How, indeed...
You mean like an enormous cataclysmic flood?
If the assumption is that the specimen is 66 million years old that question won't be pursued too vigorously. After all there may not be an answer that is acceptable to Darwinism.
Step one....start with a false title to mislead the reader into thinking they found actual dinosaur cells.
Tests have shown that the fossil still holds cell-like structures
Now it's not "cells" as the title exclaims....it's "cell-LIKE structures".....hmmmm....cell-like structures made of "what"?
although the proteins that made up the hadrosaur’s skin had degraded, the amino acid building blocks that once made up the proteins were still present
NOW, it's not even "cell-like structures"....NOW it's "degraded proteins......as in "they found some amino acids".....now it's gone from the ludicrous title of "reveals skin cells".....to "reveals amino acids"..... as in....We're looking at the altered products of proteins from the skin of this animal, locked within the three dimensional mineralised skin
So we're really talking something more like fossilized skin, not "skin cells".....like fossilized bones are not "bone cells".
ALWAYS, under all circumstances, ignore RATIONAL explanations:
They believe that the dinosaur fell into a watery grave, with little oxygen present to speed along the decay process. Meanwhile, very fine sediments reacted with the soft tissues of the animal, forming a kind of cement.
As a result, the 66 million-year-old fossil still retains some of the organic matter of the original dinosaur, mixed in with the minerals.
.....and by "organic matter" they're not talking "flesh"....they're talking "amino acids".
If they clone the DINO will they produce a RINO??? /snicker
Another amazing find of fossilized skin.
Yet for creationists, this is just another stone that fell from the moon.
PRESERVED T. Rex Soft Tissue RECOVERED (Pic)
Star Tribune | 03.24.05 | Randolph Schmid
Posted on 03/24/2005 3:04:54 PM EST by wallcrawlr
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1369945/posts
Would you Adam ‘n’ Eve it ... dinosaurs in Eden
(CRE-VO) Mixing science with creationism
The Observer | May 22, 2005 | By Paul Harris
Posted on 05/25/2005 12:14:01 AM EDT by restornu
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1409928/posts
24 posted on 05/25/2005 4:13:53 PM EDT by tahotdog
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1409928/posts?page=24#24
Scientists see the softer side of Tyrannosaurus Rex
[Surviving soft tissue w/ pics]
Science Now | 10/1/2006 | staff
Posted on 10/01/2006 11:12:10 AM EDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1711619/posts
Ancient T. rex and mastodon protein fragments discovered, sequenced
National Science Foundation | 12-Apr-2007 | Cheryl Dybas
Posted on 04/12/2007 3:43:57 PM EDT by AdmSmith
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1816333/posts
BBC: Protein links T. rex to chickens ~ ummm tasty....
BBC | Thursday, 12 April 2007 | Paul Rincon
Posted on 04/12/2007 4:57:11 PM EDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1816370/posts
Scientists Retrieve Proteins From Dinosaur Bone
New York times | April 12, 2007 | John Noble Wilford
Posted on 04/12/2007 5:05:00 PM EDT by gcruse
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1816375/posts
Dinosaur protein sequenced - Lucky find shows up record-breaking fossil.
news@nature.com | 12 April 2007 | Heidi Ledford
Posted on 04/13/2007 6:14:00 PM EDT by neverdem
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1817005/posts
Dinosaur research backs link to birds
AP on Yahoo | 4/14/07 | Randolph E. Schmid - ap
Posted on 04/15/2007 1:18:48 AM EDT by NormsRevenge
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1817592/posts
Oldest Dinosaur Protein Found — Blood Vessels, More
National Geographic | May 1, 2009 | John Roach
Posted on 05/01/2009 11:43:11 PM PDT by nickcarraway
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2242582/posts
- cre/vo “great divide” -
Dinosaur Shocker
(YEC say dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years)
Smithsonian Magazine | May 1, 2006 | Helen Fields
Posted on 05/01/2006 11:29:14 AM EDT by SirLinksalot
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/1624642/posts
The scrambling continues (Fallout over T-rex bone tissue continues)
Answers in Genesis | March 6, 2006 | Staff
Posted on 03/10/2006 9:25:07 AM EST by DaveLoneRanger
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/1593799/posts
Dino Skin Preserved in Rare Fossil Find
Discovery News | November 21, 2006 | Jennifer Viegas
Posted on 11/23/2006 12:43:21 AM EST by DaveLoneRanger
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1742984/posts
Dinosaur Blood Protein, Cells Recovered
(yet more evidence for Young Earth Creation!!!)
CEH | April 30, 2009
Posted on 04/30/2009 6:49:22 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2241706/posts
First dino ‘blood’ extracted from ancient bone (more evidence for young earth creation!)
New Scientist | April 30, 2009 | Jeff Hecht
Posted on 05/01/2009 8:25:18 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2242071/posts
Hadrosaur Soft Tissues Another Blow to Long-Ages Myth
(first T. rex, then another T. rex, now this!)
ICR | May 12, 2009 | Brian Thomas, M.S.
Posted on 05/12/2009 7:26:20 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2249728/posts
“How could soft tissue structures and details survive intact for 66 million years?”
Easy. They didn’t. The article clearly states so, but apparently only clear enough for a non “creation scientist”.
Read the article. The final question in the post is typical “creation science” misdirection pandering to readers wishful thinking.