Using Evolutionist Pseudoscience to "Explain" Dinosaur Soft Tissues
The existence of blood cells and soft tissues in Tyrannosaurus rex and other fossils created quite a stir in the evolutionary camp. After all, by their way of reckoning, there is no way that blood and tissues can be preserved for sixty-five million years. (Biblical creationists did not have a problem with the discovery.) Some uninformed but enthusiastic cheerleaders for evolution tried to deny it, but the facts remain.
Now the discoverer of the first Tyrannosaurus rex tissues has released the results of some research. It appears that iron in blood has a key part in preservation. Unfortunately, the experiments were spurious because of human interference and implausible situations (such as the Miller-Urey experiment, where the trap was removed to keep amino acids that would be destroyed in the synthetic environment). The extrapolation from two years to multiple millions of years is also absurd. The "research" has some valid points, but overall, is worthy of the Nebraska Man and Piltdown Man fiascoes.
Now the discoverer of the first Tyrannosaurus rex tissues has released the results of some research. It appears that iron in blood has a key part in preservation. Unfortunately, the experiments were spurious because of human interference and implausible situations (such as the Miller-Urey experiment, where the trap was removed to keep amino acids that would be destroyed in the synthetic environment). The extrapolation from two years to multiple millions of years is also absurd. The "research" has some valid points, but overall, is worthy of the Nebraska Man and Piltdown Man fiascoes.
Find out the analysis of the test at "Dinosaur Soft Tissue Preserved By Blood?"Researchers are now suggesting that iron embedded in blood proteins preserved the still-soft tissues, cells, and molecules discovered inside dinosaurs and other fossils after the creatures were buried in sediments. The ability to justify millions of years is at stake, and this study promises to do just that. What are its merits and demerits?Publishing in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B, Mary Schweitzer led a team that showed how iron atoms from blood adhere to and preserve blood vessels. The team placed ostrich bone blood vessels in water and watched them disintegrate in less than a week. They then treated another set of ostrich blood vessels with concentrated blood, and the treated blood vessels still looked fresh after two years of sitting on the lab bench.They postulated that iron generates chemically reactive oxy radicals that help adjacent proteins bond, preserving their overall structure in a process called cross-linking. The way a fried egg resists rotting longer than a raw, cracked egg might illustrate this effect.“Oxy radicals also facilitate protein cross-linking in a manner analogous to the actions of tissue fixatives (e.g. formaldehyde), thus increasing resistance of these ‘fixed’ biomolecules to enzymatic or microbial digestion,” according to Schweitzer and her colleagues.These results are unique and compelling. But do they really justify the study authors’ claim that this iron preservation phenomenon explains how dinosaur tissues lasted for tens of millions of years?