"Wrong. It was a veterinarian who first identified the blood cells.""We first came upon the possibility that proteins might exist in the the T. rex quite by accident. In the fall of 1991, I was trying to find a way to prevent the T. rex bone sections from slipping off glass slides. Looking for some help, I took the samples to the university's vet histologist, Gayle Callis, who specializes in examinations of modern bone. Then I promptly forgot about them. Three months later she called. Apparently she had taken the samples to a conference, and someone asked her about the oldest bone she had ever worked with. She said, "I just happen to have this dinosaur sample...." and put it under a microscope. A pathologist took a look at it and said, "Do you know you have blood cells in this bone?" Gayle brought the slides back and showed me. And that's when all the excitement in the lab began." Earth Magazine June 1997
"Oh yes indeed, he was open to the possibility. So open, he gave Shweitzer this advice: “Now see if you can find some evidence to show that that’s not what they are.”"Exactly. Isn't that the advice you would expect him to give if he thought they might be remains of blood cells?
I'll go w the Smithsonian version:
'In 1991, Schweitzer was trying to study thin slices of bones from a 65-million-year-old T. rex. She was having a hard time getting the slices to stick to a glass slide, so she sought help from a molecular biologist at the university. The biologist, Gayle Callis, happened to take the slides to a veterinary conference, where she set up the ancient samples for others to look at. One of the vets went up to Callis and said, “Do you know you have red blood cells in that bone?” Sure enough, under a microscope, it appeared that the bone was filled with red disks. Later, Schweitzer recalls, “I looked at this and I looked at this and I thought, this can’t be. Red blood cells don’t preserve.”'
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur.html#ixzz2S4wc10S1
But I do appreciate how your version eliminates the veterinarian altogether. Less embarrassing that way, isn't it? After all, no one less than a pathologist (according to you) can recognize red discs of blood sitting in a vein, right?
"Oh yes indeed, he was open to the possibility. So open, he gave Shweitzer this advice: “Now see if you can find some evidence to show that that’s not what they are.”"
'Exactly. Isn't that the advice you would expect him to give if he thought they might be remains of blood cells?'
Are you trying to make a joke? Or have you drunk so deeply of the evolutionist Kool Aid, you don't see how ridiculous that statement is? Shweitzer's boss advised her to find evidence to show that what looked like red blood cells was NOT red blood cells--& you claim this means he thought they WERE red blood cells? Let me guess: you also believe up is down & black is white.
This is the problem w people who have bought the junk/pseudo science behind evolution. They lose their ability to think clearly. You, for example, see red blood cells, & read that every single test applied to them indicates they are indeed blood. So you try to claim they're not blood.
Next you claim that Shweitzer's boss telling her to demonstrate that what looks like red blood cells is NOT red blood cells actually means he wanted her to prove it WAS blood. Honestly, if you can't argue more honestly than that, this discussion is a waste of time.