IMPACT
BACK TO GENESIS
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Stunning Protein Fossils Confirm the Flood
APOLOGETICS
A
STEWARDSHIP
lready in 2017, secular scientists have described some stun-
CREATION Q & Abiochemicals in fossil bones. Two new finds
ning original
reignite vigorous debate over the nature of the protein
RESEARCH
remnantsare they true organic remains, some form of
contamination, the result of a strange preservation process, or what?
As in the past, researchers totally leapfrog a neat, tidy, Bible-friendly
conclusion.
One find reported in Nature Communications included signa-
tures of Type I collagen in a Lufengosaurus sauropod fossil supposedly
190-197million years old.1 Researchers applied new technology to pin-
point precise locations of protein signature within the still-porous rib
fragment. They also found hematite near the protein. In an interview
with senior author Robert Reisz, the University of Toronto News said,
Reisz and his colleagues believe that these hematite particles were
derived from the original blood of the dinosaur, and that they acted
as the catalyst for preserving the protein in the vascular canals of the
bone.2 However, Reisz noted no hematite particles in his 2013 report
of protein in a Lufengosaur with essentially the same age assignment.3
Jurassic Lufengosaurus rib bone section shows pores where research-
ers found collagen, plus small amounts of hematite that they believe
helped preserve the proteins for 195 million years.
Image credit: Copyright 2013. R. Reisz. Adapted for use in accordance with federal copyright (fair use
doctrine) law. Usage by ICR does not imply endorsement of copyright holders.
Another find recently published in the Journal of Proteome Re-
search verified and extended protein identification in a duckbill dino-
saur that Mary Schweitzers team had described in 2009.4 Her groups
excellent earlier paper identified the sequence of amino acids in di-
nosaur collagen.5 Her new teams 2017 report included even more
dinosaur protein sequence.
These two new finds join dozens of others published over the
last half-century,6 but evolutionary scientists still have a hard time ac-
B R I A N T H O M A S , M . S .
cepting that these fossils retain original biochemicals. Robert Service
wrote in Science:
The [soft tissue fossil] claims were met with howls of skepticism
from biochemists and paleontologists who saw no way that frag-
ile organic molecules could survive for tens of millions of years,
and wondered whether her samples were contaminated with
modern proteins.7
So, the argument centers on time. How could organic mate-
rial last for so long? What about hematite particles preserving the
proteins? Ancient protein specialist Michael Collins noted, Proteins
decay in an orderly fashion. We can slow it down, but not by a lot. He
also doesnt think the [hematite] process could arrest protein degra-
dation for tens of millions of years.7
Since nobody has figured out how modern collagen could stuff
itself into the deep recesses of dinosaur bone, claims of contamina-
tion ring hollow. And the standard age-determining logic is circular:
Since these dinosaurs come from millions-of-years-old rock layers,
and since protein does not last even a million years (assuming the
best preservation conditions), then these dinosaur proteins must not
be possible. Such a conclusion ignores the fossil data. It uncritically
assumes an old earth right up front. Short-lived fossil proteins, tightly
folded rock strata,8 contradictory radioisotope ages,9 and flat strata
boundaries independently refute millions of years.10
The protein discoveries come from fossil science, and the pro-
tein decay rates come from experimental science, but where do we
get the millions of years? If that merely comes from evolutionary
speculation, then the tension dissolves. From a biblical perspective,
the Flood deposited most fossil-bearing rock layers recently, one right
after the other, in a single year. This opens the possibility of discover-
ing original biochemicals in all the Flood rocks. No wonder scientists
keep discovering original proteins in deeply buried fossils.
References
1. Lee, Y.-C. et al. 2017. Evidence of preserved collagen in an Early Jurassic sauropodomorph di-
nosaur revealed by synchrotron FTIR microspectroscopy. Nature Communications. 8: 14220.
2. Wahl, N. Good ribbance: U of T researcher finds dino rib bones reveal remnants of 195-mil-
lion-year-old protein. University of Toronto News. Posted on utoronto.ca February 1, 2017, ac-
cessed February 21, 2017.
3. Reisz, R. R. et al. 2013. Embryology of Early Jurassic dinosaur from China with evidence of
preserved organic remains. Nature. 496 (7444): 210-214.
4. Schroeter, E. R. et al. 2017. Expansion for the Brachylophosaurus canadensis Collagen I Sequence
and Additional Evidence of the Preservation of Cretaceous Protein. Journal of Proteome Re-
search. 16 (2): 920-932.
5. Schweitzer, M. H. et al. 2009. Biomolecular Characterization and Protein Sequences of the
Campanian Hadrosaur B. Canadensis. Science. 324 (5927): 626-631.
6. Thomas, B. 2015. Original Biomaterials in Fossils. Creation Research Society Quarterly. 51 (4):
234-347.
7. Service, R. F. 2017. Researchers Close in on Ancient Dinosaur Proteins. Science. 355 (6324):
441-442.
8. Morris, J. D. 2013. Ute Pass Fault: Sand Injectites and Rapid Deforma-
tion Fit the Flood. Acts & Facts. 42 (11): 14-15.
9. Austin, S. A. 1992. Excessively Old Ages for Grand Canyon Lava
Flows. Acts & Facts. 21 (2).
10. Thomas, B. 2011. The Stones Cry Out: What Rocks and Fossils Say
about the Age of the Earth. Acts & Facts. 40 (1): 17.
Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research
and earned his M.S. in biotechnology from Stephen F. Austin State
University.
| &
APRIL 2017 ACTS FACTS 15