of thin bones bound together by soft tissue.' Of more than 120 known species of sauropods, there have been only eight instances in which scientists have been able to recover intact skulls."

cancel ×

160 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Gary Larson inquires: (3, Informative)

Thud457 (234763) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321468)

yeah, but does it have a thagomizer [wikipedia.org] ?!

Re:Gary Larson inquires: (1)

eexaa (1252378) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321506)

To me it seems like they found only the head with rest of the body bitten off. ...so probably had no thagomizer.

Re:Gary Larson inquires: (1)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321964)

How rude! That isn't a proper question to be asking. Isaygooddaysir!

Re:Gary Larson inquires: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31322970)

Hard to say, because they have several skulls and some of the vertebrae and other postcranial bits, but they don't mention anything about the tail in the paper [springerlink.com] (it's open access -- yay!). Statistically, it probably didn't have one, because only rare sauropods [plosone.org] are known to have a thagomizer, but it's possible.

I'll be damned! (1)

voodoo cheesecake (1071228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321496)

Mormon scientists have found skolls! How interesting! Maybe this will get a Darwin award.

Re:I'll be damned! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31321566)

Re:I'll be damned! (1)

Princeofcups (150855) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321986)

Mormon scientists have found skolls! How interesting! Maybe this will get a Darwin award.

Don't be silly. They dated them at 4000 years old.

Re:I'll be damned! (1, Offtopic)

LBArrettAnderson (655246) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322100)

Mormons aren't creationists in the usual sense of the word.

Re:I'll be damned! (2, Insightful)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322940)

Mormons aren't creationists in the usual sense of the word.

They're not Christian in the usual sense of the word, either.

Re:I'll be damned! (1)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323204)

Mormons aren't creationists in the usual sense of the word.

They're not Christian in the usual sense of the word, either.

That depends on your definition of Christian. If you define Christian as strictly adhering to the Nicene Creed, then no, they're not. But neither are many other churches by that standard. There are more non-Trinitarian Christian churches then you'd think out there.

Re:I'll be damned! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31323544)

That depends on your definition of Depends.

Re:I'll be damned! (1)

CannonballHead (842625) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323574)

Mormon theology is a lot different from "mainstream" Christianity than just being non-Trinitarian. Of course, mainstream Christianity isn't exactly Biblical either, for the most part...

Re:I'll be damned! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31323440)

I guess by 'usual sense of the word' you mean they don't assign a ridiculously short age to the date of Creation.

Re:I'll be damned! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31323686)

More than that. For example, Earth formed from matter that already existed (that's official church doctrine). Most mormons believe it happened naturally (with some guidance, perhaps), so we don't necessarily disagree with scientists on anything on the subject, and there are many mormon scientists who study it.

BYU has a Paleontology department? (-1, Troll)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321530)

I wouldn't be as surprised if they claimed to have found a spaceship and a saddle in the same strata.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ervaWt03Z3w [youtube.com]

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (5, Informative)

CorporateSuit (1319461) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321590)

BYU has one of the largest collection of Jurassic dino bones in the world.

Does that not fit into what your science teacher told you about people who aren't your science teacher?

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (-1, Troll)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321876)

No, my science teacher was a Creationist. He told the class that the Earth was 6000 years old because of the small amount of moon dust they found when the Apollo landed.

Thankfully, I like to read, and unlike the rest of my classmates, I have some scientific background concerning the world in general. And thus, when I heard that BYU, founded on principles of racism, moral superiority, and hatred of atheists, I was surprised they had abandoned enough of their core principles to have a paleontology department that accurately dated fossils.

Kudos to them. Maybe one day their students will be allowed to grow beards and have private sex lives. We can only, hope, right?

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (3, Insightful)

CorporateSuit (1319461) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321954)

I like to read, and unlike the rest of my classmates, I have some scientific background concerning the world in general. And thus, when I heard that BYU, founded on principles of racism, moral superiority, and hatred of atheists, I was surprised they had abandoned enough of their core principles to have a paleontology department that accurately dated fossils.

Apparently, you shouldn't believe everything that you read, or is just it a personal bias that makes you lash out so?

Right into the trap... (5, Informative)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322160)

"I hope to see an Academy established in Provo that shall do honor to our Territory, and at which the children of the Latter-day Saints can receive a good education unmixed with the pernicious atheistic influences that are found in so many of the higher schools of the country." -Brigham Young

But, you got me on one point. There is a process for "beard exemption":

A student who wishes to obtain a beard exception must visit a BYU Student Health Center doctor by appointment (422.5156). The doctor will fax his recommendation. The student then needs to come to the Honor Code Office to fill out some paperwork and receive the letter allowing the growth of the beard, if approved. If a yearly beard exception is granted, a new Student ID will be issued after the beard has been fully grown, and must be renewed every year by repeating the process.

http://honorcode.byu.edu/content/what-process-obtaining-beard-waiver [byu.edu]

That's literally the funniest thing I have read in the last 24 hours.

But wait! There's more!

Are Mixed Gender Camping Trips allowed?
http://honorcode.byu.edu/content/mixed-gender [byu.edu]

Fear of Gays!
Homosexual behavior and/or advocacy of homosexual behavior are inappropriate and violate the Honor Code. Homosexual behavior includes not only sexual relations between members of the same sex, but all forms of physical intimacy that give expression to homosexual feelings. Advocacy includes seeking to influence others to engage in homosexual behavior or promoting homosexual relations as being morally acceptable.

Fear of the Female Body!
A clean and well-cared-for appearance should be maintained. Clothing is inappropriate when it is sleeveless, strapless, backless, or revealing; has slits above the knee; or is form fitting. Dresses, skirts, and shorts must be knee-length or longer. Hairstyles should be clean and neat, avoiding extremes in styles or colors. Excessive ear piercing (more than one per ear) and all other body piercing are not acceptable. Shoes should be worn in all public campus areas.

Forced religion!
Students are required to be in good Honor Code standing to be admitted to, continue enrollment at, and graduate from BYU. In conjunction with this requirement, all enrolled continuing undergraduate, graduate, intern, and Study Abroad students are required to obtain a Continuing Student Ecclesiastical Endorsement for each new academic year. Students must have their endorsements completed, turned in, and processed by the Honor Code Office before they can register for fall semester or any semester thereafter. To avoid registration delays, endorsement should be submitted to the Honor Code Office by March 15. Those applying to BYU should use the new-student Admissions Application Part 3 endorsement and submit to Admissions, D-155 ASB.

I mean, this shit sounds like something you'd find the Taliban advocating. Read it for yourself:
http://saas.byu.edu/catalog/2009-2010ucat/GeneralInfo/HonorCode.php#HCOfficeInvovement [byu.edu]

Re:Right into the trap... (0, Troll)

cxx (1749498) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322492)

Oh, noes! A fear of the female body!!! Fear of homosexuals!!! A fear of beards!!!

Oh, wait. No, it's not fear -- a term you clearly picked to deprave those you obviously don't understand.

I mean, this shit sounds like something you'd find the Taliban advocating.

I find this in connection with "Forced religion" bit to be quite amusing. BYU requires that its students be upstanding, moral people (using an "Ecclesiastical Endorsement" to do this). Never do they force others to be their religion, or to be a member of any other. All the school asks is that the students take some religion classes -- no more than you'd get from a catholic school (and some would say much less).

And they certainly don't advocate killing others to enforce what they believe. Feel free to compare them to Islam if you like (and there's some interesting comparisons there) ... but drawing on the Taliban? Come on!

Re:Right into the trap... (3, Interesting)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322722)

a term you clearly picked to deprave those you obviously don't understand

No disagreement there. Being terrified of women and certain styles of grooming and atheists and homosexuals is certainly something I don't understand. And I say terrified, since they aren't allowed to be any of those things near the "clean" students at BYU. All, of course, except for the beards. I guess beards aren't so scary.

Never do they force others to be their religion, or to be a member of any other.

You didn't read. It's important:

LDS students may be endorsed only by the bishop of the ward (1) in which they live and (2) that holds their current Church membership record.

Non-LDS students are to be endorsed by (1) the local ecclesiastical leader if the student is an active member of the congregation, (2) the bishop of the LDS ward in which they currently reside, or (3) the nondenominational BYU chaplain.

So, how does an atheist stay within the honor code?

Re:Right into the trap... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31322798)

Either number 2 or 3. You're making this harder than it is.

Re:Right into the trap... (1)

cxx (1749498) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323108)

LDS students may be endorsed only by the bishop of the ward (1) in which they live and (2) that holds their current Church membership record.

Translation: If you're a member of the church, go see your bishop.

Non-LDS students are to be endorsed by (1) the local ecclesiastical leader if the student is an active member of the congregation, (2) the bishop of the LDS ward in which they currently reside, or (3) the nondenominational BYU chaplain.

Translation: If you're not a member, go find any one of those three people to get an endorsement.

That person will hold a short interview and basically ask if you will live by the school's honor code. Say yes, and you have your endorsement.

Here's the specific form: Ecclesiastical Endorsement [byu.edu] . Please feel free to ignore the parts specific to LDS applicants.

As I said, there's no requirement to be religious (only a statement "encouraging" non-LDS students to attend their respective religious services). Think of it like marriage: you don't have to go do a church to get married (although that's what religious people do), just go to the county building and sign a form or two.

But I don't think your problem is with the application process or with religion in itself: it's with the rules and regulations that go with being a BYU student.

You know what? That's fine: not even all "Mormons" want (or have to) live by those rules: I even know some that have a (gasp!) beard! They just go elsewhere for school, and nobody thinks the lesser of them.

Re:Right into the trap... (0, Flamebait)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322980)

No, it's not fear

You may be right. "Hatred" of gays, women, and athiests might be more precise.

Re:Right into the trap... (5, Interesting)

SirWinston (54399) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323474)

>And they certainly don't advocate killing others to enforce
>what they believe.

Really? They did comparatively recently:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mountain_Meadows_massacre [wikipedia.org]

I for one would never support any religion capable of such an atrocity, much less one which would conspire at all levels to cover it up instead of seeking forgiveness and making reparations. The world would be a much better place if primitive religions were treated as the bunkum they are. Why tax fuels, carbon, tobacco, or alcohol, when the real danger is the superstition and intolerance emanating from the pulpit? We should be taxing churches instead of making them tax-exempt.

>Feel free to compare them to Islam if you like (and there's
>some interesting comparisons there)... but drawing on the
>Taliban? Come on!

Hmm, Mormons and the Taliban... They both hate gays, check. They each treat women as subordinate to men, check. They each have a history of violent intolerance of outsiders, check. They both have a bizarre fixation on facial hair, check. They both use religious schools to indoctrinate the young, check. They both dictate special clothing (burqas, sacred underwear), check.

Yep, Mormons (and other intolerant fundamentalist sects) are the American Taliban.

Re:Right into the trap... (1)

c6gunner (950153) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323590)

So .... Taliban Light?

New school motto:

When you want all of the religious extremism, with none of the pesky beheadings, try Taliban Light (tm)!

Re:Right into the trap... (4, Informative)

EL_mal0 (777947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322608)

You must have some grudge against the LDS church to be trolling so much on this thread. Nevertheless, I'm going to respond to a couple of your points.

First point: the beard thing. I agree, this is pretty lame. The dress and grooming standards have changed over the years, and hopefully one day neatly trimmed beards will be allowed. I've heard that the anti-beard regulations came about in the 60's when the hippies wore beards, and were thought of as some sort of representation of the counter culture, which doesn't really jive with LDS doctrines. Times have changed. I must say, though, that if that's the funniest thing you've read in the last 24 hours, you must be starved for entertainment.

Second point: mixed gender field trips. They are allowed, you just need to make sure the men and women aren't sharing tents. As you probably know, premarital sex is against LDS doctrine. This is a small measure to ensure students aren't breaking the rules while on official business. Dress and grooming standards are along this same line.

Third point: "fear" of gays. BYU is a church school. LDS doctrine states that homosexuality is bad, so the church's school isn't going to allow anybody to encourage behavior that goes against church doctrine.

Fourth point: Ecclesiastical endorsements. BYU is a church school. They strive for a religious, education along side the more secular one. There is no requirement that you be a practicing member of ANY particular religion, just that you get "cleared" from your own ecclesiastical leader. If you don't belong to any particular church (presumably even if you're an atheist) you can meet with LDS leaders to get an endorsemnt. This is mainly to ensure that the students will abide by the school's honor code, which you find so humorous and offensive.

I'm a graduate of the BYU geology department. I got a fantastic education that prepared me well for grad school and a career in science. I am happy to see the department get this press. I'm less happy at douche bags like yourself using this platform to spread half-truths and misinformation about my alma mater. If you don't like the standards, nobody's going to force you to live them, or even go near the BYU campus.

Where is the half-truth? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31323084)

I'm less happy at douche bags like yourself using this platform to spread half-truths and misinformation about my alma mater.

So what part of the OP's post is actually a half-truth or misinformation? Your post does not dispute any of the facts in the OP's comment and just excuses the behaviour as "BYU is a church school". The original post basically contains quotes from the BYU student procedures yet you feel that the text of this code somehow makes BYU look bad and so needs to be excused. Perhaps you ought to be asking yourself why you feel that way?

Re:Where is the half-truth? (1, Interesting)

EL_mal0 (777947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323340)

I know that, as an AC, you're unlikely to read this, but oh well. First, your question about what are half-truths: the part of a previous post where copponex stated the school was founded on principles of "racism, moral superiority, and hatred of atheists". Okay, so he produced a quote that might be interpreted as supporting the school being founded as a response to an atheist education. But the other two?

Citing the dress and grooming standards as being there because church members "fear" the female body? That's disingenuous, at best. And his point about "forced religion" is just false. Yes, you must get an endorsement from an ecclesiastical leader, basically stating that you are willing to abide by the school's regulations, but that's hardly forced religion. And I think that the fact that it's a church school is very relevant and excuses seemingly odd behavior like the dress and grooming standards. The church owns the school, and all who go there either agree to abide by the rules the church sets up, or goes elsewhere for their education.

And yes, the poster quoted parts of the honor code, but took them a little out of context and spun them in a way that did make BYU look bad. I valued my time there, and feel a need to right a perceived wrong.

Re:Where is the half-truth? (3, Informative)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323438)

But the other two?

Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African Race? If the White man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so. -Brigham Young

I am here to answer. I shall be on hand to answer when I am called upon, for all the counsel and for all the instruction that I have given to this people. If there is an Elder here, or any member of this Church, called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who can bring up the first idea, the first sentence that I have delivered to the people as counsel that is wrong, I really wish they would do it; but they cannot do it, for the simple reason that I have never given counsel that is wrong; this is the reason. -Brigham Young

Read on! Enlightenment awaits...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon_anachronisms [wikipedia.org]

Re:Where is the half-truth? (1, Insightful)

EL_mal0 (777947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323480)

You posted that elsewhere, but I missed the part where BYU was founded on those principles.

I predict a miraculous revelation.... (1)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323114)

No grudges. I just think the LDS is a fascinating study in human credulity. And BYU, being the official college of LDS, represents a sea of irony.

Would you have allowed to write a paper on the total lack of evidence for Nephytes in North America in the 5th and 6th centuries? I highly doubt it. Would you be allowed to state unequivocally that the LDS was institutionally racist in the 50s, and that the "revelation" received by the leaders in 1978 was obviously political and not spiritual?

So there will be another revelation about women in the church, since they are still second class citizens. And then another about homosexuals, and perhaps another for transgender. It just baffles me that the civilizing of the LDS isn't commented upon, or that any person trying to learn something would choose a school inexorably intertwined with such obviously flawed ideals.

Re:I predict a miraculous revelation.... (1)

weiserfireman (917228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323260)

As a single LDS Man,

I would suggest that women are not 2nd class citizens in the LDS Church. It is the older single men who are 2nd class citizens. I won't go into the details, but because I am not married, I am not allowed to serve in any position of authority in the Church.

Re:I predict a miraculous revelation.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31323594)

As a single LDS Man,

I would suggest that women are not 2nd class citizens in the LDS Church. It is the older single men who are 2nd class citizens. I won't go into the details, but because I am not married, I am not allowed to serve in any position of authority in the Church.

If you get married you CAN hold those positions of authority. Married or not, females CAN NOT hold a position of authority in the LDS religion, making them second class members. Unless you are implying they are 3rd class citizens? That could also be true.

Re:I predict a miraculous revelation.... (1)

EL_mal0 (777947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323458)

Okay, you have a point that there are some academic freedom issues at BYU, especially in the humanities. You likely would get at least a good talking to if you wrote a paper about the archeological evidence against the Book of Mormon. (There is some archeological evidence supporting the Book or Mormon, but it is rather shaky.)

I think that you could probably get away with writing a paper about the political climate surrounding the 1978 revelation granting blacks the priesthood. While the climate surrounding the revelation (or "revelation" if you prefer) may have been political, those involved in the decision certainly thought that the revelation itself was more than just a savvy political decision. Link [mormonbeliefs.org]

And LDS women as second class citizens? I've never fully understood that attitude.

One more thing: sorry about the douche bag comment. A little caught up in the moment.

In the words of Brigham Young (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31323730)

Does thjis sound like hate to you?

          "You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind....Cain slew his brother. Can might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings. This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin." (Journal of Discourses, Vol. 7, page 290).

          "In our first settlement in Missouri, it was said by our enemies that we intended to tamper with the slaves, not that we had any idea of the kind, for such a thing never entered our minds. We knew that the children of Ham were to be the "servant of servants," and no power under heaven could hinder it, so long as the Lord would permit them to welter under the curse and those were known to be our religious views concerning them." (Journal of Discourses, Volume 2, page 172.)

          "Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African race? If the white man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so." (Journal of Discourses, Volume 10, page 110.)

Speach by Gov. Young in Joint Session of the Legeslature.
Feby. 5th 1852 giving his veiws on slavery.

" But say some, is there any thing of this kind in the Constitution, the U.S. has given us? If you will allow me the privilege telling right out, it is none of their damned buisness what we do or say here."

" I am as much oposed to the principle of slavery as any man in the present acceptation or usage of the term, it is abused. I am opposed to abuseing that which God has decreed, to take, a blessing, and make a curse of it. It is a great blessing to the seed of Adam to have the seed of Cain for servants, but those they serve should use them with all the heart and feeling, as they would use their own children, and their compassion should reach over them, and round about them, and treat them as kindly, and with that humane feeling necessary to be shown to mortall beings of the human species. Under these sercumstances there blessings in life are greater in proportion than those who have to provide the bread and dinner for them."

I call BS (2, Funny)

srussia (884021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322768)

http://honorcode.byu.edu/content/what-process-obtaining-beard-waiver [byu.edu]

I mean, this shit sounds like something you'd find the Taliban advocating.

I find it hard to believe that the Taliban are anti-beard. In fact:Taliban religious police jail beard-trimmers for 10 days [slashdot.org]

Re:I call BS (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323046)

I find it hard to believe that the Taliban are anti-beard.

You misunderstand. He's not saying that mormons are similar to the taliban because they don't allow beards. He's saying they're similar because they agree that women are property and should be covered, gays should be shunned, and nobody should be allowed to make decisions for themselves outside of their strict religious teachings.

Re:Right into the trap... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31322772)

Funny thing is that YOU apply to go to BYU of your own free will. if YOU don't like the honor code, rules, ideology, or standards simply don't apply. No one is forcing you to be there. The article submission was meant to be scientifict yet you have turned this into a platform for expression your own bigotry and intollerance. And here I thought this site attracted the intellectually gifted bunch.

Re:Right into the trap... (1)

DaFallus (805248) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323112)

No one forces you to apply to or attend public universities either, right? Does BYU accept any federal or state funding?

Re:Right into the trap... (1)

MaxEmerika (701730) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323082)

Slamming the BYU honor code is funny, but a little OT. Mormons are Biblical literalists who believe that the earth was created 6000 years ago. That makes this discovery, and the fact that BYU has such a large collection of fossils to begin with, deeply ironic.

Re:Right into the trap... (1)

weiserfireman (917228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323310)

Mormons are "bibical literalists". We believe bible to be true "as far as it was translated correctly".

Most LDS people I know, believe that the universe was created using some unknown process that took an undeterminate amount of time. The 6 "days" could be retranslated in to 6 stages of creation.

From the founding of our church, we have been instructed to learn as much about science as we can.

Re:Right into the trap... (1)

MaxEmerika (701730) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323636)

If so, then it's changed quite a bit since I was a kid. My seminary teachers treated me like a Satanist because I accepted evolution without apology.

Re:Right into the trap... (1)

weiserfireman (917228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323710)

depends on when you were a kid, and who your seminary teachers were.

I am 43. Most people in the Church accept evolution as a tool that God might use, but don't accept the evolution of Man.

Brigham Young's science quotes (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31323482)

For example, Brigham Young's lunatic ramblings about how he believes that minerals 'grow' like plants or hair on a person's head.

Also crazy stuff about his belief that adobe is vastly superior to stone as a building material because adobe will mature into something strong, but stone has already matured, so now that it's mature, the next step is for it to decay.

He tells us that the Egyptian monuments built of stone are all gone, but the ones built of mud and straw are still here.

Guess he's never been to Egypt.

"Let the practical chemist make his observations upon a portionof the matter of which this earth is composed; and he will find, that justas quick as it is at its perfection, that very instant it begins to decompose.We have proof of this. Go into Egypt, for instance, and you will find themonuments, towers, and pyramids, that were erected in the days of Joseph,and before he was sold into Egypt; they were built of what we call adobies,clay mixed up with straw; these fabrics, which have excited interest forso many ages, and are the wonder of modern nations, were built of this rawmaterial. They have bid defiance to the wear of ages, and they still remain.But you cannot find a stone column that was reared in those times, for theyare all decayed. Here we have actual proof that the matter which is thefurthest advanced to a state of perfection, is the first to decompose, andgo back into its native element, at which point it begins to be organizedagain, it begins to congeal, petrify, and harden into rock, which growslike a tree, but not so perceptibly."

"Gold and silver grow, and so does every other kind of metal, the sameas the hair upon my head, or the wheat in the field; they do not grow asfast, but they are all the time composing or decomposing."

-- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol-1

http://journalofdiscourses.org/Vol_01/refJDvol1-36.html

Not content with proclaiming these brilliant pieces of geological wisdom, Brigham Young goes on to tell us that God plays hide-and-seek with gold and silver mines.

"Ask the brethren why they do this, and the ready reply will be, 'Is it not my privilege to find af gold mine or a silver mine as well as others?' As far as I am concerned I would say, 'Yes, certainly it is your privilege, if you can find one.' But do you know how to find such ha mine? No, you do not, These treasures that are in the earth are carefully watched, they can be removed from place to place according to the good pleasure of Him who made them and owns them.

He has his messengers at his service, and it is just as easy for an angel to remove the minerals from any part of one of these mountains to another, as it is for you and me to walk up and down this hall.

This however is not understood by the Christian world, nor by us as a people. There are certain circumstances that a number of my brethren and sisters have heard me relate, that will demonstrate this so positively, that none need doubt the truth of what I say." -- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol-19 p36-37, 17 June 1877

http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/JournalOfDiscourses3&CISOPTR=9597&REC=19

After telling us how God moves gold and silver mines so that the wrong people don't find them, Brigham Young blathers on a bit about how his friends find buried treasure left behind by the 'Lamanites' and then he spins a yarn about Oliver Cowdery, Joseph Smith, and more treasure.

Brigham claims that Oliver Cowdery and Joseph Smith returned the gold plates of the Book of Mormon to the 'Hill Cumorah' in New York. He claims that the hill 'opend' for them and inside the hill is a huge cave that is stacked with piles of gold plates.

". . . I lived right in the country where the plates were found from which the Book of Mormon was translated, and I know a great many things pertaining to that country, and I know a great many things pertaining to that country.

I believe I will take the liberty to tell you of another circumstance that will be as marvelous as anything can be. This is an incident in the life of Oliver Cowdery, that he did not take the liberty of telling such things in meeting as I take.

I tell these things to you, and I have a motive for doing so. I want to carry them to the ears of my brethren and sisters, and to the children also, that they may grow to an understanding of some things that seem to be entirely hidden from the human family.

Oliver Cowdery went with the Prophet Joseph when he deposited these plates. Joseph did not translate all of the plates; there was a portion of them sealed, which you can learn from the Book of Doctrine and Covenants. When Joseph got the plates, the angel instructed him to carry them back to the Hill Cumorah, which he did.

Oliver says that when Joseph and Oliver went there, the hill opened, and they walked into a cave, in which there was a large and spacious room.

He says he did not think, at the time, whether they had the light of the sun or artificial light, but that it was just as light as day.

They laid the plates on a table; it was a large table that stood in the room. Under this table there was a pile of plates as much as two feet high, and there were altogether in this room more plates than probably many wagon loads; they were piled up in corners and along the walls.

The first time they went there the sword of Laban hung upon the wall; but when they went again it had been taken down and laid upon the table across the gold plates; it was unsheathed, and on it was written these words: 'This sword will never be sheathed again until the kingdoms of this world become the kingdom of our God and his Christ.'

I tell you this is coming not only from Oliver Cowdery, but others who were familiar with it, and who understood it so they will not be forgotten and lost." -- Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol-19 p38-39, 17 June 1877

http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/cdm4/document.php?CISOROOT=/JournalOfDiscourses3&CISOPTR=9597&REC=19

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (2, Interesting)

LBArrettAnderson (655246) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322082)

Most mormons aren't creationists in the usual sense of the word. There isn't actually any official doctrine on the subject (most quotes that you find probably aren't official doctrine), and as far as mormon beliefs go, it doesn't matter. They believe what they feel comfortable with. Most will tell you that God works in natural ways, meaning that maybe he guides things a little, but he lets nature do stuff for him. In mormon doctrine, there is plenty of room for both science and religion. We're all about education and learning about how the world works. I don't believe in "magic," but science that we don't yet understand. Surely it's possible that God uses quantum mechanics, > 3 dimensional physics, and other things that we are only beginning to grasp.

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (1)

gyrogeerloose (849181) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322140)

Maybe one day their students will be allowed to grow beards and have private sex lives.

Not to mention a cup of coffee.

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (1)

cxx (1749498) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322246)

And thus, when I heard that BYU, founded on principles of racism, moral superiority, and hatred of atheists, I was surprised they had abandoned enough of their core principles to have a paleontology department that accurately dated fossils.

Strange, nothing I read from here [wikipedia.org] , here [wikipedia.org] , or here [byu.edu] say anything about these "core priniciples."

It's quite interesting to see how many times scientific discoveries from BYU are discussed here on slashdot. Even more amazing is how ignorant slashdot readers are of the school and its students.

Here you go (1)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322506)

I hope to see an Academy established in Provo that shall do honor to our Territory, and at which the children of the Latter-day Saints can receive a good education unmixed with the pernicious atheistic influences that are found in so many of the higher schools of the country. -Brigham Young

Shall I tell you the law of God in regard to the African Race? If the White man who belongs to the chosen seed mixes his blood with the seed of Cain, the penalty, under the law of God, is death on the spot. This will always be so. -Brigham Young

I am here to answer. I shall be on hand to answer when I am called upon, for all the counsel and for all the instruction that I have given to this people. If there is an Elder here, or any member of this Church, called the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, who can bring up the first idea, the first sentence that I have delivered to the people as counsel that is wrong, I really wish they would do it; but they cannot do it, for the simple reason that I have never given counsel that is wrong; this is the reason. -Brigham Young

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (2, Informative)

caseih (160668) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322580)

Sounds like you haven't read very much on the subject that was accurate.

Theologically, Mormons are not creationists in the same sense as evangelical Christians. Mormons do not believe in creation ex nihilo. Nor do Mormons hold to a literal 6 24-hour days creation, or that the earth is only 6000 years old. Creation came about over millions of years through natural processes, which science is doing an admiral job discovering. Since Mormons believe that human agency is the most important part of existence, then it makes sense that all of creation can come about and be explained without seeing or knowing God. There are no signatures on glaciers. No one is forced to believe in God. To say otherwise (like the intelligent designer folks) is to say that God is weak, meaning that if his works can be explained or understood through processes and principles, then he cannot be God.

Religion deals more with why, not how. Thus to Mormons, there should be no conflict between belief and science. And officially, the LDS church has no position on evolution either. Most LDS scientists recognize it as a principle of nature, and various leaders throughout the last 100 years or so have stated their personal opinions that evolution is not wrong.

Anyway, the bones are there and they have been dated. Mormons accept this and the science behind palaeontology, and study it, enjoy dinosaur museums, and even wonder what the Bonneville Lake was like back in the day.

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (1)

PopeRatzo (965947) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323072)

Theologically, Mormons are not creationists in the same sense as evangelical Christians.

You are correct that Mormons and Christians have little in common in regard to theology.

You have to understand (1)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323666)

Anyone who has seen this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Mormon_anachronisms [wikipedia.org]

and anyone who has read about their belief system would be forgiven for believing that Mormons have a very poor grasp of what science is. After decades of searching and finding no "Mormon cities" in Central America, I can't say I have scientific respect for any geologist or paleontologist or linguist or anthropologist who remains in the church. The entire hypothesis of the religion is scientifically falsifiable and falsified. So why continue with the charade?

(Notice these claims are made by all religions. Mormonism made the fatal mistake of making specific claims, and in a time where printing presses made their first mistakes all too easy to read.)

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323548)

The Mormons also abandoned their racism. They have the worlds largest collection of genological data, and I strongly suspect their recantation of their ideas about "mud people" occurred about the same time they did enough research to discover that the majority of their members actually had African ancestors. Sure, the Mormon Church has done some bad things in their past, but nothing that comes close to, say, the Inquisition, or even the arrest of Galileo as a heretic. And of late, they have been trying to distance themselves from that past and establish themselves as mainstream. For the most part, the Mormons I have know personally, including two families of next-door neighbors, have been some of the nicest, most helpful people I have ever known. The only stereotypes they truly deserve is 1) They are intensely devoted to their families (that's a good thing!) and 2) they really suck at partying.

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31323748)

BYU has had a paleontology department for decades, and they're particularly well known for sauropod dinosaur research, especially thanks to this guy [wikipedia.org] .

Perhaps you should get your head out of apertures it doesn't easily fit, and stop giving we non-religious people a bad name (my views probably aren't much different from yours), especially when you're badmouthing racism, moral superiority, and hatred of people with different religious views in the same note. If you don't believe this stuff it doesn't give you the excuse to be so prejudiced about it. You're falling into the same trap but with different views.

No question, BYU's "honor code" is seriously over-the-top ridiculous, but it's not a legitimate reason to say bad things about the science done there. As has been the case for centuries, being deeply religious doesn't prevent you from being a good scientist (ask zombie Newton and Galileo). I've read papers from people working at BYU and I've visited the BYU campus. They do some good science like many other universities. I just wouldn't want to go there to study.

I guess the thing I can't figure out is why you'd diss these scientist's work simply because they happen to work at BYU, especially when there's a well-established record in this particular area of research (i.e. sauropod dinosaur paleontology). The reason for your expectation is lame as well as being wrong.

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31322192)

And they have them set up next to a statue of Fred Flintstone.

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (1)

RDW (41497) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322804)

'BYU has one of the largest collection of Jurassic dino bones in the world.'

Absolutely! In fact, groundbreaking research from Utah published earlier this month has overturned established theories of dinosaur posture and locomotion:

http://www.theonion.com/content/news_briefs/paleontologists_weve_been [theonion.com]

Unfortunately, certain questions remain unanswered:

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/dinosaurs_sadly_extinct_before [theonion.com]

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (1)

camperdave (969942) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321976)

But archeologically, the cretaceous "wild west", and the cretaceous "space age" would be in the same strata, even if they were a thousand times farther apart than our similar eras. However, I doubt you'd find either. Saddles would have rotted away over the millions of years, and all of the space ships were used to get as many as possible off planet before the Chicxulub event.

This *should* be offtopic, but... (1, Offtopic)

weston (16146) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322376)

Headline: Blanket assumption based more on stereotype than actual familiarity turns out to be untrue. Film at 11.

A lot of people seem to think that theology/cosmology is inherently constraining when it comes to serious scientific work, and I suppose the output those like the Intelligent Design crowd does a lot to reinforce that, but my experience suggests that there's no shortage of religious people who excel in scientific and technical fields, who accept the standards of those fields whether or not they seem to conflict with religious beliefs on some point, and do solid work -- even groundbreaking work.

Some of that experience is directly with BYU, where I've found that most of the science faculty is inline with broader scientific views... for example, by and large they conclude that evolution is the best framework for studying biology and believe that's how most of life on earth came to be in its given state. And that even if you like to think of yourself as a smart person and come complete with various metrics outside of two standard deviations to prove it, there are probably Mormons who are in fact as smart or smarter than you by those metrics. It's certainly true for me. And they take the idea of scholarship and professionalism pretty seriously.

There are certainly counterexamples; I've met people with a certain kind of view-rigidity characterized by a general literalism and intolerance for ambiguity who I believe are blinded by their cosmology/theology. But then again, my observation is that this isn't a problem limited to the religious or religion, and based on the shallowly dismissive attitude in the parent poster's post, it seems likely he's amongst the afflicted.

Talk like that will get you excommunicated (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31323596)

The few BYU Profs who come out of the closet and make comments that don't conform to offical Mormon policy find themselves quickly out of work and excommunicated.

For example, the Mormons still believe that the world is 7000 years old. The official teaching direct from the Doctrine and Covenants...

      Q. What are we to understand by the book which John saw, which was sealed on the back with seven seals?

      A. We are to understand that it contains the revealed will, mysteries, and the works of God; the hidden things of his economy concerning this earth during the seven thousand years of its continuance, or its temporal existence.

      Q. What are we to understand by the seven seals with which it was sealed?

      A. We are to understand that the first seal contains the things of the first thousand years, and the second also of the second thousand years, and so on until the seventh.

    D&C 77:6-7.

Re:BYU has a Paleontology department? (1)

Locke2005 (849178) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323662)

Yes, BYU has a Paleontology department, and the Dali Lama's talks in Portland were hosted by The University of Portland, Oregon's Catholic University. What's your point? Religious organizations, especially ones devoted to education, do not always behave the way that your narrow, biased stereotypes lead you to expect. Most of them are filled with intelligent people who dedicate their lives to discovering truth, much like Martin Luther (the founder of Protestantism) did.

This is my theory, which is mine. (3, Funny)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321542)

The following is MY theory.
*ahem*
*ahem* *ahem*
This was the type of dinosaur that wore a saddle, so that people from the Bible could ride it around, and with that long neck it could have easily reached up to get the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Life for that bitch Eve. *Ahem*

Re:This is my theory, which is mine. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31321686)

Do you know anything about mormons?

Moron.

Re:This is my theory, which is mine. (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321784)

Whoops, the forbidden fruit was on the other tree, which is a flaw in my initial theory.
What follows is a modification of my theory. *ahem*
*ahem ahem*
s/Life/Knowledge of Good and Evil/

Nay, I am Moroni! (0, Flamebait)

copponex (13876) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321948)

The last living white skinned follower of Jesus in North America! And you have blasphemed Elohim, and are doomed to come back with darker skin!!

Seriously. Mormons are slightly less dumb than Scientologists. That's not a compliment.

Re:Nay, I am Moroni! (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322302)

Well, the Anonymous Mormon has a point. Mormons did dig up this dinosaur, and in terms of mythology the Mormons are more free to dig up saddleless dinosaurs than most evangelical Christians- because the Church has taken up no position on the matter of creationism/evolution other than to say God has not revealed the answer.

OTOH perhaps you're setting a low standard. I was watching Valkyrie last night (the one with Scientologist Tom Cruise)... you have to see it. He singlehandedly makes the whole movie hilarious. I couldn't suspend belief long enough to stop thinking "Scientologist", and his acting doesn't help at all.

Re:Nay, I am Moroni! (1)

cxx (1749498) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322706)

Oh, if only they believe what you imagine they do ... the world would be a much simpler place.

I won't bother going into too much detail here, but your comment started with a common misconception (that the followers of Christ in the Book of Mormon all had white skin, with dark skin being a curse for wickedness), ventured into the strange (using "Elohim," a name Mormons use for God, to make their beliefs all the more strange), and ended with complete nonsense (and designed to be flamebait, to boot!).

Yes, their beliefs can be strange when exaggerated and misunderstood, but please don't try to purposefully misrepresent them like that.

Re:Nay, I am Moroni! (1)

MillionthMonkey (240664) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323550)

I'm an athe^H^H^Hgnostic at this point in life, so my knowledge of Mormonism is a bit limited. Perhaps you can forgive me for these childish questions.

Is it an exaggeration or a misunderstanding that Mormonist beliefs include Christ entering the New World? Because that alone has always struck me as the principal strangeness. I mean, look at all the water in the way. [...Thinks...] OK, I know it's already been set up so that he can walk right across it, which itself is very strange indeed, but it's a given at the end of the first book. [...Thinks...] Still, that's like a month long walk. He'd have nothing to eat. And he did need to eat, because he was at the Last Supper, and it's not like he was a waiter for his apostles. [...Thinks...] Well, I guess he could do the loaves and fishes trick. There would be plenty of fish for him to catch, and he could make the bread from himself, along with a nice wine to go with it. [...Thinks...] Except no wine glass to hold it in. and where does he sleep? [...Thinks...] Actually I have never heard any Biblical references to His sleep patterns anywhere, and this was after the Resurrection, so he was probably jet lagged. [...Thinks...] Did he actually walk here like a normal person, or did he get here via some Star Trek transporter-like miracle? That would solve everything.

[...ducks...]

Re:This is my theory, which is mine. (1)

Cytotoxic (245301) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322034)

No, no... if you are going to paraphrase Cleese, you have to wait for someone to do the original quote first.* Then you can diverge from Python orthodoxy in the subsequent reply.

It is as if you skipped the "Triple Dare" and went straight for the jugular with a "Triple Dog Dare".

*For the uninitiated, and in the world of Slashdot there should be none, the original quote is from Anne Elk (John Cleese)

"This theory which belongs to me is as follows. Ahem. Ahem. This is how it goes. Ahem. The next thing that I am about to say is my theory. Ahem. Ready?

The Theory by A. Elk brackets Miss brackets.

My theory is along the following lines. All brontosauruses are thin at one end, much MUCH thicker in the middle, and then thin again at the far end. That is the theory that I have and which is mine, and what it is too."

Re:This is my theory, which is mine. (0, Troll)

Frosty Piss (770223) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322716)

New Type of Dinosaur Unearthed

Knuckle-dragging tea baggers voting for Palin?

in related news (5, Funny)

Tumbleweed (3706) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321552)

Another dinosaur, Windowsaurus Mobelius, has also been identified in the fossil remains of early Silicon Valley users. It seems this dinosaur was replaced in its ecosystem by a smarter, faster breed called Googlesaurus Androidius, which went on to compete for resources with the Applesaurus iPhonius, which survived only as a brightly-coloured niche dinosaur, despite competing claims that its extinction was inevitable, and that its dominance was assured. Neither of these outcomes predicted for the iPhonius turned out to be true, and the Androidius eventually evolved into sentient killing machines.

All hail, etc.

Re:in related news (4, Funny)

levell (538346) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321756)

Recent reports also note that the Nokiasuarus Maemonicus has been evolving in a new strain: Meegoasaurus Rex which prefers open spaces

Re:in related news (0, Offtopic)

voodoo cheesecake (1071228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321776)

Let's not forget the threat from the pengui sapiens of the pokealotatwat tribe.

Re:in related news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31321834)

Abydosaurus mcintoshi, also known as the iSaur.

Re:in related news (1)

Hoi Polloi (522990) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322244)

If we are going to talk about things that are extinct then I would suggest naming it Abydosaurus Lisasaurus [wikipedia.org] instead.

iPhonius extinction theory (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322324)

iPhonius developed a distaste for most boobies, with the exception of a few big name boobies like Playboyius Boobius. This contributed greatly to it's decline, despite the abundance of it's primary food source childus Improvishedus.

Re:in related news (1)

zullnero (833754) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322600)

Sentient killing machines that are "extremely concerned about your browsing habits" and "offer you suggestions about various products it wants you to buy and websites it wants you to visit?" You got it all wrong.

Most schools teach that Androidius evolved into Googlesaurus Chromicus, which, throwing the basic concepts of evolution to the wind, took many different shapes and sizes but ultimately couldn't optimize its own form into the perfect killing machine and ended up cannibalizing itself due to an inability to hunt prey and feed itself without falling down and hurting itself repeatedly while getting sidetracked by advertisements for its own competitors and various phishing schemes.

Brontasaurus (1, Funny)

jimbolauski (882977) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321556)

I would call it a Brontasaurus just to add confusion.

Thesaurus? (5, Funny)

fahrbot-bot (874524) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321578)

Thesaurus: Small dinosaur that uses flowery language to extricate itself from dangerous situations. - Dennis Miller

Abydosaurus mcintoshi (1)

olsmeister (1488789) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321622)

Which evolved into its much cooler offspring, iPodosaurus.

Head and neck position? (2, Interesting)

red_blue_yellow (1353825) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321638)

I wonder if the low density of these skulls will affect the on-going debate about the whether or not the sauropods held their necks and heads erect or horizontally? It will be interesting to see. See here [wikipedia.org] for info on the debate.

Actually (4, Informative)

riboch (1551783) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321660)

More specifically it was a U of M graduate student:
http://www.ns.umich.edu/htdocs/releases/story.php?id=7537 [umich.edu]

Re:Actually (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31321868)

After reading your entire linked article, I don't see where it says that "it was a U of M graduate student." Seems like they were all part of a team.

Abydosaurus mcintoshi is the first dinosaur (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31321666)

That only had a one foot.

The animal could be found in large groups, leaning against the tall conifers that were common at the time.

It's Norton. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31321712)

I believe they mean this: http://security.comcast.net/ [comcast.net]

A thin skulled dinosaur unearthed (-1, Troll)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321824)

Their heads are built lighter than mammal skulls because they sit way out at the end of very long necks,' Brooks Britt, a BYU paleontologist said in a news release. 'Instead of thick bones fused together, sauropod skulls are made of thin bones bound together by soft tissue.'

- damn, even dinosaurs are smarter Sarah Palin. Guess they are not retards. They also had backbone, unlike any democrats, were actually honest in what they did, unlike any politician, and they most likely did not take shit from nobody, unlike the US voters.

Terminology question (1)

ArhcAngel (247594) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321826)

Is this a new dinosaur or a new as in you didn't have it before BMWsaur?

Science in Utah? (0, Troll)

wintercolby (1117427) | more than 4 years ago | (#31321968)

Do they also believe it lived alongside man?

Re:Science in Utah? (1)

rjolley (1118681) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322048)

It's not just Utah, it's Utah COUNTY. A section of Utah every normal person here wishes would just go away.

Re:Science in Utah? (0, Redundant)

LBArrettAnderson (655246) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322136)

Mormons aren't creationists in the usual sense of the word..

Re:Science in Utah? (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322274)

Actually it did live alongside man, but man was a small rodentlike creature at the time.

Re:Science in Utah? (1)

Cro Magnon (467622) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322926)

Actually it did live alongside man, but man was a small rodentlike creature at the time.

65 million years ago, my great-great grandpa scurried under a rock to avoid a dinosaur. Yesterday, I scraped droppings off my car from that dino's great-great grandson.

Re:Science in Utah? (1)

wintercolby (1117427) | more than 4 years ago | (#31322620)

In light of this article [guardian.co.uk] I contest my modding as Troll. It only makes sense to question how likely anything scientific comes from the state, and make light of the fact that opinions have also come from the state that had a right wing/religious bias.

The problem is when the legistlature of the state has recently released an opinion that completely goes against commonly accepted scientific principle, it is reasonable to question the likelihood of anything scientific coming from the state.

Re:Science in Utah? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31322942)

Except your comment didn't make any sense. BYU != Utah legislature. Mormons aren't even creationists, so if you were trying to make a joke, it wasn't funny.

My estimate? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31322030)

It'll be before the night is out that some furry fuck draws two of them ass-banging. Probably with multiple breasts and shitting dicknipples.

This is really rare! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31322040)

"The researchers stumbled on four skulls"

I never heard of a four headed sauropod before!

Skolls? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31322080)

"Sauropod skolls are rarely found in the fossil record because the soft tissue from which they are constructed is unlikely to be preserved after death."

Correction. They are rarely found because nobody quite knows what a "skoll" is.

Abydosaurus mcintoshi (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31323196)

Macintoshi? Is Apple nowadays even into dinosaurs?
Well, at least I bet they didn't wear turtlenecks...

New or just previously undiscovered? (0, Flamebait)

hyades1 (1149581) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323338)

Soft head...tiny brain...a Paleoconservative, no doubt.

My favorite dinosaur... (1)

madsenj37 (612413) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323646)

My favorite dinosaur is still the Lickalotapus. Need less to say, my least favorite is the Megasaurass.

Was this one domesticated? (1)

NReitzel (77941) | more than 4 years ago | (#31323760)

After visiting the creation science museum, I wonder if the BYU crew found any evidence of saddles along with the dinosaurs?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?