Misrepresenting Mary Schweitzer

In 2005 paleontologist Mary Schweitzer lead a team that discovered the remains of blood cells in dinosaur fossils and later discovered soft tissue remains in the Tyrannosaurus rex specimen MOR 1125.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specimens_of_Tyrannosaurus#MOR_1125_.28B-rex.29

Schweitzer was the first researcher to identify and isolate soft tissues from a 68 million year old fossil bone. Prior to Schweitzer’s discovery, the oldest soft tissue recovered from a fossil was less than one million years old.

Schweitzer’s research has been misrepresented by young earth creationists, who claim that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t survive millions of years. They assert her discoveries support their literal interpretation of Genesis and calculations of the age of the earth by a Church of Ireland Archbishop, James Ussher, who calculated the age of the earth in 1650 based on literal interpretations of the bible using character ages and lineages. (Such as Noah living to be 900 years old). Woohoo.
Schweitzer doesn’t seem to approve as evidenced in her interview with biologos.org in 2014:
One thing that does bother me, though, is that young earth creationists take my research and use it for their own message, and I think they are misleading people about it. Pastors and evangelists, who are in a position of leadership, are doubly responsible for checking facts and getting things right, but they have misquoted me and misrepresented the data.
On October 13, 2006, Young Earth Creationist and AM radio talk show host Bob Enyart called paleontologist Jack Horner about testing the soft tissue fossil for carbon 14. Enyart had people willing to write a grant to Horner in the amount of $20,000 just for permission to have the fossil tested for Carbon-14.
Horner didn’t refuse, but tried to explain that Carbon-14 dating doesn’t work on something like this. He then says he will talk to Mary about it. Bob Enyart says he will call back to find out what the determination is… but then it ends. We’ve yet to find anything about whether Enyart has called back. What the following conversations were like or if they even happened. Yet the Young Earth Creationist crowd upholds this YouTube video as a staunch rejection of the attempt even though no rejection was made.
Did Enyart call back? If so, why didn’t he post the contents of that conversation?
And…
Mary did further work on how the soft tissue could have survived so long and discovered that Iron acted as a preservative.
A role for iron and oxygen chemistry in preserving soft tissues, cells and molecules from deep time

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/281/1775/20132741

Even Answers In Genesis ( a creationist nuthouse) applauds her findings (while not necessarily agreeing with them):
Mary Schweitzer should be applauded for her team’s excellent detective work zooming in on that explanation. They deduced from observing iron’s ubiquitous presence in dinosaur soft tissue that iron might be a preservative. They determined, based on the observable biochemical behavior of iron, possible mechanisms showing how iron’s chemical behavior in life and death may enable it to function as a preservative. And most significantly Schweitzer’s team developed experimental support for the efficacy of iron as a postmortem preservative.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *