Soft tissue in fossils

From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
Jump to navigationJump to search
A close up picture of Soft Tissue Sarcoma under an electron microscope.

Fossils are the remains of buried organisms. The fossilization process begins after the object is buried and the organic remains are put through a long fossilization process called taphonomy. The fossils original substances are slowly replaced with materials that harden into the same shape as the original organism. The organism must be buried rapidly or else it will not fossilize. A corpse exposed to the wild will be decomposed by other animals for food or weathered away by the elements leaving nothing to fossilize. The existence of fossils at all is a demonstration of rapid burial, sedimentation rates vastly higher than rates seen today, and a disproof of uniformitarianism. [1]

A close up picture of a small creature embalmed in amber.
A good picture of soft tissue under a microscope.

Small creatures can also be fossilized by being encased in amber. Amber is hardened tree sap that the organism became stuck in and fossilized over the course of many years. Animals in very dry, hot places, like deserts die and dry out due to sun exposure. Animal body parts and organs become mummified and preserved for thousands of years. Fossils that are frozen are very rare, but the best way of preservation. This exact way is hard to find because for a fossil to stay intact, it has to be frozen from death, to recovery. This means that an organism must be both frozen and undisturbed by any heat for many years. [2]

Soft tissue is consistent with young earth creationism, where a global Flood fossilized life rapidly through massive levels of sediment and underwater volcanism. However, conventional scientific theory has disclaimed the existence of soft tissues which should not still exist after millions of years.

How Was Soft Tissue In Fossils Discovered?

It is widely claimed Mary Schweitzer was the first to discover soft tissues in fossils but this is incorrect. As recorded in the List of Biometerial Fossil Papers maintained by Brian Thomas Ph.D and and Joel Tay of the Institute for Creation Research[3] the first discovery of soft tissue was in 1954 where Devonian alanine, glutamic, & glycine amino acids were discovered in several fossils[4] followed by the discovery of collagen fibers in Dremotherium in 1962 [5] The topic of soft tissues in fossils continued largely unnoticed in its significance until Mary Schwietzer's discoveries and the controversy surrounding them.

Schweitzer is a paleontologist located in North Carolina and a professor of paleontology. Schweitzer discovered blood vessels, blood cells and collagen in a tyrannosaurus Rex fossil thought by naturalists to be 68 million year old. Soft tissue is unable to survive under any condition for millions of years. Mary Schweitzer's findings were attacked by her naturalist colleagues as a hoax for many years because of the significance of her finding in overthrowing the Geologic Column and its assumed Geologic Ages. An attempt at explaining away these findings was made but fails to provide evidence these tissues can last for 65 million years because a test can only show the tissues can last in certain special conditions for as long as the test has been running. This test was only run a few years. [6]

Background

As far back as 1982 a mummified insect was discovered with intact soft tissue.[7] Palaeontologist Mary H. Schweitzer actually had made a similar discovery in 1992, but skeptics argued the tissue was just biofilm, slime formed by microbes invading the bone.[8] In 1998 thousands of dinosaur eggs were discovered with evidence of fossilized skin, soft tissue, intact.[9]

Schweitzer's 2005 Discovery

Contrary to conventional thinking, dinosaur soft tissue was discovered in 2005, including preserved T-Rex blood cells, in demineralized dinosaur bones.[10] The 2005 university press release noted that "Not only is the tissue largely intact, it’s still transparent and pliable, and microscopic interior structures resembling blood vessels and even cells are still present... Schweitzer then duplicated her findings with at least three other well-preserved dinosaur specimens, one 80-million-year-old hadrosaur and two 65-million-year-old tyrannosaurs. All of these specimens preserved vessels, cell-like structures, or flexible matrix that resembled bone collagen from modern specimens. Current theories about fossil preservation hold that organic molecules should not preserve beyond 100,000 years."[11]

“ By all the rules of paleontology, such traces of life should have long since drained from the bones. It's a matter of faith among scientists that soft tissue can survive at most for a few tens of thousands of years, not the 65 million since T. rex walked what's now the Hell Creek Formation in Montana... She had already seen signs of exceptional preservation in the early 1990s, while she was studying the technical aspects of adhering fossil slices to microscope slides. One day a collaborator brought a T. rex slide to a conference and showed it to a pathologist, who examined it under a microscope. 'The guy looked at it and said, 'Do you realize you've got red blood cells in that bone?' Schweitzer remembers. 'My colleague brought it back and showed me, and I just got goose bumps, because everyone knows these things don't last for 65 million years.' When Schweitzer showed Horner the slide, she recalls, 'Jack said, 'Prove to me they're not red blood cells.'

-Barry Yeoman, Discover Magazine[12]

”

As Schweitzer earlier noted, "Finding these tissues in dinosaurs changes the way we think about fossilization, because our theories of how fossils are preserved don't allow for this."[13] Schweitzer's original paper took note of the rapid fossilization process at work, stating "To preserve these labile embryonic remains, the rate of mineral precipitation must have superseded post-mortem degradative processes, resulting in virtually instantaneous mineralization of soft tissues."[14] According to evolutionists, that is a 68-million year-old Tyrannosaurus Rex with soft tissue and preserved blood vessels. Creationists at the time quickly pointed out the implications of this evidence in supporting the Biblical account.[15]

“ Regardless of how the evolutionist community finally decides what to do with this fossil conundrum, the creationists now possess immensely powerful evidence against the well-publicized belief that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago and instead have tremendous support for the biblical timeline of a recent creation.

-Answers In Genesis[16]

”

Schweitzer's original paper took note of the rapid fossilization process at work, stating "To preserve these labile embryonic remains, the rate of mineral precipitation must have superseded post-mortem degradative processes, resulting in virtually instantaneous mineralization of soft tissues."[14] In 2005 liberal skeptics attempted to question the findings, with Gary Hurd of TalkOrigins suggesting the material just had the appearance of soft tissue[17] and Joe Skulan of the NCSE writing that Creationists were "improperly" seizing on the finding.[18] Schweitzer admitted that she had been afraid to publish her research because of the ridicule she would receive for questioning conventional theory.[19]

“ A 2005 paper in the journal Science described what appeared to be flexible blood vessels, cells, and collagen-like bone matrix from fossils of a 70-million-year-old Tyrannosaurus rex. Mary Schweitzer, the North Carolina State University paleontologist who announced the finding, said her team has now repeated that feat with more than a dozen other dinosaur specimens. To make sense of the surprising discovery, scientists are beginning to rethink a long-standing model of how the fossilization process works.

-Scott Norris, National Geographic[20]

”

Further Discoveries

TalkOrigins in 2006 attempted to deny soft tissue could be evidence for creationism, claiming that "If dinosaur fossils were as young as creationists claim, recovering DNA and non-bone tissues from them should be routine enough that it would not be news."[21] However, now that scientists are examining fossils for soft tissue, routine is exactly what these discoveries are becoming.

By 2007 the evidence got even stronger following analysis of similar tissue in mastodons showing they were closely related to modern elephants.[22] Critics continued attempting as late as 2008 to prove that bacterial biofilms were the answer rather than preserved dinosaur blood vessels.[23]

“ Critics said that her claims, which given the millions of years perspective are indeed 'extraordinary', required extraordinary evidence. But this is a cliché; in reality, they just require evidence, and that has been amply provided. Yet the critics demanded additional protein sequencing, super-careful handling to avoid claims of contamination, and confirmation from other laboratories. So Schweitzer and her team set about doing just that when they looked at the leg bone of this hadrosaur encased in sandstone.

Extraordinary measures were taken to keep the sample away from contamination until it reached the lab. They used an even more sophisticated and newer mass spectrometer, and sent the samples to two other labs for confirmation. They reported finding not just collagen, but evidence of two additional proteins—elastin and laminin. They also found structures uncannily resembling the cells found in both blood and bone, as well as cellular basement membrane matrix. And there were, once again, hints of hemoglobin, gleaned from applying hemoglobin-specific antibodies to the structures and seeing if the antibodies would bind to them...

What happens is that 'auxiliary' hypotheses and assumptions are constructed to preserve the intactness of the 'core' hypothesis, in this case what is known as 'deep time'. In simple terms, proteins should simply not have been able to last for these tens of millions of years. So when they are found in specimens dated this old, the paradigm is under serious threat.

-Carl Wieland, Creation Ministries International[24]

”

In 2009, preserved blood vessels and other connective tissue was found in a duck-billed Hadrosaur.[25] In 2012 molecular analysis decisively proved that soft tissue had been discovered.[8] In 2013 a duck-billed Edmontosaurus was discovered with a head crest made entirely of fleshy soft tissue. [26]

In 2013 a cache of 20 dinosaur embryos of the long-necked Lufengosaurus, according to evolutionists 500 million years old, were discovered inside their eggs including "organic material" (i.e. soft tissue) that may include collagen fibres.[27] The dinosaur eggs were remarkably preserved by being flooded out of their nests and covered with a heavy layer of mud that turned into an 8 inch layer of sandstone.[28] One of the dinosaur embryo discoverers, Reisz, stated that "The nests were inundated by water and basically smothered, and the embryos inside the eggs died and then decayed. And then more water activity moved the bones and concentrated them into a very small area. We only excavated 1sq m of the ‘bone bed’ and we got more than 200 bones."[29] Creation scientists have been pointing out for years that such egg deposits indicate a global Flood.[30]

“ If the presence of organic material in these embryos is confirmed, the finding will add to the roster of remarkably ancient biochemistry. And while no imaginable mechanism could explain such preservation for millions of years, residual biomolecules sheltered within fossils since being suddenly buried in the global Flood less than 4,500 years ago is a lot easier to swallow. The preservation of proteins such as collagen and keratin, structures such as blood cells, and even bits of DNA are consistent with the young age of the earth, but are unbelievable in a millions-of-years scenario.

-Answers In Genesis[29]

”

2014 research claims an embryo as old as 500 million years is included among the soft tissue finds.[31] The Institute of Creation Research observed of the embryo discovery, "One problem—collagen decay-rate measurements at the temperature of the fossil’s location in southern China imply a maximum age of fewer than one million years. How could a specimen be 190 times older than its maximum age?"[32]

“ Given the fact that organic materials like blood vessels and blood cells rot, and the rates at which certain proteins decay, how could these soft tissues have been preserved for ten thousand, let alone 65 million or more, years? These soft tissues have met with hard resistance from mainstream science, and some scientists have even discounted or ignored them. But fresh studies keep finding fresh tissue, making the issue difficult to dismiss. Either the vast evolutionary ages assigned to these finds are dramatically erroneous, or 'we really don't understand decay' rates of the soft tissues and proteins.

-Brian Thomas, Institute for Creation Research[33]

”

Also in 2014 ancient underwater crustaceans were discovered (an alleged 500 million years old), 100 ostracods "entombed" when a huge layer of mud hit them from above, fossilizing them with their eggs and newly hatched offspring, preserving soft tissue such as delicate eggshells.[34] Ancient ichthyosaurs, huge marine reptiles, have also been discovered entombed in huge layers of flood sediment. As the Scientific American puts it (attempting to hypothesize away the possibility of a global Flood), "Occasionally, there would have been mudflows that cascaded into the water like an avalanche, and the researchers think these mudflows killed the ichthyosaurs. The animals likely became disoriented and drowned, getting sucked into the deep sea, where their bodies were entombed in the sediment, the researchers said."[35]

Ramifications

The discovery of relatively short-lived biomaterials in fossils has numerous ramifications affecting many angles of the creation evolution debate.

Geologic Column and ages

The Geologic Column was largely the foundation of modern evolutionary belief. It is what was used to establish in scientific circles and culture the idea the earth has existed for millions of years. This was believed not from evidence but from the naturalist religious doctrine of Uniformitarianism. It dictated that present rates of sediment deposit have been the same throughout all history and therefore the depth of the earth could only have been built up over a very long period of time and that the depth of the earth correlated with time. The deeper a fossil the older it must be. This is a belief based on faith. It excluded the possibility of a Global Flood not based on evidence but based on philosophical grounds.

The discovery of relatively short-lived biomaterials that could not last the claimed millions of years overthrows the geologic ages as this belief of millions of years cannot fit the evidence. A rock cannot be older than the fossil it is encasing. Unless a naturalist will claim that Satan put these fossils there to trick them into believing the earth is young then they will need to accept the geologic ages have collapsed down to only thousands of years.

Uniformitarianism

Further building on the ramifications for the Geologic Column and ages the doctrine of uniformitarianism has been proven false as the ages predicted by it through currently observed rock sedimentation rates have failed to match the evidence.

Evolution

Further building on the ramifications for the Geologic Column and ages the belief in evolution by natural selection came only after millions of years was accepted by the scientific community as evolution is stated to require millions of years for minor changes to accumulate. Since the presence of soft tissues across various created kinds demonstrates they lived very recently then this removes the possibility evolution has occurred across the kinds.

Flood

These findings provide further confirmation of a recent large scale rapid-sedimentation event to bury these creatures and produce fossils.

Naturalist attempts at explanation

One attempt by Mary Schweitzer to explain her finding was to appeal to iron in the blood of the corpse causing proteins and cell membranes to "tie in knots" for preservation, acting like formaldehyde. [36] The research supporting this however has only demonstrated this effect could preserve tissues for a few years. It has yet to be shown it could resolve the naturalist's problem of soft tissues.

Another attempted explanation states that the destructive enzymes for breaking down cells were taken away by the sandstone that fossilized the animal. This theory was tested on an ostrich and the outcome demonstrated similar results.[37] This explanation also fails to explain the vast number of biologic material findings in fossils from numerous environments. See: List of Fossils with Soft Tissues

Preservation by Iron?

In 2013, it was claimed that iron was responsible for the remarkable preservation of blood vessels for millions of years.[38] Experiments showed iron chelation (i.e. removal) could preserve soft tissue for two years. As mentioned on PhysOrg, "Schweitzer and her team noticed that iron particles are intimately associated with the soft tissues preserved in dinosaurs. But when they chelated – or removed the iron from – soft tissues taken from a T. rex and a Brachyolophosaurus, the chelated tissues reacted much more strongly to antibodies that detect the presence of protein, suggesting that the iron may be masking their presence in these preserved tissues. They then tested the preservation hypothesis by using blood vessels and cells taken from modern ostrich bone. They soaked some of these vessels in hemoglobin taken from red blood cells, while placing other vessels in water. Two years later, the hemoglobin-treated soft vessels remained intact, while those soaked in water degraded in less than a week."[39] Naturally Creationists have questioned however whether this can prove millions of years at work.[40]

“ But can iron chelation preserve soft tissue and even keep it soft for millions of years? While a 200-fold delay in the decay of ostrich blood vessels is certainly impressive, even that level of preservation can’t hold a candle to the 99,800,000-fold increase in chemical stability needed in the millions-of-years evolutionary scenario. Schweitzer quite reasonably makes a comparison to the fixation properties of formaldehyde. Many variables influence the degree and duration of the decay-delaying properties of formaldehyde. But specimens preserved in formaldehyde are not preserved perfectly or permanently. While burial conditions likely influence the efficacy of iron as a preservative in any given bone, there is certainly no reason to propose that iron could preserve the molecular structure of soft tissue for millions of years any more than formaldehyde could.

-Elizabeth Mitchell, Answers In Genesis[41]

”

Young Carbon Dating of Soft Tissue Censored

In 2012 a team of researchers including Dr. Thomas Seiler, Dr. Robert Bennett, and Dr. Jean de Pontcharra presented evidence at the 2012 Western Pacific Geophysics Meeting in Singapore, August 13–17, showing that carbon dating eight dinosaur fossils produced dates in the range of 22,000-39,000 years old, despite conventional assumptions that no carbon 14 should still exist in the bones. The event was hosted by the American Geophysical Union (AGU) and the Asia Oceania Geosciences Society (AOGS). However, the abstract and discussion were removed from the conference site, and the entries for the conference discussion are now blank.[42]

The researchers emailed a protest to the conference and were told "Dear Mr. Miller, As a result of comments from attendees at the recent AOGS-AGU (WPGM) meeting in Singapore we have examined your abstract which was delivered in session BG-02. The interpretation which you present in your abstract is that the age of various dinosaurs, previously interpreted as being Mesozoic in age, are less than ~50,000 years. Your report that these ages were calculated using C-14 methods. There is obviously an error in these data. The abstract was apparently not reviewed properly and was accepted in error. For this reason we have exercised our authority as program chairs and rescinded the abstract. The abstract will no longer appear on the AOGS web site. Program Chairs, Minhan Dai, Xiamen University Peter Swart, University of Miami." A rebuttal sent in reply received no response.

The researchers state that "Both the schedule for the August 15, 2012, presentation, abstract and authors’ names are listed in the CD-Rom given to each of the 2000 registrants, so it is possible to prove that our abstract was approved by the conference organizers. We encourage AGU members to protest against the flagrant censorship of our research, and we urge other researchers to C-14 date dinosaur bones from bone repositories around the world and to present papers confirming or challenging our data."[43]

Rates of decay

The soft parts of a carcass can decay in two to three weeks, but cell damage begins in minutes. [44]

Books on the topic

  • "Evolutionists Say the Oddest Things Surprising Admissions From Leading Scientists" by Lita Cosner, Editor 1
  • "Ancient and Fossil Bone Collagen Remnants" by Dr. Brian Thomas 1 2
  • "Biblical Geology 101" By Michael J Oard and Robert Carter 1

See Also

Quotes

“ "Traditionally, there was little hope that biomolecules might be recovered from bone more than a few thousand years old." [45] ”

References

  1. ↑ What Are Fossils? about. last visited November 30, 2016. Author Unknown
  2. ↑ How are dinosaurs formed? facts-and-finds. last visited November 30, 2016. Author Unknown
  3. ↑ https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1BSM-oQJXxhYBlsLE3gGl3bz8GXgtoLy-oLOsSNF_Lhw/edit#gid=0
  4. ↑ Abelson, Paleobiochemistry: Organic constituents of fossils, Carnegie Inst.
  5. ↑ Little, K., M. Kelly, and A. Courts. Studies on bone matrix in normal and osteoporetic bone. J. Bone and Joint Surg. 44-B(3): 503
  6. ↑ Pappas, Stephanie.Controversial T. Rex Soft Tissue Find Finally Explained livescience. Published November 26, 2013.
  7. ↑ Schmeck Jr., H.M. (1982, February 27). "40-Million-Year-Old Mummy of Insect is Reported Found." The New York Times.
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Wong, K. (2012, October 22). "Molecular Analysis Supports Controversial Claim for Dinosaur Cells." Scientific American.
    Schweitzer, M.H. (2010, December). "Blood from Stone: How Fossils Can Preserve Soft Tissue." Scientific American.
  9. ↑ American Museum Of Natural History. (1998, November 18). "First Dinosaur Embryo Skin Discovered -- Unhatched Embryos Are First Ever Found Of Giant-Plant Eating Dinosaurs." ScienceDaily.
    BBC (1998, November 17). "Dinosaur 'Lost World' Discovered," BBC News.
  10. ↑ Associated Press (2005, March 24). "Scientists Recover T-Rex Soft Tissue." NBC News.
    Schweitzer, et. al. (2005). "T. rex Fossil Yields Soft Tissue." National Science Foundation.
    Wilford, J.N. (2005, March 25). "Dinosaur Find Takes Scientists Beyond Bones." The New York Times.
    Schweitzer, Wittmeyer, Horner, & Toporski (2005, March 25). "Soft-Tissue Vessels and Cellular Preservation in Tyrannosaurus Rex." Science 307(5717): 1952-1955. American Association for the Advancement of Science. DOI: 10.1126/science.1108397
    BBC (2005, March 24). "T. Rex Fossil Has Soft Tissues. BBC News.
  11. ↑ North Carolina State University (2005, March 25). "NC State Paleontologist Discovers Soft Tissue In Dinosaur Bones." ScienceDaily.
  12. ↑ Yeoman, B. (2006, April 27). "Schweitzer's Dangerous Discovery. Discover Magazine.
  13. ↑ Mayell, H. (2005, March 24). "T. Rex Soft Tissue Found Preserved. National Geographic.
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 Schweitzer, Chiappe, Garrido, Lowenstein, & Pincus (2005, April 22). "Molecular Preservation in Late Cretaceous Sauropod Dinosaur Eggshells." Proc Biol Sci. 272(1565): 775-84. National Center for Biotechnology Information. PMID: 15888409. PMCID: PMC1599869. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2004.2876
  15. ↑ Sherwin, Frank (2005). "The Devastating Issue of Dinosaur Tissue." Institute for Creation Research. Acts & Facts. 34 (6).
    Harrub, B. (2005). "Soft Tissue From A Dinosaur? Apologetics Press.
  16. ↑ N.a. (2006, March 6). "The Scrambling Continues." Answers In Genesis.
  17. ↑ Hurd, G.S. (2005, May 20). "Dino Blood Redux. TalkOrigins.
  18. ↑ Skulan, J. (2005, May-August). "Non-Mineralized Tissues in Fossil T Rex." National Center for Science Education. 25(5-6): 35-39.
  19. ↑ Batten, D. (2014, July 10). "Unreliable Historian." Creation Ministries International.
  20. ↑ Norris, S. (2006, February 26). "Many Dino Fossils Could Have Soft Tissue Inside. National Geographic.
  21. ↑ N.a. (2005, April 24). "Claim CC371: Tyrannosaurus Blood." TalkOrigins.
  22. ↑ Joyce, C. (2008, April 24). "T-Rex 'Tissue' May Be the Real Deal After All." NPR.
    Schweitzer, M.H.; Suo, Z.; Avci, R.; et. al. (2007, April 13). "Analyses of Soft Tissue from Tyrannosaurus rex Suggest the Presence of Protein." Science. 316 (5822). pp. 277-280. DOI: 10.1126/science.1138709.
    Wilford, J.N. (2007, April 13). "In Breakthrough, Scientists Identify Dinosaur Proteins." The New York Times.
  23. ↑ Kaye, T.G.; Gaugler, G.; & Sawlowicz, Z. (2008, July 30). "Dinosaurian Soft Tissues Interpreted as Bacterial Biofilms. PLoS ONE 3(7): e2808. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002808.
  24. ↑ Wieland, C. (2009, May 6). "Dinosaur soft tissue and Protein—Even More Confirmation!" Creation Ministries International.
  25. ↑ Roach, J. (2009, May 1). "Oldest Dinosaur Protein Found -- Blood Vessels, More." National Geographic.
  26. ↑ Ravindran, S. (2013, December 12). "Dinosaur Fossil With Fleshy Rooster's Comb Is First of Its Kind." National Geographic.
    Balter, M. (2013, December 12). "ScienceShot: How Is a Dinosaur Like a Rooster?" American Association for the Advancement of Science.
  27. ↑ Science (2013, April 10). "Giant Dinosaurs Got a Head Start on Growth." American Association for the Advancement of Science.
    University of Toronto (2013, April 10). "World's Oldest Dinosaur Embryo Bonebed Yields Organic Remains." Phys.org.
    Chang, A. (2013, April 10). "190M-Year-Old Dino Bones Shed Light On Development." The Associated Press.
    Viegas, J. (2013, April 10). "Early Dinosaur Embryos Found in China." Discovery Magazine.
    Reisz, Huang, Roberts, Peng, Sullivan, Stein, et. al. (2013, April 10). "Embryology of Early Jurassic Dinosaur from China with Evidence of Preserved Organic Remains." Nature. 496(210-214). doi:10.1038/nature11978.
  28. ↑ Vergano, D. (2013, April 11). "Dinosaurs Grew Big In A Hurry." USA Today.
  29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 Mitchell, E. (2013, April 13). "Jurassic Embryos Suggest Rapid Growth of Sauropod Embryos." Answers in Genesis.
  30. ↑ Barnhart, W.R. (2004, September 2). "Dinosaur Nests Reinterpreted." Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal. 41(2).
  31. ↑ Pappas, S. (2014, April 14). "Tiny Fossils Could Be Rare 500-Million-Year-Old Embryos." NBC News.
    Pappas, S. (2014, April 15). "Tiny Fossils Found in China Appear to be 500-Million-Year-Old Embryos." FOX News.
    Pappas, S. (2014, April 15). "500-Million-Year-Old Embryo Fossils a Rare and Mysterious Find." CBS News.
  32. ↑ Thomas, B. (2013, December 27). "Best Creation News of 2013: Tissue Fossils. Institute for Creation Research.
  33. ↑ Thomas, B. (2009). "Dinosaur Soft Tissue Issue Is Here to Stay." Acts & Facts. 38 (9): 18. Institute for Creation Research.
  34. ↑ Gershon, E. (2014, March 18). "Scientists Discover Ancient Fossilized Crustaceans Entombed with Eggs and Embryos." SciTech Daily.
    Siveter, D.J. et al. (2014). "Exceptionally Preserved 450-Million-Year-Old Ordovician Ostracods with Brood Care." Current Biology. DOI:10.1016/j.cub.2014.02.040
  35. ↑ Lewis, T. (2014, May 29). "Ichthyosaur Graveyard Discovered beneath Glacier." Scientific American.
  36. ↑ Pappas, Stephanie .Controversial T. Rex Soft Tissue Find Finally Explained livescience. Published November 26, 2013.
  37. ↑ Buchanan, Scott. “Soft Tissue” in Dinosaur Bones: What Does the Evidence Really Say? BioLogos. published October 19, 2015.
  38. ↑ Pappas, S. (2013, November 27). "What Preserved T. Rex Tissue? Mystery Explained at Last." NBC News.
    Pappas, S. (2013, November 27). "T. Rex Flesh? Controversial Soft Tissue Finally Explained." FOX News.
    Schweitzer, Zheng, Cleland, Goodwin, Boatman, Theil, Marcus, & Fakra (2014, January 22). "A Role for Iron and Oxygen Chemistry in Preserving Soft Tissues, Cells and Molecules from Deep Time." Royal Society Publishing. DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2013.2741
    Turano, P. (2010, January 12). "NMR Reveals Pathway for Ferric Mineral Precursors to the Central Cavity of Ferritin." PNAS 107(2): 545–550. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0908082106
  39. ↑ North Carolina State University (November 26, 2013). "Iron Preserves, Hides Ancient Tissues in Fossilized Remains." Phys.Org.
    North Carolina State University (2013, November 26). "Iron Preserves, Hides Ancient Tissues in Fossilized Remains." ScienceDaily.
    Peake, T. (2013, November 26). "Iron Preserves, Hides Ancient Tissues in Fossilized Remains." North Carolina State University.
  40. ↑ Thomas, B. (2013, December 11). "Dinosaur Soft Tissue Preserved by Blood?" Institute for Creation Research.
  41. ↑ Mitchell, E. (2013, December 4). "Iron Key to Preserving Dinosaur Soft Tissue." Answers In Genesis.
  42. ↑ Wieland, C. (2013, January 22). "Radiocarbon in Dino Bones." Creation Ministries International.
    N.a. (2012, August 13-17). "AOGS - AGU (WPGM) Joint Assembly Browse Abstracts Asia Oceania Geosciences Society.
    Holzschuh, J.; de Pontcharra, J.; & Miller, H. (2013). "Recent C-14 Dating of Fossils including Dinosaur Bone Collagen. Science vs. Evolution.
  43. ↑ Miller, Owen, Bennett, De Pontcharra, Giertych, Taylor, Van Oosterwych, Kline, Wilder, & Dunkel (2012). "Reflections on Oral and Poster Presentations of Percent of Modern C-14 (pmC) Content Studies of Dinosaur Bones given at the AOGS-AGU Singapore Conference." DinosaurC14Ages.com.
  44. ↑ Schweitzer, M.H., Soft tissue preservation in terrestrial Mesozoic vertebrates, Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Science, 39: 187-216, 2011.
  45. ↑ Schweitzer et al., Heme compounds in dinosaur trabecular bone, p. 6291.
v • d • e
Geology Portal
Flood GeologyGeology portal header.png
Formations
Processes
Age of the Earth
Creationwiki portals.png Categories • Portal • News Creationwiki portals.png
Retrieved from "http://creationwiki.org/index.php?title=Soft_tissue_in_fossils&oldid=368709"