How is this explained? Is her research suspect?
It might be more accurate to say that we have thought, due to lack of contrary evidence, soft tissues were not preserved.
The current data indicates that they might be.
No... she has published her findings in Science and others have noted that what she has found seems to be valid. However here is an interesting quote from her:
"Tissue preservation to this extent has not been noted before in dinosaurs," the team leader, Dr Mary Schweitzer of North Carolina State University, said.
She doesn't seem to be an IDwacko at all. The fossil itself was discovered by Jack Horner... Not exactly an unreputable scientist. So the question remains how did soft tissue survive in a Dinosaur? The fact that soft tissue has never been found in such an old fossil suggests that the environment it was fossilized in somehow preserved it.
I have a fossil (I believe it is Pecopteris) from the Pennsylvainian which was about 300 million years ago. Basically it looks like a short leafed fern and what always amazes me is how "green" the leaves still are.
As I understood the article, the acid
bath softened the protective density of
the leg bone. It was that density that
has protected the soft tissue all those
centuries. Fascinating stuff that
paleontology!
If scientists were not as susceptible to "faith" as the most maligned fundamentalist, we would not now be engaged in the absurd "global warming" hysteria...
Scientist are not immune to dogmatism any more than the totally ignorant. The temptation to believe that the final answers are all in is irresistible to human nature.