Blood vessels, cells and proteins(!) discovered in dinosaur bones

Wow! Just wow!To be completely clear: this isn't fossilised tissue in the shape of these things; it's actual proteins!Wow!

Thank you for the offer; but I have access to pretty much everything online through the OU anyway

Creation Safaris has a misleading piece up about it already; doubtless we can look forward to more in this vein.

We have no idea That is the least likely of all explainations.

Faith, as always, has nothing to do with it.Let me give you an analogy: you've got a 1000 reliable witnesses to an event, 999 of them say one thing, the 1000th tells you something that appears to contradict them. Do you think the most rational thing to do is to consider that:a) the 999 other witness are wrong?
b) there is an explaination as to what the 1000th appears to contradict?You, apparently, think that a) is the way forward. I think that b) is the rational choice.

This is probably not the thread for an extended debate of dating methods, so I'll summarise the two major reasons:1. Multiple, independent lines of evidence produce consistent results.
2. The failure of dating methods would require that laboratory confirmed results from physics and chemistry not apply in the past.More in-depth discussion should perhaps be taken to the Dates and Dating forum?