William sent in the link www.yahoo.com/news/193-million-year-old-nesting-ground-105100105.html … paleontologists found 100 eggs and 80 skeletons from a dinosaur nesting site in Patagonia – or that is how it has been hyped. The fossilised remains were grouped into clusters of juveniles and adults. It is suggested this is a feature of herds. The site dates back 193 million years ago on the geochronology column. The eggs themselves were found in clusters of 8 to 30, suggesting they were in nests as part of a common breeding ground. They also found the skeletal material of similar size and age buried together.
The nesting ground measures half a square mile. The eggs seem to have been buried at the same time as the adults and juveniles. It is suggested by the paleontologists that the animals died from a drought – but how come they were buried? It must have been quick enough to prevent the eggshells and the embryos inside from deteriorating to any degree, quite apart from the rapidity required to preserve the separation of juveniles from adults [including parents]. The soft parts were fully intact. That does not happen in a drought scenario. One claim by the paleontologists is that volcanic ash was scattered around the eggs, and amongst the skeletal material. It seems something other than a drought was going on. This particular type of dinosaur was previously only known from the Late Triassic. The end Triassic event is dated at 200 million years ago – hardly a snitch in time from 193 million years ago. Is this another case of dating sedimentary layers over long periods of time even when said sediments were probably laid down during the end of the Triassic extinction event? One suspects this post should be under 'catastrophism' but it is also 'biology' – but it is interesting how so many studies shear away from a catastrophist interpretation, when it seems highly likely the nesting grounds were overwhelmed, by whatever, and quickly buried [preserving soft tissue and parts].