At https://dailygalaxy.com/2026/01/baby-dinosaur-fossils-found-in-arctic/ … fossils uncovered at the Prince Creek formation, a rugged and remote site in northern Alaska, includes tiny bones and teeth that likely belong to baby dinosaurs. Newly hatched dinosaurs to be precise. They would have later grown into Hadrosaurs and Tyrannosaurus, it is thought. They come from dinosaurs that appear to have died inside their eggs, or shortly after hatching. This strongly suggests such dinosaurs laid eggs and raised their offspring locally – in the high Arctic. They did not migrate into and out of the Arctic with the seasons, occupying the north only in the summer months. As previously considered more likely. That is what is so strange according to paleontologists at Edinburgh university. It is what comes of thinking the poles are static and cannot budge. They airily declare, these animals must have been acclimatised to the extreme winter Arctic weather – and the long dark days and nights of an Arctic winter. We know that over in eastern Canada temperatures were warm enough for trees to grow during the dinosaur age. Right up to the end of the Cretaceous and the Chicxulub asteroid strike. Indeed, the fossil bones are dated 70 million years ago – on the cusp of the asteroid.
The idea that dinosaurs migrated south to avoid the winters in the far north has been a standard rebuff for many years. There have been several discoveries of dinosaur fossils up there in the most unlikely of places. It is supposed. However, it probably took several months for dinosaur eggs to reach hatching point and this now begins the process of unravelling the seasonal migration theory. So, if eggs were laid in the spring and hatched in the autumn, leading up to winter and the dark nights, the hatchlings would have been too small to walk all the way south to warmer territory. Arctic summers are short. The presence of fossilised wood at the site suggests the region was at least potentially forested – with distinct seasons.
At https://dailygalaxy.com/2026/01/transylvania-dinosaur-fossils-reveal-prehistoric-dwarfism/ … a contrast in approach between two studies. This one is wedded to the mainstream mantra. In a forgotten corner of Transylvania in Romania there is a fossil site extremely diverse and packed to the gunnels with broken bones. The fossils are embedded in sediments that contain hundeds of vertebrate remains. Again, dating to the late Cretaceous. This time, 72 million years ago on the uniformitarian geological column. The quantity and preservation of the bones, we are told, point to a long standing enviromental process that favoured fossilisation. What that process is not divulged but the lead author is certain it did not involve a catastrophic event. In spite of an incoming asteroid just moments away – or already in the process of creating a mess of sedimentation. He is sure it doesn’t represent a single cataclysmic event – he assures the reader. Nothing to see here.
The composition of the fossil bed includes not just fossil dinosaurs but mammals and reptiles too. It looks like they were living in the same eco system – but is that against the prevailing view? The site preserves a high fossil density and state of preservation. In other words, they must have been buried fairly quickly. Some 800 fossils are to be found in an area just 5 square metres. Romania is nowadays in a temperate zone but back then it was sub tropical, we are told. Moving plates. The authors appear to be highly resistant to a catastrophic explanation. Do they recognise the problem if the sediments were laid down at the same time as the asteroid strike. Or are they negative in regards the asteroid, itself? It certainly would be problematic for uniformitarian geology if they had made a bold connection with the Chicxulub cosmic strike. Perhaps they are leaving it to someone else to raise their head above the parapet.
Taphonomic analysis established how the bones were transported and deposited. Orientation, breakage, and spatial distribution of the fossil bones showed up a consistent pattern. They say this pattern shows they were not scattered by fast moving water or disturbed by scavengers. They settled in quiet conditions, they say, allowing for layered preservaton. In a low energy aquatic environment. It seems it was a watery grave after all. In addition, the authors claim the small bones of some of the dinosaurs was due to dwarfism rather than being juveniles. It seems they are circling the wagons.