“So, to close the loop, since you are fixated on this article, are you agreeing that this sample is actually and in fact 80 million years old, and that the “Young-Earth Creationist” and “creation science” ideas are simply proven wrong?”
I do not believe by any stretch of your imagination that the fossil is 80 million years. I realize that the finding of extracted bone cells and blood vessels deconstructs your belief in the 80,000,000 year finding of your so-called experts. You are going to, however, have to construct a better argument then you have to answer how soft tissue of any type can still be present over a period of 80 million years.
“You are going to, however, have to construct a better argument then you have to answer how soft tissue of any type can still be present over a period of 80 million years.”
Again, you are misrepresenting the research. They aren’t saying they have found “soft tissue”. They aren’t saying they know how apparent collagen fragments are preserved, and they also aren’t saying unequivocally that the samples were not contaminated.
However, they are saying that they don’t think they were contaminated.
Here’s another quote about your “blood vessels” from another related article posted here:
http://focus.hms.harvard.edu/2009/050109/tools_and_tech.shtml
“The microscope techniques revealed possible vestiges of bone cells, blood cells and vessels entwined within a fibrous structure that looked like collagen. Further analysis with antibodies confirmed there was collagen and other proteins mingling with those structures. “
You’ll note they aren’t saying “we found blood vessels” as you had claimed, and continue to claim.
This cutting-edge stuff - with plenty more research to come. You and the rest of your “creation science” prevaricators don’t have a prayer of actually understanding this research. That’s why you misrepresent it by saying that “soft tissue” was found - to make it seem like someone dug a fresh steak out of the ground.
Fortunately, I am completely objective, and am more than a few steps ahead of you in your argument. You have to make stuff up. I actually understand the research and am interested only in the facts coming out.
This is why there are more than a few dozen IQ points between the average “creation science” type, and folks who actually perform and/or understand this research.
Thank you for playing. You lost this round, but please feel free to try again.