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

Parasomnium writes:It is the least likely - or, rather, very unlikely - because it would mean that, if the dating was off to such an extent, almost everything we know about physics would be wrong. Dating methods are based in part on our understanding of physics, in particular nuclear decay. If, on the basis of this evidence, we would abandon our current picture of the ages of the different layers of the geologic column, and with it our current understanding of the history of life on earth, then we would have to abandon an important part of physics as well, together with a host of other well established scientific disciplines.

MrJack writes: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?

Percy writes:It seems absolutely incredible to most scientists that protein could survive for millions and millions of years, and that's why the skepticism. It has nothing to do with fears that it calls into question evolution and even physics itself.