Disagreements about Dinosaur DNA Half-Life

Posted by -

Yes, I know, half-life refers to the amount of time it takes for something radioactive to go through changes and decay. For example, Carbon-14 is unstable and is thought to decay into nitrogen-14 after 5,730 years. The term half-life has been appropriated for other uses, including how long half of a drug takes to leave a body. It seems fitting that since DNA deteriorates, similar calculations and curves are used for that as well.

Secular scientists (as well as some of their churchian allies) are committed to narratives involving millions and billions of years, so they have having trouble with dinosaur soft tissues existing today and come up with rescuing devices to evosplain them away. If the half-life of dinosaur DNA in bone is 512 years, secularists have a passel of problems.

Secular researchers are having cognitive dissonance about dinosaur DNA. It should not exist if the earth was as old as they believe, but there it is.

This is causing cognitive dissonance because DNA in dinosaurs exists, but according to the narrative, it cannot. (To quote Chico Marx, "Who ya gonna believe, me or your own eyes?") Debates are occurring, but apparently researchers are unwilling to accept the accumulated evidence that the earth is nowhere near as old as they (and Chuck Darwin) need it to be for their paradigm to function — it was created recently.
Evolutionists are experiencing cognitive dissonance about claims of dinosaur DNA.

“The trouble with dinosaur bones,” writes Jacinda Bowler in Science Alert, is that some of them appear to contain DNA, which is impossible in the consensus evolutionary timescale. DNA degrades too fast for any to remain for a million years, let alone tens of millions. . . . 
So what are evolutionary paleontologists to think about “Evidence of proteins, chromosomes and chemical markers of DNA in exceptionally preserved dinosaur cartilage” reported last year by Alida Bailleul et al. in National Science Review? The authors, including John Horner and Mary Schweitzer, ruled out contamination; they believe that the fragments of DNA in a late Cretaceous dinosaur fossil (evolutionarily dated to 75 million Darwin Years) are really there. Two different stains for DNA support the claim, and cartilage, not made by bacteria, also support the conclusion they observed original dinosaur tissue. Bowler relates the lead author’s contention:

To read the full article, see "Dinosaur DNA Provokes Disbelief".