I get annoyed by uninformed 'news' articles....
~misfit~
Dinsosaur prints found near Nelson.
In the atricle they say:
"They are the first dinosaur footprints to be recognised in New Zealand and
the first evidence of dinosaurs in the South Island."
I have read previously that dinosaur bones/fossils have been found at at
least two other South Island sites (that I can recall off the top of my bald
head); Motanau beach and the Waipara river bed.
<g> Just had to get that off my chest. No good being pissed of without
sharing right?
--
Shaun.
"Give a man a fire and he's warm for the day. But set fire to him and he's
warm for the rest of his life." Terry Pratchet, 'Jingo'.
Geopelia
"~misfit~" <sore_n...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote in message
news:hd2klv$860$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
> <http://home.nzcity.co.nz/news/article.aspx?id=107076&fm=psp,tst>
>
> Dinsosaur prints found near Nelson.
>
> In the atricle they say:
>
> "They are the first dinosaur footprints to be recognised in New Zealand
> and the first evidence of dinosaurs in the South Island."
>
> I have read previously that dinosaur bones/fossils have been found at at
> least two other South Island sites (that I can recall off the top of my
> bald head); Motanau beach and the Waipara river bed.
>
> <g> Just had to get that off my chest. No good being pissed of without
> sharing right?
Perhaps they are the first Sauropod footprints, and the reporter left that
out.
teile
> "~misfit~" <sore_n_ha...@yahoo-nospam.com.au> wrote in message
> > I have read previously that dinosaur bones/fossils have been found at at
> > least two other South Island sites (that I can recall off the top of my
> > bald head); Motanau beach and the Waipara river bed.
>
> out.
Or were the fossils found earlier those of marine reptiles,
technically not dinosaurs? I know some of them were, but I'm sure
about all of them.
I once picked up a hitch-hike at Waipara, and it turned out to be the
lad who had found them. We had a very interesting conversation.
LW
Geoff Rait
<b5f79d13-f3b2-44da...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
teile wrote:
>On Nov 7, 4:12=A0pm, "Geopelia" wrote:
>> "~misfit~" wrote in message
>> > I have read previously that dinosaur bones/fossils have been found at at
>> > least two other South Island sites (that I can recall off the top of my
>> > bald head); Motanau beach and the Waipara river bed.
>>
>> Perhaps they are the first Sauropod footprints, and the reporter left that
>> out.
>
>Or were the fossils found earlier those of marine reptiles,
>technically not dinosaurs? I know some of them were, but I'm sure
>about all of them.
I suspect you're right - I think terrestrial dinosaurs were first found
in Hawkes Bay, more recently than the marine ones in the South Island -
but I'll have to check.
>I once picked up a hitch-hike at Waipara, and it turned out to be the
>lad who had found them. We had a very interesting conversation.
Did you get his name?
There was a great creationist argument a few years back linking the
Haumuri Bluff fossil beds to The Flood. I'll see if I can dig it out.
Geoff
--
Actually, I do have spots.
teile
> In article
> <b5f79d13-f3b2-44da-9d57-08edaf3b8...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
> teile wrote:
> >Or were the fossils found earlier those of marine reptiles,
> >technically not dinosaurs? I know some of them were, but I'm sure
> >about all of them.
Typo - it should have been "not sure".
> I suspect you're right - I think terrestrial dinosaurs were first found
> in Hawkes Bay, more recently than the marine ones in the South Island -
> but I'll have to check.
>
> >I once picked up a hitch-hike at Waipara, and it turned out to be the
> >lad who had found them. We had a very interesting conversation.
>
> Did you get his name?
Yes, but I've forgotten it. He was getting publicity in the local
papers at the time. I think he was a boarder at Christ's College.
LW
> There was a great creationist argument a few years back linking the
> Haumuri Bluff fossil beds to The Flood. I'll see if I can dig it out.
Now if the flood covered the whole world, I guess it must have been in
a period when all the land masses were together as Pangaea, which was
a long time before those fossils were laid down. But I guess the
creationists dismiss the dating along with any other evidence against
their madness.
LW
Geopelia
"teile" <te...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
news:74f9d0a6-ae0d-4854...@h14g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
LW
LW
If Pangaea was there before the plates started moving, it could have been
flat land, easy to flood.
But Noah wasn't around back then.
teile
> "teile" <te...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
> > There was a great creationist argument a few years back linking the
> > Haumuri Bluff fossil beds to The Flood. I'll see if I can dig it out.
>
> Now if the flood covered the whole world, I guess it must have been in
> a period when all the land masses were together as Pangaea, which was
> a long time before those fossils were laid down. But I guess the
> creationists dismiss the dating along with any other evidence against
> their madness.
>
> flat land, easy to flood.
> But Noah wasn't around back then.
Nor, come to think of it, were there any trees to build an ark out
of. An ark of punga logs, perhaps. . . .
LW
Roger_Nickel
> "teile" <te...@clear.net.nz> wrote in message
> news:74f9d0a6-
ae0d-4854-815...@h14g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
You measure your way, I'll measure my way.
For a thousand years in your sight
are but as yesterday when it is past,
or as a watch in the night. (Psalm 90)
Geoff Rait
<74f9d0a6-ae0d-4854...@h14g2000pri.googlegroups.com>,
teile wrote:
>On Nov 11, 6:27=A0pm, (Geoff Rait) wrote:
>> In article
>> <b5f79d13-f3b2-44da-9d57-08edaf3b8...@o9g2000prg.googlegroups.com>,
>> teile wrote:
>> >Or were the fossils found earlier those of marine reptiles,
>> >technically not dinosaurs? =A0I know some of them were, but I'm sure
>> >about all of them.
>
>Typo - it should have been "not sure".
I read it so.
>> I suspect you're right - I think terrestrial dinosaurs were first found
>> in Hawkes Bay, more recently than the marine ones in the South Island -
>> but I'll have to check.
This does seem to be the case - some terrestrial reptiles found in the
North Island and recently the Chathams, but to date no definitive
terrestrial ones in the South Island:
http://www.otago.ac.nz/geology/research/paleontology/mesozoic_reptiles.
html
See also:
http://www.oceansofkansas.com/nz-aus.html
http://www.teara.govt.nz/en/fossils/3
>> There was a great creationist argument a few years back linking the
>> Haumuri Bluff fossil beds to The Flood. I'll see if I can dig it out.
Here it is:
2LIY3.5$tG1...@news.clear.net.nz
>Now if the flood covered the whole world, I guess it must have been in
>a period when all the land masses were together as Pangaea, which was
>a long time before those fossils were laid down. But I guess the
>creationists dismiss the dating along with any other evidence against
>their madness.
I did once hear somebody try to explain biogeographic patterns
consistent with supercontinent distributions as resulting from breakup
and dispersion of the supercontinents post-flood. When I calculated the
seafloor-spreading rates necessary for all that to happen in the last
6000 years I concluded that one reason now-fossil species became extinct
might have been poor aerodynamics.
Roger Dewhurst
Creationists and climate shroud wavers, peas out of the same pod really.
R