Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

T. rex tissue controversy

Comments

  • #2
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    So wait, they found bacterial biofilm on a completely different specimen and use it as a springboard to say Schweitzer's findings were not what she said they were? Hmm, I think a bit of cross examination is in order.


  • #3
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    Galvasean wrote: »
    So wait, they found bacterial biofilm on a completely different specimen and use it as a springboard to say Schweitzer's findings were not what she said they were? Hmm, I think a bit of cross examination is in order.

    Agreed! The main concern though seems to be that they made their isolations from very much comparable samples and weren't able to reproduce Schweitzer's results despite many samples. It's quite possible that Schweitzer's samples just represented a lucky isolation... contamination seems unlikely.


  • #4
    Galvasean
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    Makes you wonder why they didn't just contact Schweitzer first and collaborate their research rather than run to the presses. I fear palaeontology is starting to get ruined by celebrity and tabloidism.


  • #5
    AtomicHorror
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,888 ✭✭✭AtomicHorror


    Galvasean wrote: »
    Makes you wonder why they didn't just contact Schweitzer first and collaborate their research rather than run to the presses. I fear palaeontology is starting to get ruined by celebrity and tabloidism.

    That would fly in the face of scientific philosophy somewhat. Your results don't mean quite so much until someone can independently reproduce them.


Advertisement