Soft Tissue Withstands Another Challenge

While analyzing a newly discovered dinosaur fossil,  Mary Schweitzer stumbled upon one of the greatest evidences for a young earth ever to be discovered! In evolution’s time frame, the fossil was a 68 million old Tyrannosaurus rex which was found in Montana and various fragments were dissolved in acid in Schweitzer’s laboratory at North Carolina State University in Raleigh.

To her astonishment as well as her colleagues, Schweitzer announced she had discovered blood vessels and structures that looked like whole cells inside that T. rex bone which was the first discovery of its kind and would not be the last!  They never imagined even a trace of still-soft dinosaur tissue could survive such a long time because as various textbooks would tell you, when an animal dies, soft tissues such as blood vessels, muscle and skin decay disappear over time, while hard tissues like bone may gradually acquire minerals from the environment and become fossils.

It is quite possible that the soft tissue would have been discovered prior to Schweitzer’s discovery but paleontologists generally don’t dig their specimens out of the ground so they can destroy with acid like Schweitzer did!  She recalls, “I looked at this and I looked at this and I thought, this can’t be. Red blood cells don’t preserve.” She is right, not for millions of years they don’t!

As one can imagine, much controversy followed the discovery although it didn’t come creationists but rather evolutionists themselves which continues to challenge the soft tissue discovery. Creationists and Christians alike rejoiced around the world in such a discovery while evolutionists were on their heels, attacking creationists as “hijacking” the data,  that Schweitzer was evolutionist with no challenge from a creationist that she was not and trying to come up with a rescue explanation which would allow them to claim that soft tissue could survive for 68 million years.  Maybe the textbooks are wrong about fossilization they suggested or maybe it wasn’t soft tissue to begin with.

Mary Schweitzer decided to attend a meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology this month where she presented more compelling evidence that has soft tissue withstanding another challenge!

In Nature News

“Schweitzer and her colleagues have continued to amass support for their interpretation. The latest evidence comes from a molecular analysis of what look to be bone cells, or osteocytes, from T. rex and Brachylophosaurus canadensis. The researchers isolated the possible osteocytes and subjected them to several tests.”

“When they exposed the cell-like structures to an antibody that targets a protein called PHEX found only in bird osteocytes* (birds are descended from dinosaurs), the structures reacted, as would be expected of dinosaur osteocytes. And when the team subjected the supposed dinosaur cells to other antibodies that target DNA, the antibodies bound to material in small, specific regions inside the apparent cell membrane.”

The talking point about dinosaurs to birds is storytelling, but this latest evidence for soft tissue is a valid scientific discovery, and it will interesting to watch for more evidence to come out of this research. As long as the soft-tissue claims hold up, they argue strongly against the consensus view that dinosaurs died out millions of years ago!

In the creationist model, it has no problem with dinosaurs, or soft tissue being discovered, because we believe the earth is young! In the evolutionary story which distorts history with complex conjectures that takes more faith to believe than God himself. In the creationist model, dinosaurs co-existed with another animals, and the fossil record bares this out with discoveries like ducks, squirrels, platypus, beaver-like and badger-like creatures that have all been found in ‘dinosaur-era’ rock layers along with bees, cockroaches, frogs and pine trees!

T. Rex Debate Over Soft Tissue Revisited

One of the most damaging pieces of evidence against evolution which has been attacked countless times is now verified…In 2005, Mary Schweitzer’s made an incredible discovery. Blood vessel proteins and structures resembling cells were recovered from the dinosaur’s bone.

Kaye from the Burke Museum of Natural History in Seattle with two colleagues concluded in their observation of the dinosaur bone from seeing turtle and ammonite fossils was bacterial biofilm that grew in the hollow spaces inside the fossils rather than soft tissue.

In May 2009, Robert F. Service stated in science…

“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.”

This is a tremendous blow to evolution but great news for Christians as it verifies creationism.  How can soft tissue last that long? It can’t!  The story is now being created to explain evolution being falsified but rest assured, there’s no way this blood protein could be 68 million years old!

The data has been revisited and will be published in full detain on September fourth, here is a preview from Journal of Proteome Research

“In the study, Marshall Bern, Brett S. Phinney and David Goldberg point out that the first analysis in 2007 of a well-preserved, fossilized T. rex bone identified traces of seven distinct protein fragments, or peptides, from collagen. That material is one of the primary components of bone, tendons and other connective tissue. However, later studies disputed that finding, suggesting that it was a statistical fluke or the result of contamination from another laboratory sample.

“The scientists describe reanalysis of the T. rex data and also report finding evidence of substances found in collagen. “In summary, we find nothing obviously wrong with the Tyrannosaurus rex [analysis from 2007],” the report states.”

“The identified peptides seem consistent with a sample containing old, quite possibly very ancient, bird-like bone, contaminated with only fairly explicable proteins. Hemoglobin and collagen are plausible proteins to find in fossil bone, because they are two of the most abundant proteins in bone and bone marrow.”

So evolutionists have created a gap for themselves. Dino’s tissue is not showing the age of being 68 million years but rather much younger. The problem is, they are following a false timescale in a frame work that has failed countless times.

Robert Krulwich On Evolution: Smote Them With Your Story

Once upon of time, there was a woman named; Mary Schweitzer.  Now Mary  was a very smart gal, she obtained her PhD, Biology at Montana State University, in 1995.

Mary was very interested in examining well preserved fossils and soft tissue. Her dedication to evolution was never questioned but rather admired! She has a strong desire to find out the reproductive strategies in dinosaurs and their bird descendants. But what she did finally discover was beyond her wildest dreams, it was totally beyond her belief in the evolutionary structure.

One day Mary was extracting a fossil of T-Rex that was found in Montana. While working on T-Rex so it could be transported for further study, she noticed a strange smell coming from the dinosaur! It smelled like a dead carcass.  She shook her head in disbelief, because this fossil of T-Rex is suppose to be 68 million years old. So rock is not suppose to smell like dead tissue!

Mary continued with her work, packing the fossil of T-Rex up. The leg bone was considered too big for the helicopter, so it had to be reduced in size by breaking apart the leg. All of a sudden, part of the leg drops to the ground.  Mary’s heart beat went up a few notches. The feeling of fear for any damage to the bone crossed her mind. As Mary looked down, she saw the most astounding thing ever witness in her career…An observation thought to be impossible!

After reviewing the new discovery, Mary said; “The microstructures that look like cells are preserved in every way, preservation of this extent, where you still have this flexibility and transparency, has never been seen in a dinosaur before.”

Mary was really very excited over the discovery. “I could be famous with this unique dinosaur as well as finding an alternative explanation for the soft tissue” she said to herself. Many had trouble with this reality including Mary, how could a 68 million year old animal still contain soft tissue? Could the textbooks be wrong about fossilization? she asked.

To be continued!

The story ties in with a Mr Robert Kurlwich who is a Journalist who gave a speech at Cal Tech’s graduation last summer. His choice of weapon when it comes to his war with creationism, tell stories…

“So Mary and her two assistants collected the dead ostrich, which was in the farmer’s backhoe bucket, and drove it back to Raleigh, and what do you know?  The former ostrich had been a pregnant former ostrich, and the bones looked pretty similar.  The next year, Mary published a paper in Science with the dinosaur bone right next to an emu bone, which looks even more like Bob’s.

And since then, another T. rex, this one in Argentina, was found to have the same calcium structure—more evidence that when you look deep inside dinosaurs and deep inside birds, what you see is very, very similar.  Which gives us yet another reason to think that the robin in your front yard is an itty, bitty dinosaur.”

Mr Kurlwich explaination on how this story might effect a person’s beliefs is rather quite amusing…

If your nonscience friend listens to that story, and leans in a little, and hears how scientists work with bones and dead birds in buckets, patiently looking for patterns, you have just placed a sword in her hand.  The next time somebody tells her that scientists are know-it-alls who toss off opinions, that science is an elitist plot, she would think, “welllll, but I did hear this story . . .” and the scientific method gets a little more defense, a little protection.

But better than that, the next time your friend sees a robin, she’ll see, I hope, more than a robin.  She’ll glance at a little bird pecking for worms on the lawn, and she’ll travel 70 million years back to a time and a place that creationists say did not exist…”

I think his story is geared for younger kids who he might think are more easy to sway than children who are older. Maybe Mr Krulwich is thinking of someone who never had a science class before…lol…But obviously, he under estimates people’s intelligence especially in the information age. He then packs his story with half truths, assumptions, and more bias by connecting similar dots in DNA picked by evolutionists while not picking other similar DNA.

Contrary to what Kurlwich thinks, true christians who are creationists, mavel with delight not only in the Creator Himself but the wonderful works He has done with His creation!