New research has shed new light on the true identity of the 300-Million-Year-Old monster named the ‘Tully monster.” As The Daily Mail reports:
The mysterious Tully monster is not likely to have been a vertebrate – despite its hard cartilage ridged back – scientists claim, after discovering unusual elements within its fossilised eyes.
Tullimonstrum, also known as the Tully monster, which lived 300 million years ago, has baffled scientists since fossils were first discovered 60 years ago.
The #Tully Monster (#Tullimonstrum gregarium) is a vertebrate!: https://t.co/MVJxc3fQmA pic.twitter.com/Pj7Icp9qVz
— Nobu Tamura (@paleofan) March 20, 2016
A previous discovery in 2016 found Tully to have a stiffened rod of cartilage that supported its body and gills – suggesting that the creatures were predatory vertebrates, similar to some primitive fish.
But now researchers at the University College Cork believe this was not the case after studying chemicals present in the eyes of the animal.
The prehistoric oceans were full of secrets, and so are our own. Who knows what have have survived at their greatest depths.
i figured it was a story about hillary clinton
Hillary’s alter ego………………….
I don’t believe in “Black Holes”. How about that?
Newer dated a Negrita??
Bullshit.
I thought you were going to show me a picture of Pelosi.
“keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called” (1 Timothy 6:20).
I have graduate and post graduate degrees in physical anthropology. and I worked for 20 years as an archaeologist for the federal government. By the grace of God, I will never have anything to do with evolutionary mythology again.
I agree totally. They haven’t found soft tissue inside dinosaur bones for any possible reason they can come up with.
Let me ask. Do you see a difference between macro and micro evolution?
By macro, I mean the Darwin evolutionary theory where different species evolved for a common source. For example, fish type invertebrates becoming land animals developing into lizards, birds, mammals, apes, and eventually into Homo Sapiens.
By micro evolution, I mean where in different species the individual species evolved. For example, horses evolved from small equine to the larger ones we have today. Also there’s the evolution of man from Neanderthals to Cro-Magnons to Homo Sapiens of today.
I accept evolutionary improvements (and sometimes dangerous problems) within a species such as equines and humans. But I don’t accept the Darwinian theory.
Macro–No.
Micro–YES in small changes as in the shape of the birds’ beaks in the Galapagos. The different sized horses were not related. I believe all humans were the same as now. The difference in the Neanderthal from us was in their age. I believe the Bible in that before the flood, when man lived into the hundreds of years, his extreme age created the so-called Neanderthal. Bent over and having changes simply due to age. Biblical ages of man show them decreasing since the flood changed the worldly environment.
Wow I thought it was Adam Schiff he has stiffened rod of cartilage that supported its body and pencil neck
THAT was a killer comment. Probably one of the best of the year everywhere.
Now now, let’s try to leave politics out of this, even if you believe Schiff is a lower life form.
It’s not a rod, it’s a Tee and his head is a golf ball.