...and why don’t you read the primary source? She found “fossilized” tissue structures, dissolved the mineral part...that’s “rock”, for the homeschooled, using an acid called EDTA, and what was left was pliable “something”.....a far cry from finding pliable tissues in a fossil...from finding blood cells...from finding skin...from finding squid ink.
Do you need any definitions? Fossilized? Demineralized in an EDTA solution? Need the medical definition of “soft tissue”?
“that’s “rock”, for the homeschooled”
Wow could you be any more condescending?
I don’t know the original source. Would you care to share a link?
“Schweitzer was interested in studying the microstructure and organic components of a dinosaur’s bone. All bone is made up of a combination of protein (and other organic molecules) and minerals. In modern bone, removing the minerals leaves supple, soft organic materials that are much easier to work with in a lab. In contrast, fossilized bone is believed to be completely mineralized, meaning no organics are present. Attempting to dissolve the minerals from a piece of fossilized bone, so the theory goes, would merely dissolve the entire fossil. But the team was surprised by what actually happened when they removed the minerals from the T. rex femur fragment. The removal process left behind stretchy bone matrix material that, when examined microscopically, seemed to show blood vessels, osteocytes, or bone building cells, and other recognizable organic features.”
From the same article here http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/03/050325100541.htm
You are misrepresenting her work. It was demineralized and all the ROCK was dissolved leaving behind what wasn’t rock.