It's too bad they just show a reconstructed image of what the forest looked like. I would really like to see what the fossilized remains of an "almost perfectly preserved 298 million year-old forest" looks like rather than an artist's rendering.

The journal article supporting information has pictures.

http://www.pnas.org/content/suppl/2012/02/15/1115076109.DCSu...

… don't despair at the little line chart, scroll down.

When they described it as being like Pompeii my imagination might have gotten the best of me and expected too much :) Very cool photos nonetheless

Here's the direct link to the original article in case you're interested: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/02/14/1115076109

I guess researchers dubbed it, "the whole of the article from line 10, word 7 through the end?

Ha, I know.. I couldn't tell if it is "Pompeii" or "Pompeii of the Permian period". I hate that professional articles have so many typos in them these days.