Posted on 07/09/2015 9:48:38 AM PDT by Jan_Sobieski
"The obvious question, though, was how soft, pliable tissue could survive for millions of years. In a new study published today (Nov. 26) in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, Schweitzer thinks she has the answer: Iron. Iron lady 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. "The free radicals cause proteins and cell membranes to tie in knots," Schweitzer said. "They basically act like formaldehyde." 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. rex and another soft-tissue specimen from Brachylophosaurus canadensis, a type of duck-billed dinosaur. 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. [Paleo-Art: Illustrations Bring Dinosaurs to Life]"
The idea that this preservation is not unknown in other fossils gives us the tantalizing that DNA might be extracted. There is nothing here that contradicts the age of the fossils. Isotope decay rates are consistent and do give us the age of rocks.
It amazed me how people create a whole “scientific fact” out of one minor point like the race of Nebraska man.
In other words .... if a “day” is not a revolution of the earth or 24 hours, and indeed is a phase.....why can’t the total of six phases be 4.5 billion years?
The actual development phases in the Genesis story are very similar if not exactly alike what scientists have determined. ie: fiery ball, water world, land out of the water, waterlife first than land life etc.
It’s remarkable how close they are!
You can get a square peg into a round hole with a big enough sledgehammer.
“It has long been accepted...”
Yeah....long list of these “truths” that need to be examined as well.
Nice to see you gut tells you something’s not quite right. Of course the people that actually devote their lives to the study these sorts of things are a bunch of ignorant dullards. You know, there’s this thing called
“science”, and the fact that you don’t understand how findings are arrived at doesn’t make them untrue.
If that doesn’t make me a proud Husker, nothing will.
Agree with you.
I’m comfortable with the idea that nobody knows how long one of God’s days are.
Shoot it could be about 1:00AM Monday morning.
Thanks for the post!
Because we read the bible.
FWIW, the largest dinosaur eggs are around 19 inches long, thus the dino hatchlings would be around the size of a full grown house cat.
As such, Noah would not have brought a full size 80 foot 40 ton Brachiosaurus on board, but would have opted for a <5 foot pair of specimens that would serve the re-population purpose just fine and have more time in their reproductive years to be fruitful.
It doesn’t make your alleged “experts” correct either
Because we read the bible.
Is that how the Bible defines "day"?
bookmark
Believe what you want. But you have to explain away why "...evening and morning were the nth day" does not mean a simple, 24 hour period.
And if you don't believe Genesis 1, then why bother with chapter 3 (original sin), Chapter 6 (the flood), Chapter 12 (Abraham), Genesis 46 (Israel goes into Egypt).
The Bible is either "The Word of God" (all of it) or it is not. If it "Contains" the word of God, as you suggest, then man must determine which part is and is not inspired truth. Man must also then force fit his understanding of scripture with current scientific theory.
BTW, science proves people dead 3 days don't come back to life, so will you re-explain that away with a swoon theory?
All they have is theories based on ideas and evidence. All you need to challenge them is better ideas and evidence.
Do you let your landscaper work on your teeth or the kid at the Quickie Mart fly a commercial airliner? There’s are these things called education and training, and generally, the people who possess the education and training specific to any given field are the best resource for information regarding those fields.
“I don’t see any mention of “protein cells”, nor do I recall ever seeing that term in the chapters on the various cell types”
Correct, proteins are not cells, so there is no such thing as “protein cells”.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.