On of the more highly controversial findings happened in 2005. Mary Schweitzer and her team found a T-Rex bone which contained soft tissue which contained blood vessel proteins and structures resembling cells. Critics inside the box (defenders of biological evolution) said the finding was contaminated.
The latest discovery was reported with great lengths to avoid any possibility of contamination. The paper carefully refrained from using the word “protein” in order to try and avoid any implications of disproving the theory of evolution.
“A controversial finding that protein fragments can be recovered from dinosaur fossils has been replicated for the first time. Two years ago, Mary Schweitzer, a paleontologist at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, and colleagues stunned the paleontology community when they reported discovering intact protein fragments in a fossil from a Tyrannosaurus rex that died 68 million years ago.”
“The claim has remained contentious, because proteins in tissue normally degrade quickly after an animal dies. On page 626, however, Schweitzer and colleagues report finding an even larger number of protein fragments from an 80-million-year-old fossil from a duck-billed dinosaur, or hadrosaur, known as Brachylophosaurus canadensis.”
Why would this finding remain so “contentious?” Because protein degrades fairly quickly, so quick in fact, it’s rare to even find proteins in fossils which are hundreds of years old. Also, various lines of evidence was used to rule out bacterial contamination. This finding blows the lid off of the storytelling that goes on in evolution. How could a fossil supposedly being 80 million years old still contain soft tissue with proteins? It can’t it’s not physically possible. The new finding also proves the soft tissue found in T Rex in 2005 wasn’t a fluke!
Now those who like to think “inside the box” consider this a gap which needs to eventually be filled with some sort of explanation (story) so it can be fitted into the time frame of an supposedly old earth.
There was also a heavy spin to the report, the emphasis on the finding wasn’t on the preserved protein found in the fossil but whether or not the dinosaur could be linked to birds. But with appropriate scientific caution, the evidence did in fact point to the confirmation of the hypothesis that the protein fragments were once part of a living dinosaur which verifies creationism!