Yes, there are several limitations to original remains in archaeological and paleontological studies. First, they can be subject to degradation over time due to environmental factors, which can hinder accurate analysis. Additionally, the context in which remains are found may be disturbed, complicating interpretations of their significance. Lastly, the limited availability of original remains can restrict the breadth of research and understanding of past life forms and cultures.
Original remains are the actual body parts of an organism, such as bones or teeth, while other fossils are impressions or molds of the organism. Original remains can provide information about soft tissues, behavior, and physiology that other fossils cannot. However, original remains are rare and may be subject to decay or damage, limiting their availability for study. Additionally, original remains may not always be well-preserved or complete, which can limit the amount of information that can be obtained from them.
Yes, it is false that dinosaur footprints are original remains.
20 percent of the original remains of the Philippine forest
It depends on what the original offense was, and the statute of limitations (if any) for THAT particular offense.
Mineralization occurs in the original remains, inside the shells bones and teeth, of animals and fish. This process turns remains into fossils.
It appears that the court has already recorded the crime and the pleading. As such it is not subject to a statute of limitations and remains on the record.
By definition, 50%. Half life is the time for half of the original sample to decay.
amber
The remains of the Globe Theatre in London were discovered in 1989.
1/8 of the original amount remains.
Because oetzi is awesome
One eighth remains.