Hello and welcome to the program UFO Warning.
In this episode, we're asking, are they lying about dinosaurs?
That's correct. Are they lying about dinosaurs?
You might be asking yourself, this is UFO Podcast.
Why are we talking about dinosaurs?
Well, because dinosaurs represent one of the narratives
that we learned from the time that we're just little kids in
school. Actually, the current narrative
from academia, by extension the deep state, our own government,
is that dinosaurs have been around for hundreds of millions
of years and that there's no possible way that they would
ever be able to preserve DNA for that long.
Of course, now we're finding out that it does in fact appear that
some of these samples have been located with DNA in them.
And it's creating a lot of controversy.
And some people in that field of study pantology, the folks that
actually are supposed to be telling us the truth about
dinosaurs, don't want to talk about it the same way that they
don't want to talk about a lot of things.
And this is important because it disrupts the current narrative.
Anytime there's something that doesn't fit the timeline that
we're told exists for the history of civilization and for
Earth. A lot of times, the people that
that find these new discoveries, whether it's tools buried in
coal beds, there are millions of years old that show that people
were there or human footprints or whatever, they're ostracized
from the community. And this is how we see academics
a lot of times who are interested in the field of
Ufology. Once they begin to say, hey,
something's going on here, they become ostracized from their
academic peers. And I think it's important
because lifes about narratives, the people that control things
have to keep a certain number of narratives going in order to
control the herd. And This is why no matter what
subject you bring up, whether it's a cure for cancer, whether
it's a flu virus that we're all supposed to stay inside for, or
whether it's a current political persuasion that's in charge,
there's a narrative that goes along with that.
And I think that we find out who's controlling that narrative
and who's putting it out there. We can learn a lot more about
what's going on. So these narratives are
important, and that's why I'm talking about this today.
I'm going to take a look at a couple articles here, and then
you kind of make up your own mind about what's going on with
these dinosaurs, dinosaur DNA, and just how do these things fit
into the whole human story. This first article is from
chemistryrole.com. It says possible dinosaur or DNA
discovered and it's fossilized. Cartilage now 125 million years
old, fossilized. You know, most of us, when we
think of fossilized, we think of that all of the original
material in that animal's body was replaced with surrounding
chemicals, minerals, whatever. But turns out things must be a
little bit different here. This is articles written by
Barbara Pino dated October 26, 2021.
It says, but that doesn't mean we can clone extinct species,
Jurassic Park style. A team of researchers found what
seems to be DNA and 125 million year old dinosaur fossil, though
how the fragile biomolecules survived fossilization remains a
mystery. And if you get into the story a
little bit, there's been a couple of these cases and
there's a lot of resistance against testing this stuff.
So already they're couching this whole finding and in terms
where, well, it seems to be. Just keep that in mind.
Balida Balul a, a paleontologist from the Chinese Academy of
Sciences, and her colleagues found the biomolecules and a
portion of cartilage from the Codyopertex specimen.
This Peacock sized theropod dinosaur inhabited what is now
in northeast China and is one of the oldest species of dinosaurs
with feathers discovered so far. Finding an exquisitely preserved
group of cells in a fossil is rare.
Nucleic acids are fragile and tend to break down quickly post
mortem. Sometimes minerals protect
biomolecules for thousands of years, and other cases proteins
like collagen preserve biomolecules.
However, there's no hard rule as to what makes a molecular fossil
possible. In an interview with Forbes,
Values colleague Zing Li explained that volcanic ashes
and tuming a carcass could preserve it down to the cellular
level during fossilization. Now they're stretching a little
bit. I mean, for a long time they
said, hey, these things only last 30-40 thousand years, I
think is what they've been saying for a long time, maybe a
little longer with some of the stuff that's coming out of the
Neanderthals. But 125 million years, I mean,
think about it, you can just say 125 million, but 125 million
compared to say 100,000 years, that's 1000 times longer.
So it's almost like they're not really wanting to deal with the
reality of this stuff. After decalcifying the fragment,
the researchers treated the cells with hematoxin and eosin,
compounds that stain cellular nuclei blue, purple, and
cytoplasm and extracellular matrix pink.
They also extracted and stained Cartly cells from a chicken to
compare the results. While most cells disappeared
during the staining process, a few persisted, and one of them
researchers found long, dark purple threads encased in a
large purple circular structure. They believe this to be an
intact cellular nucleus with preserved threads of chromatin,
a complex DNA, a complex of DNA and protein.
Now that sounds so fascinating to me, but it seems like there's
been so little attention paid to these discoveries.
This isn't the first time scientists believe they found
biomolecules and dinosaur fossils, and 2020 Bio Lulu and
team found evidence of proteins, chromosomes and DNA material and
cartilage from a 70 million year old duck billed dinosaur fossil.
However, she and her colleagues remain cautious with any claims
about the stain structures chemical identity.
See, they don't want to, They don't want to rock the boat.
They want to keep this narrative intact.
These dinosaur nuclei are staining like normal cells, but
does it mean there's DNA inside them?
Not really, says Baliul. What it means is that there are
definitely parts of original organic molecules, perhaps some
original DNA in there. Well, isn't that what we just
ask you? Still, we don't know that yet
for sure. While standing as a good start,
it's not precisely enough to indicate whether certain
compacts compounds are present, she explains.
So here it's been 4 years, and what are they doing to test this
stuff? I don't know.
From what I can see, not much. Mary Schweitzer, a
paleontologist at North Carolina State University, US, also
advises caution. I commend the authors for their
approach, but in my opinion, this study opens up the door for
further more specific and higher resolution studies, she says.
Sergio Bertasa, a biochemist from University College London,
UK, agrees. They need to use other chemical
biochemical techniques as mass spectrometry or any other method
that can confirm the chemical identity of what they are
staining. Nevertheless, BIO is excited to
collect more chemical data to get to the bottom of the
biomecular mystery. Let the future, more data, more
studies, and new technological advances tell the full truth
about DNA preservations and deep time.
But As for the possibilities of real life, Jurassic Park volume
is explicit. We can never clone dinosaurs and
bring them back to life, even if we ended up having their entire
genome sequenced while talking about throwing a blank on this
stuff. So do you see what's happened
here? They found DNA in these
dinosaurs. I mean, they know it's there
because they, they do this test that they do want any kind of
fossilized remains. How come they run these same
tests on human bones? And when they, the collars show
up like this, they, they know that it's DNA proteins.
But when they do it to the dinosaur, which they claim is
125 million years old, all of a sudden, well, we're not sure.
Well, we need to wait for more technology to come along.
Well, we're never going to be able to clone these things.
What if they're hiding? It's the narrative.
They always have to protect the narrative.
And it doesn't matter if it's dinosaurs or UFOs.
Academia, which has really become just an extension of the
deep state. The people who control us have
created these various narratives that they used to control us.
OK. And they don't want to change
the narratives, these bedtime stories they tell us, because
those narratives are used to influence the way that you
think. Now, if one of these Batty
Christians comes along and says, wow, maybe, maybe the world's
not that old. Maybe the earth, maybe the earth
is only 6 or 7000 years old. Maybe these creatures did live
during human times. Maybe everything you're telling
us about evolution is not true. Maybe we're operating on the
completely incorrect paradigm when we when we look at this
thing through the eyes of an evolutionist.
Yeah, when people ask questions like, well, wouldn't this
creature have gone extinct by the time that it gotten around
to evolving to deal with it, to deal with the current problem?
So this idea of time and how time passes and how it just give
it enough time. They can convince you that Iraq
can evolve into a monkey and into a person.
This narrative, it's important to them because they want to be
at the very top. They want to be the authorities.
If there's some kind of God, regardless of the religion you
believe in, if there's some sort of entity above them, then
they're accountable. And then you as an individual
have some kind of free will to to look above what they're
telling you. So this is about power and
control, and narratives are used every single day of your life to
control you. And this is just one of them,
just one of them. This this narrative about how
dinosaurs emerged from a planet that was basically just rocked
with water on it, how they carried on for 300 million years
or whatever until the big meteorite impact.
And then during this whole time, we're being told, well, there's
no chance that we'll ever find DNADNA preserved in these things
because they're just too old. But then they do find DNA.
And when they find it, they say, well, we're not sure that it's
DNA while you're running the same test on it, that you do
want other stuff. Why aren't you sure?
And it's been, this is back in 2020-2021, and we still don't
have any more definitive answers about it.
Come on. Protecting the DNA, protecting
the narrative. Let's go ahead and look at this
next article. Now, this article is dated April
17th, 2020. So think about this five years
ago possible dinosaur DNA has been found.
New discoveries have raised the possibility of exploring Dino
genetics. But controversy surrounds the
results. See any time that you disrupt
their narrative, there's going to be controversy.
They don't like it. This article is written by Riley
Black, edited by Dean Weiser. It says got a nice picture of a
of a big what's a Ceratops? One of these like a rhinoceros
looking dinosaurs on there. The tiny fossil is unassuming as
dinosaur remains go. It is not as big as an
Aptosaurus femur or as impressive as a Tyrannosaurus
jaw. The object is just a scant Shard
of cartilagen form the skull of a baby hardrosaur called
Hypercorrosaurus that perished more than 70 million years ago.
It may contain something never seen from the depths of the
mesoic of the Mesozoic era, degraded remnants of dinosaur
DNA. So the other one's like 125
million year old sample, 70 million years old, still very,
very old. Genetic material is not supposed
to last over such time periods, not by a long shot.
DNA begins to decay at death. Findings from a 2012 study on
Moab bones show an Organism genetic material deteriorates at
such a rate that it halves itself every 521 years.
This speed would mean paleontologists can only hope to
recover recognizable DNA sequences from creatures that
have lived and died within the past 6.8 million years, far
shorter of even the last non avian dinosaurs.
Now, I do believe that they used to say it was a lot less than
that, but then there is the hypercorsource cartilage.
In a study published earlier this year, Chinese Academy of
Science paleontologist Elita Balu and her colleagues proposed
that in that fossil they had found not only evidence of
original proteins and cartilage creating cells, but a chemical
signature consistent with DNA. Recovering genetic material of
such antiquity would be a major development.
Working on more recently extinct creatures such as mammoths and
giant ground sloths, paleontologists have been able
to revise family trees, exploring the interrelatedness
of species and gain some insights into biological
creatures such as variations and coloration.
DNA from non avian dinosaurs would add a wealth of new
information about the biology of the terrible lizards.
Such a find would also establish the possibility that genetic
material can remain detectable not just for one million years,
but for 10s of millions. The fossil record would not be
bones and footprints. It would contain the scraps of
the genetic records that ties together all life on Earth.
Well, think about it. What if, what if there's enough,
enough evidence out there to show that that there's just no
way this stuff could survive for that many millions of years?
They would rewrite the narrative of dinosaurs.
So rather than learn all this new information about dinosaurs,
what they look like, you know how they lived, that would
require rewriting the narrative. That would require telling
people, well, actually it wasn't 25,000,000 years ago, or 125
million at most. It was maybe 7,000,000 years
ago. They don't want to do that yet.
First paleontologist need to confirm that these possible
genetic traces are the real thing.
Such potential tatters of ancient DNA are not exactly
Jurassic Park quality. At best, their biological
markers seem to be degraded remnants of genes that cannot be
read, broken down components rather than intact parts of a
sequence. So they're making some more
assumptions here. We're talking it down.
Still, these potential patterns of DNA would be far older by
millions than the next closest trace of degraded genetic
material in the fossil record. They just told you that none of
this stuff survived. Survives after what, 6.8
million? If upheld, Valio and her
colleagues findings would indicate the biochemical traces
of organisms can persist for 10s of millions of years longer than
previously thought. Or maybe it would show that
you're wrong about the age of dinosaurs.
And then it just kind of finishes up here and says, well,
we have to keep looking. You see, it's so clear to me.
You make this groundbreaking discovery over five years ago.
And just this one here. There's been others, But instead
of pursuing it, they put it on a shelf.
And that's what's done with anything.
Doesn't matter if it's Bigfoot, doesn't matter if it's
dinosaurs, doesn't matter if it's UF OS.
If you come up with some hard evidence that counters what the
narrative is for whatever that subject is, they're going to put
it on the shelf. And if you're an academic,
they're going to put your career on the shelf if they need to.
Let's take a look at another article here.
It does seem like they're really trying to put a slant on this
stuff. I did find this on Google, the
AIO review. It says Mary Higby Switzer, a
paleontologist who famously discovered soft tissues and what
appeared to be ancient blood vessels within a 68,000,000 year
old Triosaurus Rex fossil, continues your research at North
Carolina State University, focusing on molecular
paleontology and the evolution of dinosaurs and bird
descendants. Here's a more detailed look at
our work and background. Swicers interest in dinosaurs
begin in childhood, but she initially pursued a career in
commutative disorders, bringing a degree working with deaf
children. She later returned to her
passion for paleontology, earning a doctorate after
volunteering at Jack Horner's lab at Montana State University.
Now there's a documentary somewhere on YouTube that used
to be this, where she found this stuff.
OK. And they're like, yeah, there's
DNA in her somewhere. And they interviewed Jack or
somebody. One of these.
There's a couple of them out there, but there was one in
particular. It's a Christian research group.
I don't know who funded it, but their, their narrative, their,
their, their belief is that the earth is not a hundreds of
millions of years old or billions of years old, but that
it all goes in line with a literal reading of Genesis.
And so that the, the earth is just, you know, I don't know,
6-7 thousand years old. And their idea was these ancient
dinosaurs weren't 125 million years old.
Maybe they were 5 or 6000 years old.
So there was there was plenty of time for the DNA to remain in
there. They played a phone call that
they had with Jack Horner questioning him about this DNA
and they offered to pay to have this sample tested.
And he just wanted to have nothing to do with it, as far as
you know, I could tell. I'd like to find that somewhere
if we, if somebody has a link to it, leave in the comments
section. But this idea of protecting the
narrative goes on. It says Schweitzer's research
focused on microscopic and molecular analysis of dinosaur
bones, leading to the discovery of preserved soft tissues,
including collagen and what appeared to be ancient blood
vessels inside AT Rex Fossil. This discovery challenged Long
Hill beliefs about the preservation of soft tissues and
fossils and has led to renewed interest in searching for more
evidence. Says She is currently
researching molecular paleontology, molecular
digenesis, and Tafani. And it has a whole list of
stuff. Controversy and Skepticism
Spicer's findings have been met with both excitement and
skepticism within the scientific community, with some questioning
the authenticity of your results.
Well, she had all the stuff there.
She has described her work as honoring God and has stated that
she takes her work very seriously.
They don't want to hear the God word.
She is currently searching for more dinosaur soft tissue.
This summer, she and her colleagues have figured out how
to remove the iron from the samples, which enables them to
analyze the original proteins. They have found chemicals
consistent with DNA though spice.
She was quick to note that she hasn't proven they really are
DNA. Yeah, that's the lady that first
came out with this stuff that was just so amazing to me.
Then we'll finish up with this article here.
This is from from smithsonianmeg.org, dated May
2006. So think about that.
This stuff's been known for over for nearly 20 years, probably
over 20 years. Probing a 68,000,000 year old T
Rex, Mary Schweitzer stumbled upon astonishing signs of life
that may radically change our view of ancient of the ancient
beast. Neatly dressed in blue Capri
pants and sleeveless top, long hair flowing over her bare
shoulders, Mary Schweitzer sets at a microscope in a dim lab,
her face lit only by a glowing computer screen showing a
network of thin branching vessels.
That's right, blood vessels from a dinosaur.
Ho ho ho, I'm excited, She chuckles.
I am like, really excited after 68,000,000 years in the ground
by a trying to source. Rex found in Montana was dug up.
Its leg bone was broken in pieces and fragments were
dissolved in acid in Schweitzer's laboratory at North
Carolina State University in Raleigh.
Cool beans, she says, looking at the image on the screen.
It was big news indeed last year when Schweitzer announced she
had discovered blood vessels and structures that look like whole
cells inside that T Rex bone, the first observation of its
kind. The finding amazed colleagues
who had never imagined even a trace of still soft dinosaur
tissue could survive. After all, as any textbook will
tell you, when an animal dies, soft tissue such as blood
vessels, muscle and skin decay and disappear over time, while
heart tissue, like bone may gradually acquire minerals from
the environment and become fossils.
Schweitzer, one of the first scientists to use modern tools
of cell biology to study dinosaurs, has upended the
conventional wisdom by showing that some rock hard fossils 10s
of millions of years old may have remnants of soft tissues
hidden away in their interiors. The reason it hasn't been
discovered before? There's no right thinking
paleontologist would do what Mary did with her specimens.
But why wouldn't they do that? Well, they're afraid they might
upset the apple cart. We don't go to all this effort
to dig this stuff up out of the ground to then destroy an acid,
says dinosaur paleontologist Thomas Holtz Junior at the
University of Maryland. It's great science.
The observation could shed new light on how dinosaurs evolved
and how their muscles and blood vessels work.
And the new findings might help settle a long running debate
about whether dinosaurs were warm blooded, cold blooded, or
both. But see nothing about the
mention about how the stuff should even be there, because
it's far too old. Meanwhile, Schweitzer's research
has been hijacked by young Earth creationist who insist that
dinosaur soft tissue couldn't possibly survive for millions of
years. Now didn't we just talk about
the test they did where they showed that I can't live past 6,
I can't be there after about 6.8 million years.
But notice how Smithsonian, how the Smithsonian just attacks
people for asking questions about this.
They claim discovery support their belief based on their
interpretation of Genesis that the earth is only a few 1000
years old. Of course it's not unusual for a
paleontologist to differ with great for with creationists.
But when creationists misrepresent Switzer data, she
takes it personally. She describes herself as a
complete and total Christian. On a shelf in her office is a
plaque bearing an Old Testament verse.
For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans to
prosper you and not harm you, plans to give you hope in the
future. Well, apparently the plans for
this stuff was to put it on a shelf and leave it there.
It may be that Spicer's unorthodox approach to
paleontology can be traced to her right about career path.
Growing up in Helena, Mt, she went through a phase when, like
many kids, she was fascinated by dinosaurs.
In fact, at age 5, she announced she was going to be a
paleontologist. But first she got a college
degree in commutative disorders, married, had three children and
briefly taught remedial biology to high schoolers.
In 1989, a dozen years after she graduated from college, she
settled in a class at Montana State University taught by
paleontologist Jack Horner of the Museum of Rockies, now an
affiliate of the Smithsonian Institution.
You see the pattern here? You see Jack Horton, he's the
guy you see on The History Channel, on Discovery Channel.
These are kind of the gatekeepers, the gatekeepers of
the narrative. The narrative here says
dinosaurs have been around for hundreds of millions of years.
You can have whatever religious belief you want, but if you
question that narrative, then you're a kook.
The lectures reignited her passion for dinosaurs.
Soon after, she talked her way into a volunteer position in
Horner's lab and begin to pursue a doctorate in pantology.
She initially thought she would study how the microscopic
structure of dinosaur bones differs depending on how much
the animal weighs. But then came the incident with
the red spots. In 1991, Schweitzer was trying
to study thin slices of bones from a 65,000,000 year old T
Rex. OK, that they estimate
65,000,000 years old. This is clear back in 1991.
So what 36 years ago when And what's happened with this
knowledge since then? Pretty much nothing.
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, GAIL Kallas,
happened to take the slides to a veterinary conference where she
set up the ancient samples of for others to look at.
One of the vets went up to Callus 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 disc. Later, Switzer recalls.
I looked at this and I looked at this and I thought, this can't
be. Red cells don't preserve.
Notice the denial on everybody. The author, the scientist.
Yep, here's the blood cells. Look at them.
No, they can't be. Same thing when people spot
UFOs. Oh, it can't be a UFO.
Must be a drone. When Schweitzer showed the slide
to Horner when she first found the red blood cell looking
structures, I said Yep, that's what they look like, her mentor
recalls. Then he thought, was it possible
they were They wore red blood cells.
But he gave her some advice. Now I'll see if you can find
some evidence to show that they're not what they are.
What she found instead was evidence of Hemi in the bones,
additional support for the idea that they were red blood cells.
Heme is a part of hemoglobin, the protein that carries oxygen
in the blood and gives red blood cells their cholera.
It got me real curious as to the exceptional preservation, she
says. If particles of that one
dinosaur were able to hang around for 65,000,000 years,
maybe the textbooks were wrong about fossilization, or maybe
they were wrong about how long dinosaurs have been on the
planet. Schweitzer tends to be self
deprecating, claiming to be hopeless at computers, lab work
and talking to strangers. But colleagues admire her,
saying she's determined and hard working and has mastered a
number of complex laboratory techniques that are beyond the
skills of most pantologists. And asking unusual questions
took a lot of nerve. If you point her in a direction
and say don't go that way, she's the kind of person who will say
why, and she goes and test it herself, said Gregory Erickson,
a paleo biologist at Florida State University.
Schweitzer takes risk, says Karen Chen, a University of
Colorado paleontologist. It could be a big payoff, or it
could just be kind of a ho hum research project.
Well, notice the risk she's not taking.
She's not challenging the age, the age of the planet.
The narrative is millions and millions of years old and 2000.
Bob Harmon, a field crew chief from Museum of Rockies, was
eating his lunch in a remote Montana Canyon when he looked up
and saw a bone sticking out of a Rockwall.
That bone turned out to be part of what may be the best
preserved T Rex in the world. Over the next 3 summers, workers
chipped away at the dinosaur, gradually removing it from the
Cliff face. They called it B Rex in Harmon's
honor and nicknamed it Bob. In 2001 they encased a section
of the dinosaur and the surrounding dirt and plaster to
protect it. The package way more than 2000
lbs which turned out to be just above their helicopters
capacity, so they split it in half.
One of B rexes leg bones was broken into two big pieces and
several fragments, just what Schweitzer needed for her micro
scale explorations. It turned out Bob had been
misnamed. It's a girl and she's pregnant,
Swatcher recalls telling her lab technician when she looked at
the fragments on the hollow inside surface of the femur,
Sweecher had found scraps of bone that gave a surprising
amount of information about the dinosaur that made them.
Bones may seem as steady as stone, but they're actually
constantly in flux. Pregnant women use calcium from
their bones to build the skeleton of a developing fetus.
Before female birds start to lay eggs, they form a calcium rich
structure called medillary bone on the inside of their legs and
other bones. They draw on it during the
breeding season to make egg shells.
Schweitzer had studied birds, so she knew about medillary bone
and that's what she figured she was seeing in that T Rex
specimen. Pretty insightful stuff.
Most paleontologists now agree that birds are the dinosaurs
closest living relatives. In fact, they say that birds,
our dinosaurs, colorful, incredibly diverse, cute little
feathered dinosaurs, The theropod of the Jurassic forest
lives on, and goldfish visiting the backyard feeder, the two
cans of the tropics and ostrich loping across the African
Savannah. To understand her dinosaur bone,
Spicer turned to two of the most primitive living birds,
ostriches and emos. In the summer of 2004, she asked
several ostrich breeders for female bones.
A farmer called months later. Y'all still need that Lady
ostrich. The dead bird had been in the
farmer's backhoe bucket for several days in the North
Carolina heat. Schweitzer and her colleagues
collected a leg from the fragment carcass and drove it
back to Raleigh. As far as anyone can tell,
Schweitzer was right. Bob the Dinosaur really did have
a store of medullary bone when she died.
A paper published in Science last June presents microscope
pictures of medillary bone from ostrich and emu stride by
stride, with dinosaur bone showing near identical features.
In the course of testing AB Rex bone fragment further, Switzer
asked her lab technician Jennifer Whitmire to put it in
week acid, which slowly dissolves the bone, including
fossilized bone, but not soft tissues.
On Friday night in January 2421 years ago, Whitemer was in the
lab as usual. She took out a fossil chip that
had been in the acid for three days and put it under the
microscope to take a picture. The chip was curved so much I
couldn't get in focus, Whitmer recalls.
She used the forceps to flatten it.
My forceps kind of sunk into it, made a little indentation, and
it curled up. It was, I was like, stop it.
Finally, through her irritation, she realized what she had a
fragment of dinosaur soft tissue left behind when the mineral
bone around it had dissolved. Suddenly, Schweitzer and
Whitmire were dealing with something no one else had ever
seen for a couple of weeks. White Merced.
It was like Christmas every day. So imagine that this soft tissue
there from supposedly 70 million years previously in the lab,
Whitmer now takes out a dish with six compartments, each
holding a little brown dab of tissue and clear liquid, and
puts it on the microscope lens. Inside each specimen is a fine
network of almost clear branching vessels, the tissue of
a female Tyrannosaurus Rex that strode through the forest
68,000,000 years ago, preparing to lay eggs. close up, The blood
vessels from that T Rex and her ostrich cousins look remarkably
alike. Inside the dinosaur vessels are
things Schweitzer diplomatically calls round microstructures, so
she can't even call them DNA and the journal article out of the
abundance of scientific caution. But they are red and round, and
she and other scientists suspect they are red blood cells.
Of course, what everyone wants to know is whether DNA might be
working in that tissue. Whitmer, from much experience
with the press since the discovery, calls this the awful
question whether Schweitzer's work is paving the road to a
real life version of science fiction's Jurassic Park, where
dinosaurs were regenerated from DNA preserved in amber.
But DNA, which carries the genetic script for the animal,
is a very fragile molecule. It's also ridiculously hard to
study because it's so easily contaminated with modern
biologic materials such as microbes or skin cells well
buried or after being dug up. Instead, Schweitzer has been
testing her dinosaur tissue samples for proteins, which are
a bit harder and more readily distinguishable from
contaminants. Specifically, she's been looking
for collagen, elastin, and hemoglobin.
Collagen makes up much of the bone scaffolding, elastin is
wrapped around blood vessels, and hemoglobin carries oxygen
inside red blood cells. Because the chemical makeup of
proteins changes through evolution, scientists can study
protein sequences and learn more about how dinosaurs evolve.
Because proteins do all the work in the body, studying them could
someday help scientists understand dinosaur Physiology.
How their muscles and blood vessels worked, for example.
Well, maybe this could also completely upset their
narrative. Proteins are much too tiny to
pick out with the microscope. To look for them, Schweitzer
uses antibiotics, immune system molecules that recognize and
bind to specific sections of proteins.
Schweitzer and Whitmer have been using antibiotics to chicken
collagen, cow elastin, and ostrich hemoglobin to search for
similar molecules in the dinosaur tissue.
At an October 2005 paleontology conference, Schweitzer presented
preliminary evidence that she has detected real dinosaur
proteins in her specimens. For the discoveries in the past
year have shown that the discovery of soft tissue in B
Rex wasn't just a fluke. Schweitzer and Whitmore have
found probable blood vessels, bone building cells and
connective tissue. And another T Rex and a theropod
from Argentina and a 300,000 year old woolly mammoth fossil.
Spicer's work is showing us we really don't understand decay,
Hall said. There's a lot of real basic
stuff in nature that people just make assumptions about.
Well, there again, no matter what happens, no matter how much
in your face it is, they are not allowed to question the
narrative. Young Earth creationists also
see Schweitzer work as revolutionary, but in an
entirely different way. Well, maybe just the common
sense way. They first seized upon
Schweitzer work after she wrote an article for the Popular
Science magazine Earth in 1997 about possible red blood cells
and her dinosaur specimens. Creation Magazine claimed that
Swisher's research was powerful testimony against the whole idea
of dinosaurs living millions of years ago.
It speaks volumes for the Bible's account of recent
creation. Now see, that's just holy water
on a vampire. They're they're not going to
like that whatsoever. And they go on articles.
Basically a decent article, except that it's just totally
closed minded to only one, one outcome on this.
I mean, you have two choices. Either all these people who have
been studying DNA and have told us, hey, look, the longest it
can last is 6.8 million years and then there's no DNA left.
So that's been the that's been the go to for a long time.
And then we come up with these samples where we see what looks
like and it shows evidence that it is DNA in samples that are
supposed to be 70 million, eighty million, 125 million
years old. So what is the response of the
academics? Well, First off, they say, well,
it does test positive for it, but who knows, You know, maybe
we're missing something here. 20 years later, they're still
testing. It's still showing.
Yeah. Oh, yeah.
This looks like DNA. Are they doing anything to
really unlock that DNA and show us what's there?
Doesn't seem like it. Are they doing anything to
question this notion that DNA can only last 6 or 7,000,000
years? Well, they are doing that, but
are they doing anything to question the narrative of of the
old Earth that dinosaurs have been around for hundreds of
millions of years? Oh, no.
And why not? Well, because that would totally
upset the whole concept of evolution because without deep
time, evolution really doesn't work.
You have sure, you have what amounts to selective breeding
that's going to that's going to result in some changes in
species, you know, over the short term.
But as far as turning dinosaurs into, you know, into little
finches, well, that doesn't take a week, that takes 100 million
years. And so this is one of the
reasons I think that they have to protect the narrative.
And like I said, it doesn't matter if it's about dinosaurs,
doesn't matter if it's about Bigfoot, doesn't matter about if
it's about UFOs. Recognizing narratives,
recognize what they do when their narratives are are are
challenged. And then you'll start to see
where we're at in this whole thing.
Until next time. This is UFO warning over and
out.