By Andreea
Scientists studying two mummified baby woolly mammoths found in the Siberian Arctic have announced new details about the animals’ short lives – and gruesome deaths.
Researchers at the University of Michigan believe that both of the 40,000-year-old babies, nicknamed Lyuba and Khroma, suffocated in mud – Lyuba after falling through lake ice, Khroma after tumbling into a river. Through a dental analysis on both Ice Age animals, researchers also learned that Lyuba was likely one month old when she died. Khroma was about two months old.
Read more and see the video here.
19 comments on “Two mummified baby woolly mammoths found in the Siberian Arctic”
Evil! It is clearly the work of the Devil! Satan deliberately planted them there to fool us into thinking the Biblical account is wrong, and the planet is more than 10,000 years old.
It is a good thing that Sarah Palin now has her own radio station; she can alert the World to the dangers this portends, by creating words, which, although poor simple mortals like me cannot comprehend, have deep meaning, and will ward off the evil spirits.
Go Sarah, go, speak in tongues and protect us all.
And you, you silly scientists, with your ‘pet projects’, – cutting up flies indeed, – stop your delving and investigating; you never know what you might find. Stop it, I say!
Report abuse
Right out of the dark ages. Someone obviously got to your mind before the age of reason, which is the primary goal of most religions. Inserting these irrational beliefs (Gods and demons) into children’s minds is despicable to say the least. Once infected, most people will never recover from the mental abuse of religious dogma.
Report abuse
A statement right out of the dark ages. Someone obviously got to your mind before the age of reason, which is the primary goal of most religions. Inserting these irrational beliefs (Gods and demons) into children’s minds is despicable to say the least. Once infected, most people will never recover from the mental abuse of religious dogma.
Report abuse
Frederick, it’s a joke!
I’ve been subscribing to this forum for years, and am a keen student of Darwin’s discovery, arguably the most profound and elegant ever made, even if it’s not quite on the same intellectual level as those of Newton and some others.
Looks like I fooled yer Frederick.
Report abuse
Further to my last Frederick, since it’s not possible to have a rational debate with creationists, the only thing to do is ridicule their infantile notions, and your reaction makes me think that I’ve now got the hang of it.
Dons a satisfied grin.
I wonder if I could pass off as one of their number; it would be fun!
Report abuse
Most amusing Stafford – I got the joke on reading the first para 😀
Report abuse
There’s always someone who completely misses the sarcasm, and today that person is you!
Report abuse
This is a lie some old evil hindu god might have planted this mammoth to confuse believers
Report abuse
I’m still waiting for the first Mammoth clone.
Report abuse
Now it’s 10,000 years? What happened to 6,000?
Report abuse
It varies!
Creationists never could do numbers, measurements or maths!
Report abuse
I would settle for a hairy elephant inhabiting cold climates in the upper latitudes. Maybe that is how to save them: by increasing their range outside Africa where they are being poached at a rate of 78 per day.
Report abuse
I believe he is being sarcastic.. 🙂
Report abuse
Hmmm… Hindus never believed what christians believed and hence that does not hold much water. Hindus do believe that the universe destroys and recreates every few billion years… now.. where did we hear that theory before?
Report abuse
Frederick, you must be a serious type and that is why you didn’t get Stafford Gordon funny sarcasm. He doesn’t sound religious by any means, just make fun off the silly once who fall for this naive myth. Religion means going back to the dark ages and can’t compete with the rationality of science.
Report abuse
Infiltration. I like it.
Report abuse
A great discovery; and yes tahoekid, a clone would be wonderful, but how would it procreate? That’s not a rhetorical question, I would genuinely like to know; anyone?
Because if cloned without the possibility of regenerating the species it would be a frivolous thing to do and not worthy of science.
Further, great care would have to be taken to find the right habitat for it, to avoid unnecessary suffering.
All in all it could prove to be a pointless exercise, because with the present genetic techniques I think everything worth knowing could be learnt anyway.
Report abuse
LOL. He’s actually being sarcastic.
Report abuse
I blame Obama.
Report abuse