OTHER PHOTOS

These are photos from other sources.

The three-panel photo is from www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7285683 and the caption reads:

Tissue fragments from a Tyrannosaurus rex femur are shown at left, when it is flexible and resilient and when stretched (arrow) returns to its original shape. The middle photo shows the bone after it is air dried. The photo at right shows regions of bone showing fibrous character, not normally seen in fossil bone.

The two-panel photo of the vein and blood is from M. H. Schweitzer , and posted at http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0325Dino_tissue.asp AIG's caption read:

Left: The flexible branching structures in the T. rex bone were justifiably identified as “blood vessels”. Soft tissues like blood vessels should not be there if the bones were 65 million years old.
Right: These microscopic structures were able to be squeezed out of some of the blood vessels, and can be seen to “look like cells” as the researchers said. So once again there is scope for Dr Schweitzer to ask the same question, “How could these cells last for 65 million years?”

CLOSE UP of T-REX FEMUR with SOFT TISSUE

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0325Dino_tissue.asp

Full coverage of this amazing find in the URL above. Soft, unfossilized tissues, blood vessels, and blood cells were found inside the leg bone of a T-Rex.

It's difficult to make a case that these tissues could have survived the 4,500 years since the Genesis flood, much less the supposed 70 MILLION years since dinosaurs went extinct, according to evolutionists.

This is solid evidence (even though it's soft!) that dinosaurs lived until modern times. They were referred to as dragons in accounts before the word dinosaur was coind in the 1840's.

MUSEUM DISPLAY of FEMUR

Here is the display of the soft-tissued femur from the Museum of the Rockies, taken by Cecil Allen.

Of course the museum adheres to the religion of evolutionism, even in the face of contrary evidence. Thus they believe this soft tissue somehow lasted for over 70 million years.

This certainly repudiates some major evolutionary beliefs, either way. Even if there is some way it could've been preserved for tens of millions of years, that refutes the longstanding evolutionary belief that such tissue would not last so long. If they could be wrong about that, why should we believe they are right that man, apes, skunks, rats, weeds, and tomatoes all have a common ancestor?

T-REX SKULL

Here is the skull of the dinosaur from which the soft tissue was found.

The false view of evolutionists that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago kept them from looking for evidence that dinosaurs lived recently, along with man. In this case the evidence found them.

T-REX SOFT TISSUE!

Early in 2005, Mary Schweitzer, a paleontologist working under the legendary "Dinosaur Jack" Horner, discovered UNFOSSILIZED soft tissue, blood vessels, and blood cells in the femur (leg bone) of a T-Rex, when the bone had to be cut in half for shipping.

This kind of tissue would hardly survive for thousands of years, much less 70 MILLION.

You can read all about the amazing find at http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0325Dino_tissue.asp