The only thing this clearly shows is that you *assume* that 'in certain circumstances, proteins can be preserved for an exceedingly long period of time'.
For without the assumption of 68 MM year age, the notability collapses.
The only thing I'm assuming is that these findings were conducted by honest researchers and will stand up to peer review. I'm not sure why you think I'm making an assumption about their age -- the age of the Cretaceous has been firmly established by a variety of absolute and relative dating methods. Do you have any specific criticisms?