The researchers also analyzed other fossils for the presence of soft tissue, and found it was present in about half of their samples going back to the Jurassic Period , which lasted from The obvious question, though, was how soft, pliable tissue could survive for millions of years.
Dinosaur Soft Tissue
In a new study published today Nov. Biological Sciences, Schweitzer thinks she has the answer: Iron is an element present in abundance in the body, particularly in the blood, where it is part of the protein that carries oxygen from the lungs to the tissues. Iron is also highly reactive with other molecules, so the body keeps it locked up tight, bound to molecules that prevent it from wreaking havoc on the tissues. After death, though, iron is let free from its cage. It forms minuscule iron nanoparticles and also generates free radicals, which are highly reactive molecules thought to be involved in aging.
Formaldehyde , of course, preserves tissue. It works by linking up, or cross-linking, the amino acids that make up proteins, which makes those proteins more resistant to decay. Schweitzer and her colleagues found that dinosaur soft tissue is closely associated with iron nanoparticles in both the T. They then tested the iron-as-preservative idea using modern ostrich blood vessels. They soaked one group of blood vessels in iron-rich liquid made of red blood cells and another group in water.
The blood vessels left in water turned into a disgusting mess within days. The blood vessels soaked in red blood cells remain recognizable after sitting at room temperature for two years. Illustrations Bring Dinosaurs to Life ]. Dinosaurs' iron-rich blood, combined with a good environment for fossilization, may explain the amazing existence of soft tissue from the Cretaceous a period that lasted from about The specimens Schweitzer works with, including skin, show evidence of excellent preservation.
The bones of these various specimens are articulated, not scattered, suggesting they were buried quickly. They're also buried in sandstone, which is porous and may wick away bacteria and reactive enzymes that would otherwise degrade the bone. Schweitzer is set to search for more dinosaur soft tissue this summer. As far as anyone can tell, Schweitzer was right: Bob the dinosaur really did have a store of medullary bone when she died. A paper published in Science last June presents microscope pictures of medullary bone from ostrich and emu side by side with dinosaur bone, showing near-identical features.
In the course of testing a B. One Friday night in January , Wittmeyer was in the lab as usual. She took out a fossil chip that had been in the acid for three days and put it under the microscope to take a picture. She used forceps to flatten it. I was like, stop it! Suddenly Schweitzer and Wittmeyer were dealing with something no one else had ever seen. For a couple of weeks, Wittmeyer said, it was like Christmas every day. In the lab, Wittmeyer now takes out a dish with six compartments, each holding a little brown dab of tissue in clear liquid, and puts it under the microscope lens.
Inside each specimen is a fine network of almost-clear branching vessels—the tissue of a female Tyrannosaurus rex that strode through the forests 68 million years ago, preparing to lay eggs. Close up, the blood vessels from that T. Further discoveries in the past year have shown that the discovery of soft tissue in B. Schweitzer and Wittmeyer have now found probable blood vessels, bone-building cells and connective tissue in another T.
You can say that again! In regards to the mammoth, we have here yet another soft tissue found to go with the many others. I am reminded of the Scientists in a lab that made coal in 6 hours.
Post navigation
At a different time, in the British made oil in 10 minutes. This drives Schweitzer crazy. Geologists have established that the Hell Creek Formation, where B. I like healthy debate, and prefer to present logical material for consideration. The data is the data. What is observable is the geology of Hell Creek, the bones themselves, and where they were located, and the soft material inside. Forensic or historical sciences, such as archaeology, anthropology, paleontology, and forensics are historical sciences.
In other words, results cannot be repeated in a lab. This animal cannot be buried again for all to see. Her emotions in this case are irrelevant. For her, science and religion represent two different ways of looking at the world; invoking the hand of God to explain natural phenomena breaks the rules of science. Breaks HER rules of science, and no doubt the rules of those who educated her. Conversely there exists the well known anthropic principle which states that the universe appears to be carefully designed for the well-being of mankind.
This is quite recognized, and is in direct opposition to her approach and personal philosophy, since teleologically, we can observe a design and purpose, and therefore can conclude a designer. Yes it is correct God asks for faith. He would not have so meticulously recorded the history of the Jewish nation, the forming of their laws, kings, lineages, and travels.
Answering critics – Soft Tissue in Dinosaur Bones – J.R. Cooper – Author
Cities such as Nineveh, Ur, Jericho, all found. God used historians like Luke to record eye witness accounts and the history of the early church in Acts, precisely because evidence was so important. In Acts and John alone, over eye witness details have been verified by scholars, because it WAS so important to be able to defend the scriptures.
More on that later when we discuss the second part of the question. We are without excuse if we do not see God in the wondrous creation He has made for us. A huge point of contention, because simply put, evolutionists must conclude that all this came about by accident.
From there through millions of years of death, and change for survival, man developed from animals. But in her defense, they are not disagreeing with the forensic science she conducted. And the simple fact remains, soft tissue cannot last 65 million years before breaking down. In my opinion, when they let go of the presupposition of evolution, much of what they observe in the field will fall in to place, like it already has with Dr. Snelling at the Grand Canyon, Dr. Sanford the geneticist who studied the genetic entropy of the human genome, and fifty others I could name see in six days: Paleontologist Alan Cheetham, a gradualist evolutionist, summed up decades of his own research: Enoch, Evolution or Creation , p.
Far from ignoring or ridiculing the ground-swell of opposition to Darwinism that is growing, for example, in the United States, we should welcome it as an opportunity to reexamine our sacred cow more closely. I hope this is the case for all who discount the veracity of scripture.
- whos iggy azalea dating.
- Dinosaur Shocker | Science | Smithsonian;
- funny opening messages for online dating.
- indian girl free dating site.
- Answering critics – Soft Tissue in Dinosaur Bones.
- signs a guy wants to hook up.
The second part of our question: Again, her data, the actual hard data does not lie in contradiction to anyone. They are simply hard facts.
Accessibility Navigation
Certain testable content, location, etc. Evolutionists are adept however at blurring the lines between hard facts, and interpreted data, as well as always insisting they have a monopoly on the sciences. This is simply in gross error. This same accusation was levied at me by this debater as well, and several times at that. But he also did say one thing I agreed with, and that is that the bible is not a science book. Creationists do not claim it to be so, nor do they claim it to be a book on taxonomy or dinosaurs.
The bible contains what it contains, and from it, we must derive conclusions based on what God told us. But in it creationists would expect, unlike Schweitzer, to find a Creator God who does speak sense when referring to the natural world, which is precisely what we find. Through studies, we can learn the culprits that brought us the evolutionary theory, and what their intent was. Lyell wanted to save the sciences from Moses, and from Buffon, to Lamarck, to Darwin, the enlightenment brought us the unsubstantiated theories about the decent of man that we teach today.