Fossils

These discoveries do not say what researchers think they say. We discussed this more thoroughly at theologyarchaeology today. Here is one example:

Fossil of an ancient shark that swam in the age of dinosaurs solves centuries-long mystery

During the Cretaceous Period, a genus of sharks roamed the sea with rows of unusual teeth. Mostly large and rounded, these chompers were not meant to slice through their prey, but to grind and crush shelled creatures.

However, since the sharks’ presence in the fossil record has mostly consisted of isolated teeth, scientists have been left to speculate on what the rest of this ancient predator looked like since its discovery in the 18th century.

Now, remains uncovered from limestone quarries in northeastern Mexico are finally giving researchers a clearer idea of the shark’s appearance, including one fossil that shows almost all skeletal elements and an outline of the specimen’s soft-tissue body. The find also reveals where the genus, known as Ptychodus, sat on the shark evolutionary tree, and other previously unknown traits of this “long-standing enigma,” according to a study published in April in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

“The finding of the skeletal remains in Mexico not only allow us to unite these teeth that have been searching for a long time for a skeleton, but also allow us as scientists to revise our previous hypotheses regarding its biology and relationships and see what we got right and what we got wrong,” said study coauthor Dr. Eduardo Villalobos Segura, an assistant professor in the department of paleontology at the University of Vienna, Austria, in an email.

The discovery also provides insight into the evolutionary history of sharks found in our oceans today, experts say.

Fossils are a one-time picture of an animal or other life form that does not have the information researchers claim to pull out of them. The researchers assume that evolution is true however, that assumption influences how they view fossils.

They make all sorts of claims including how old the shark was at the time of fossilization. They cannot be sure of that date or the information they provide. When you look at the fossil, you can see a spine, teeth, and other features but what one cannot see is any evolutionary development or indications.

How can there be when it is just one shark frozen in time? Since no one knows when it was fossilized, the majority of information about this discovery is read into it by those who believe evolution is real.

Very little information is taken out of the fossil as evolutionary ties cannot be seen at any time. What is important is where these fossils were found. In a limestone quarry far from the ocean.

This discovery supports Noah’s global flood more than it does evolution. We do not doubt such a shark existed, but that is just about all this and other fossils prove. There is nothing evolutionary in fossils.

In other news, a white man may have been depicted in a Chinese tomb

Stunning Tang dynasty mural in tomb unearthed in China may portray a ‘Westerner’ man with blond hair

Archaeologists in northern China have unearthed a centuries-old tomb decorated with stunning murals portraying daily life during the Tang dynasty, which ruled much of central and eastern China from A.D. 618 to 907.

The tomb includes never-before-seen depictions of daily life, including men threshing grain and making noodles.

One of the murals also depicts what appears to be a “Westerner” with blond hair and a beard who probably hailed from Central Asia, Victor Xiong, a professor of history at Western Michigan University who wasn’t involved in the discovery, told Live Science in an email.

The tomb was discovered in 2018 during roadwork on a hillside on the outskirts of Taiyuan, the capital of China’s northern Shanxi province, but archaeologists only reported on the completed excavations last month.

Given the date of the Taung Dynasty, this is not unusual or surprising. People traveled throughout the ancient world so why shouldn’t they have made it to China?

I doubt we can identify where the lone traveler originated but it is interesting to see how ancient travel was not an oddity or a rare occasion. The images in that article are worth seeing.

Finally, an ancient threat

A Newly Discovered Ancient Artifact Comes With a Threat: ‘Whoever Breaks This Will Die’

Contracts in ancient Turkey came with clearly spelled out punishments if broken, so one would know what they’re getting themselves into. Archaeologists recently found a seal promising a severe penalty: “Whoever breaks this will die.”

Whatever contract came sealed with this inscription—which can be traced to Hittite Empire royalty in the second millennium BC—must have been quite serious. This wasn’t a negotiation to be trifled with.

The find, according to Arkeo News, comes from the Büklükale ruins near the Kizilirmak River about 60 miles outside of Ankara, the capital of present-day Turkey. The excavation site has been well-known for over a decade, sitting at a location where the country’s longest river once served as a pivotal transportation link for trade.

The seal’s intense inscription was written in an ancient Middle Eastern logosyllabic writing system, according to experts. Because ancient Hittite laws typically assigned punishments of fines, not death, for breaking contracts, the team of archaeologists led by Kimiyoshi Matsumura of the Japanese Institute of Anatolian Archaeology were surprised by the discovery. The recent find also unearthed a different terracotta seal, this one in fragments. Experts hope to discover the meaning of the motifs on that seal with closer examination.

To add another layer of gravity to the intact seal—not that the punishment isn’t enough to take this contract language seriously—Matsumura, according to Anatolian Archaeology, says the seal is from a royal family, either the sovereign king or queen of the day.

“These seals were usually stamped on contracts,” Matsumura says, “stating that if something was done against the contract, it would be penalized. The king and queen from Hattusa sent something here. This shows that this city was in intensive relations between Hattusa and the royal family.”

As interesting as this discovery is, we do not like the reading into the discovery that archaeologists do. What also bothers us is the use of different terms without explanation or the source of their definitionof those terms.

Case in point, the term ‘contracts’ used throughout the article. It would benice for them to provide some evidence for this application and their conclusions. The article is written assuming people have all these facts already when they don’t.

Thisis the first time in our 30 years of archaeological research we have read the term ‘contracts’ used in this way. The theories presented by the archaeologist makes us suspicious of his conclusions.

But it is an interesting discovery none the less.