[count-your-change]

I know the objections about contamination, at first it was bacterial “slime” and possibly in Israel it was someone may have some left over ostrich material in the lab hence the dino to ostrich link.

But contamination would raise another problem, that is if the link to dinosaur and bird is due to contamination then there really is no link to be found in the lab at all. OR

Horner, Schweitzer, and, I forget the other fellow's name, are the best of the best with the best and latest equipment yet cannot even run a amino acid sequence without botching it? Or perhaps the objections of contamination have nothing to do with contamination of the test so much as contamination of the science by prejudice.

In this article it appears what is being called “soft tissue” is the bone collagen that was sequenced....... Dinosaur Soft Tissue Sequenced; Similar to Chicken Proteins Apr 12, 2007 ... Dinosaur Soft Tissue Sequenced; Similar to Chicken Proteins ... extracted from the T. rex's leg bone is original dinosaur soft tissue that ... news.nationalgeographic.com/.../070412-dino-tissues.html -

[RFEngineer]

“In this article it appears what is being called “soft tissue” is the bone collagen that was sequenced”

that’s what I’m talking about. It is not “soft tissue” it was fossilized collagen protein fragments extracted chemically. It was a fossil.

It’s still interesting, but it’s not like they opened up a cooler and pulled out a steak as the article implies.

I read about contamination. That’s something that should be resolvable. It’s in the “more to come” category