To: lasereye
They did not comment on the trouble these tissues bring to evolution's assumption of deep time, but their silence regarding the "elephant in the room" question of how a "fresh" fossilized salamander could exist after millions of years does not diminish the question's relevance.How would this same muscle tissue remain "fresh" after 6,000 years?
7 posted on
04/09/2010 11:57:48 AM PDT by
Ol' Dan Tucker
(People should not be afraid of the government. Governement should be afraid of the people)
To: Ol' Dan Tucker
How would this same muscle tissue remain "fresh" after 6,000 years?In another article on this topic, Dinosaur Soft Tissue: Biofilm or Blood Vessels? he says that biomolecues have a lifespan of no more than 100,000 years. For collagen it's 30,000 years. So 6,000 years is not an obstacle.
8 posted on
04/09/2010 12:29:49 PM PDT by
lasereye
To: Ol' Dan Tucker
It's like the “fresh” fish served at the local restaurant, "fresh" when it was frozen in 1957.
13 posted on
04/09/2010 1:58:19 PM PDT by
count-your-change
(You don't have be brilliant, not being stupid is enough.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson