[HN Gopher] Trove of dinosaur fossils found high in B.C. mountains
___________________________________________________________________
Trove of dinosaur fossils found high in B.C. mountains
Author : curmudgeon22
Score : 75 points
Date : 2024-09-18 04:39 UTC (4 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.cbc.ca)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.cbc.ca)
| blueflow wrote:
| TIL: "B.C" stands for British Columbia, which despite the name,
| is neither part of Britain nor near Columbia, but in Canada.
| cryptoegorophy wrote:
| They did add "Beautiful" before British Columbia on the license
| plates, so that there is at least one word that gives the best
| description of the province.
| lostemptations5 wrote:
| "Sure! I'll call you next week!" -- never to be heard from
| again.
|
| Everyone seems very unhappy there socially.
| cdaringe wrote:
| Subjective, likely false. No sources listed.
| paul_n wrote:
| I live there, that comment made me laugh because there's
| definitely some amount of truth in it. I've always
| described west coast Canada as surface nice, but harder
| to make friends, while Ontario is surface closed off, but
| a lot easier to make new friends.
| ikmckenz wrote:
| The Wikipedia page for the "Seattle freeze" phenomenon
| mentions it applying to Vancouver[1], also Vancouver has
| long been known as "No Fun City" because of laws and
| cultural norms against partying[2].
|
| 1 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seattle_Freeze 2
| https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/No_Fun_City
| ghostpepper wrote:
| I'm not sure of the root causes but British Columbia does
| seem to have particularly antiquated liquor laws, even
| compared to the rest of Canada.
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| That's normal nice in the Pacific Northwest. Possibly due
| to the Scandinavian heritage. Another explanation I heard
| is that people used to be more open there before the many
| waves of post 90s immigration. Once people there have
| established their friend groups they're not looking to add
| any more to the group as they worry too many new friends
| will diminish their own place in their friend group.
| pfannkuchen wrote:
| Scandinavia is similarly dark and gloomy in the winter, I
| think?
|
| Does the darkness cause this effect in people? Is the
| darkness a filter for people who are like that already?
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| I do wonder, could be that for much of human history if
| you ever saw a foreigner one of you was about to die. PNG
| blood feuds being a modern example. Perhaps societies
| with a strong centralized state would evolve a culture
| open to integrating foreigners. I also wonder how much of
| modern multiculturalism has its roots in colonial
| empires.
|
| AFAIK many of the Scandinavians that came to the US were
| escaping the really bad ethnic / religious stratification
| and famines.
| deanCommie wrote:
| > Once people there have established their friend groups
| they're not looking to add any more to the group as they
| worry too many new friends will diminish their own place
| in their friend group.
|
| That's such a cynical interpretation of a totally
| reasonable problem of social dynamics.
|
| A friendship of 2 has different dynamics than 3 than 4,
| etc. And all of them are different depending on the
| composition of intraverts/extraverts.
|
| FWIW, the extravert friend groups I know are highly
| inclusive and are always eager to add new members. For
| obvious reasons.
|
| And the opposite for introverts who are much more careful
| and cautious (I am one) because they know how fragile
| good vibes can be and how new strangers are exhausting
| and can affect them.
|
| IMO, the Pacific Northwest attracts introverts because
| the main activities are fairly individualistic (hiking,
| skiing) and the social aspects happen before/after which
| you can easily skip. Not so in something like NYC where
| everything is orientated around other people.
|
| Then extraverts move to the PNW for the hot tech job
| markets (Seattle/Vancouver) and are annoyed that everyone
| is so "cold".
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| I am describing things as I see them, not casting
| aspersions. As far as I care people can manage their
| friend groups however they wish even if that results in
| my own exclusion.
|
| I think what people criticize most is the insincerity in
| the 'nice'. I see that as a cultural communication issue
| and not properly understanding local norms. At least in
| PNW they won't make plans with you, the Northern
| California version of 'nice' will make plans with you but
| then flake at the last minute. From an organizational
| perspective this appears to be rather sub-optimal but I
| understand why people do it.
|
| Personally I'm weird so I have to navigate cultural
| differences no matter where I go and I don't expect
| people to change to accommodate me.
| shermantanktop wrote:
| Aka "Seattle Nice."
|
| People move to a place, are eager to get connected, but the
| people there are already connected...except for all the
| other lonely newbies. It's a boom-town phenomenon, I think.
|
| And if you are a long-time resident, it's a little rich
| having large numbers of people come clog up your town while
| doing clueless newbie things and then gripe about how they
| don't feel welcome.
| lostemptations5 wrote:
| Though in other cities you can make friends much more
| easily, especially on the East Coast...
| charles_f wrote:
| Because immigration is not as strong.
| charles_f wrote:
| (note, sounds racist, but not what I meant. What I meant
| is that when there's a lot of people coming, it's
| mechanically harder for people to enter pre-existing
| social groups, thus the impression that people are not
| welcoming)
| pfannkuchen wrote:
| Newbies who just moved in are much more likely to leave
| as well. Why invest the time?
| cjbgkagh wrote:
| For newbies often it's their first time as an expat or
| immigrant but for the natives usually they've been
| through these waves of immigrants multiple times already.
| karaterobot wrote:
| I've lived in Seattle for 25 years, have been hearing
| about "Seattle Nice" and "The Seattle Freeze" that whole
| time. By which they mean that people are friendly and
| polite on a surface level, but cold and distant when you
| try to get closer. I think it's a myth, or at any rate I
| have never experienced it as a trend (individuals, sure).
| People here are as nice as anywhere else I've been. I
| think maybe it's confirmation bias: people hear about it,
| then see it everywhere, like stereotypes about rude New
| Yorkers, or snooty Parisians.
|
| It would be strange if whole a region, with such a huge
| population of transplants, all shared the same
| personality. They don't make you sign a contract to be
| rude when you move here!
| shermantanktop wrote:
| "Seattle freeze" is like "Seattle drivers". The chances
| are pretty high that the dumdum who is double-parked in a
| bus lane while cars honk at them is actually not from
| Seattle.
| morkalork wrote:
| I've never been to Seattle but this description is
| erfectly apt for Toronto.
| nativeit wrote:
| I get this all the time in North Carolina. Maybe it's just
| a symptom of the times? Most everyone I know under the age
| of 40-45 would rather commit hari kari than place a short,
| friendly phone call.
| nativeit wrote:
| Also, hear me out, maybe it's us?
| arcticbull wrote:
| It was a British Crown Colony, hence the British -- and the
| Columbia part is a reference to the [edit] Columbia River Basin
| which I believe was part of the territory before it ended up in
| Washington. You may be thinking of Colombia.
|
| [edit] just to drive home the British part the Union Jack is
| still an official, ceremonial flag of Canada.
| themadturk wrote:
| If I remember right, the Columbia River has its source in
| British Columbia.
| seabrookmx wrote:
| Correct. I just did a 5 hour paddleboard down the Columbia
| near its starting point in Invermere BC (it's a huge
| wetland). It's absolutely gorgeous out there.
| PeterHolzwarth wrote:
| "Columbia" was a word used to refer to the New World. It's use
| shifted over time (sometimes just the tropics, sometimes both
| continents, sometimes just America, etc).
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_(personification)
| thangalin wrote:
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Langley#History
|
| > [Fort Langley] dates from a time when the boundary between
| British and American possession of the trans-mountain west,
| known as the Columbia District had not yet been decided.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_District#Hudson's_Bay...
|
| > With the creation of the Crown Colony on the British mainland
| north of the then-Washington Territory in 1858, Queen Victoria
| chose to use Columbia District as the basis for the name Colony
| of British Columbia, i.e. the remaining British portion of the
| former Columbia District.
| bee_rider wrote:
| The dinosaur is from B.C. geographically, and from extremely
| B.C. temporally.
| seabrookmx wrote:
| We typically don't use the periods, and abbreviate it like any
| other Canadian province or US state like BC, AB, WA, NY etc.
|
| Are you American? I'm surprised to hear some people don't know
| we exist!
| blueflow wrote:
| I'm from Saxony.
| freeslave wrote:
| These days B.C. seems to be preferred due to the colonial
| connotations of "British Columbia".
|
| https://tnc.news/2024/02/21/stop-saying-british-columbians/
| dkga wrote:
| It's really interesting to have so many fossils close to the
| surface, especially in an area with a considerable amount of
| seismic activity. I always thought earthquakes & the such would
| serve to disperse fossils rather than pool so many together.
| alex_young wrote:
| She said finding dinosaur fossils at a high elevation -- in this
| case, 2,000 metres above sea level -- is unusual because it means
| they would have been living there.
|
| No indication of geological age, but presumably more than 65mya,
| so maybe it wasn't that elevation when they were left there?
| Tagbert wrote:
| The Cascade Range did not exist during the Cretaceous era.
| Those mountains arose through subduction and volcanism starting
| around 37 Mya.
|
| Even if there were mountains around, 2K meters is not that
| high. I used to live in a town at 2500 meters elevation in
| Colorado.
| jeff_carr wrote:
| Black rock around white bone could be volcanic ash or mud
| buried the bones, then pushed down into the mantle just
| right, heated it under lots of pressure and cooked it all
| into rock like a kiln?
| Tagbert wrote:
| Heat and pressure like that would convert that ash into a
| metamorphic rock and destroy any fossils. Surface rocks
| don't get down to the Mantle except through subduction
| where they are melted and mixed with other melted rocks.
|
| If those fossils were buried in ash or mud, the normal
| rock-forming processes would have fossilized the bone and
| converted the ash and much to sedimentary rock. You see the
| same thing in other fossils bearing rocks like limestone
| and sandstone.
| cgh wrote:
| I might be misinterpreting your comment, but the mountains of
| Spatzizi and BC in general are not part of the Cascades,
| other than a small area near the border around Chilliwack.
| birriel wrote:
| I'm not a geologist, but 2000 m in 37 million years is ~0.05
| millimeters per year. Is that about the right rate of growth
| for mountains formed through subduction and volcanism?
| dredmorbius wrote:
| [delayed]
| tracerbulletx wrote:
| Yeah that whole paragraph is nonsensical...
| sethammons wrote:
| > "It probably didn't look a lot different than it does today,
| except the mountains would have been even taller," she said.
|
| Is that true? I would expect upheaval more than erosion there.
| mmooss wrote:
| FTFA: "Arbour estimates the fossils are 66 to 68 million years
| old."
| baxtr wrote:
| > _" It probably didn't look a lot different than it does
| today, except the mountains would have been even taller," she
| said._
| ZunarJ5 wrote:
| Most fossils we know about come from wetland and marine
| environments. It's extremely rare to find things for mountains
| and jungles. Fossils require quick deposition and the right
| conditions... Exciting stuff.
| throwaway918299 wrote:
| My grandfather told me about this yesterday. He said something
| along the lines that they needed helicopters to get where they
| are to retrieve them.
|
| To which I said: this is the most important discovery about
| dinosaurs, who would've thought they had helicopters!
|
| Didn't quite land like I had hoped. My transition to Full Dad is
| complete.
| nativeit wrote:
| I hereby award you three knee-slaps and a yuk-yuk.
| Congratulations!
| xyproto wrote:
| What were they smoking?
| robofanatic wrote:
| Potosaurus?
| edm0nd wrote:
| smoking on that dinosaur pack
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-09-22 23:00 UTC)