Do you have a reference for "current understanding of collagen rate of decay"? Because I'd say current understanding is that sometimes, under rare and specific conditions, it can last 50 million years.
You don't dispute that but instead focus on choice of words
I'm not disputing that it was a surprise to find it. But it wasn't "steak," and calling it "steak" is an attempt to deceive. I guess that's okay with you.
This is your field of expertise?
Do you have a reference for "current understanding of collagen rate of decay"?
"in bones, hydrolysis [breakdown] of the main protein component, collagen, is even more rapid and little intact collagen remains after only 1-3x104 [10,000 to 30,000] years, except in bones in cool or dry depositional environmnents."
With a lifespan of 30,000 or so years, collagen should not exist in a 68-million-year-old sample. To get around this, some evolutionary scientists challenge the measured molecular decay rates. "Schweitzer's work is 'showing us we really don't understand decay,'" paleontologist Thomas Holtz said in Smithsonian magazine.2 But even allowing 100,000 years for collagen longevity, perhaps due to superior preservation, this is still only 1/680th of B. rex's assumed age.
Dinosaur Soft Tissue: Biofilm or Blood Vessels?
There should be NO collagen there according to current understanding of collagen rate of decay.
They've also found supposedly millions of years old DNA.
Researchers have uncovered biological molecules like proteins, DNA, and pigments from rocks that are supposedly millions of years old. Laboratory studies on many of these materials indicate that they will only survive thousands, not millions, of years.
DNA is particularly prone to decay, yet ancient fossil "plants, bacteria, mammals, Neanderthals, and other archaic humans have had short aDNA sequences identified."2 Such remnant DNA should not be able to last more than 10,000 years.3 Just as finding the phrase "cell phone" in a reputedly ancient stone inscription would immediately identify it as a fraud, finding a ribosomal gene in bacteria supposedly 250 million years old causes deep suspicion of its assigned age.4
Fossilized Biomaterials Must Be Young
There's a number of other articles along these lines at the ICR website.