- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Coal miners in North Dakota discover 7-foot mammoth tusk in incredible condition
Posted on 1/8/24 at 5:18 pm to PikesPeak
Posted on 1/8/24 at 5:18 pm to PikesPeak
quote:
That's a pretty wide spread. Shouldn't they have a pretty good idea of the age of the earth they're digging in or is that a 'narrow' range for these types of things?
They found it in gravel in a stream bed. Could you go to an abandoned cut off meander of the Mississippi and tell just when the cut off was deposited?
If they could find charcoal or plant remains with that tusk they might get Carbon dating to work, but the water passing through stream gravels would destroy/oxidize most plant debris. That it's a lignite mine nearby probably gave them one end of the age.
0
Posted on 1/8/24 at 5:23 pm to Moon Pie
Its hard to realize just how big those suckers were. I'm 6'2" and could not touch the bottom of the tusk of one in Los Angeles' museum.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 5:26 pm to jeffsdad
I wish they were still around.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 5:27 pm to Moon Pie
Do they slow down or halt operations when a discovery like this is made? Maybe give Indiana Jones and crew a chance to check for more fossils?
Posted on 1/8/24 at 5:32 pm to MorbidTheClown
that's a log
Posted on 1/8/24 at 5:40 pm to TrueTiger
quote:
I wish they were still around.
Fun Trivia Fact: When the Great Pyramids of Giza were being built woolly mammoths still roamed the arctic tundra in northeastern Russia.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 5:51 pm to MorbidTheClown
Posted on 1/8/24 at 6:04 pm to Moon Pie
quote:
This is a shovel.
Nope, That is an "Excavator". A shovel uses the bucket in reverse orientation and has a bottom drop opening for dumping.
This is a "Shovel".
Posted on 1/8/24 at 6:11 pm to Shanegolang
I dont want to be that guy but, where is the other one and the rest of it?
Posted on 1/8/24 at 6:22 pm to Moon Pie
quote:
10,000 to 100,000 years old.
Such a precise estimate. Do they moonlight as contractors on the weekends?
All jokes aside, that's pretty cool, but I'm excited to see when they reintroduce mammoths to Siberia in a few years.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 6:35 pm to PurpleandGold Motown
Much like modern day beavers the old school woolly mammoth went out of style being replaced with hairless elephants these days.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 7:24 pm to LanierSpots
Good question. Perhaps the animal lost it in a fight or something? Is that a thing? Can elephants break their tusks off? Maybe there's more where it was found and they haven't found it yet.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 7:59 pm to LegendInMyMind
slow down or halt operations when a discovery like this is made?
I bet the head cheese would rather they push that shite into a hole and pretend they didn't see anything. Stopping work on a huge operation like a coal mine is hella expensive.
I bet the head cheese would rather they push that shite into a hole and pretend they didn't see anything. Stopping work on a huge operation like a coal mine is hella expensive.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 10:37 pm to Moon Pie
Just to try and help explain a few reasons why the dating range may seem so large (some of which has been mentioned already in this thread), in case anyone cares:
- There are multiple methods used for dating different types of objects
- Different methods can be used for dating plant and animal remains (organic materials) compared to inorganic materials
- 100,000 years is a very small period of time on a geological time scale (this is usually more relevant for methods used with inorganic materials)
- Radiocarbon dating and other methods that use radioactive decay / half-lives are generally less accurate the more recently the object was deposited
- Certain ranges of time are inherently more inaccurate than other ranges of time when using radioactive decay / half-lives based on natural events that impacted background amounts of particular elements, such as Carbon
I didn't read the study associated with this find, so I don't know which factor(s) played a part in this dating range, but the things mentioned above can generally affect dating ranges.
- There are multiple methods used for dating different types of objects
- Different methods can be used for dating plant and animal remains (organic materials) compared to inorganic materials
- 100,000 years is a very small period of time on a geological time scale (this is usually more relevant for methods used with inorganic materials)
- Radiocarbon dating and other methods that use radioactive decay / half-lives are generally less accurate the more recently the object was deposited
- Certain ranges of time are inherently more inaccurate than other ranges of time when using radioactive decay / half-lives based on natural events that impacted background amounts of particular elements, such as Carbon
I didn't read the study associated with this find, so I don't know which factor(s) played a part in this dating range, but the things mentioned above can generally affect dating ranges.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 10:41 pm to LanierSpots
They did look for other bones and found a tooth, and enough other bones to (my guess) determine size and maybe sex from the hip.
eta IF I recall correcting some of the longest surviving mammoths were on an island and were much smaller as adults than the frozen carcasses found elsewhere.
eta IF I recall correcting some of the longest surviving mammoths were on an island and were much smaller as adults than the frozen carcasses found elsewhere.
This post was edited on 1/8/24 at 10:43 pm
Posted on 1/8/24 at 10:45 pm to real turf fan
Wonder if the Chinese would forgive our debt if we gave them the tusk? That is some vintage Ivory, with some good JuJu.
Posted on 1/8/24 at 10:46 pm to CrazyTigerFan
I read one time they found Mastadon bones near Highland Road in BR.
Posted on 1/9/24 at 11:08 am to Shanegolang
quote:
Good question. Perhaps the animal lost it in a fight or something? Is that a thing? Can elephants break their tusks off? Maybe there's more where it was found and they haven't found it yet.
Its the different between a horn and a antler. Horns dont grow back, antlers are shed and grow back
I have no idea what mammoths have
This post was edited on 1/9/24 at 11:08 am
Posted on 1/9/24 at 12:09 pm to Bluefin
quote:
10,000 to 100,000 years old
Crazy how they're able to just narrow it down like that
Might have to call in this guy to narrow it down a bit
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News