Information icon.svg Nominations and campaigning for the RationalWiki 2019 Moderator Election is underway and will end on November 16.

Talk:Soft tissue preservation

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Possible section on 14C & left-handed amino acids?[edit]

(Hello RW. My first contribution.) Now that so many different types of dino tissue, sequenced proteins, decomposing DNA (with a reported 521-year half life), organelles, osteocyctes, etc., have been reported in so many leading journals, from a half-dozen different dinosaurs (in addition to many other organisms from the same strata, and even down to pre-Cambrian), it seems that extant dinosaur soft tissue is becoming somewhat routine. (For example, the creationist Real Science Radio program has predicted that endogenous soft tissue will be found in the newly discovered Dreadnoughtus bones.) Perhaps the next phase of investigation will focus on the likelihood both of significant left-handedness, and 14c, in the very same soft tissue specimens. Might this expected development be relevant on this page? Thoughts? --Bob Enyart (talk) 19:18, 15 September 2014‎ (UTC)

Well, if those science-loving creationists have predicted it then it must happen.--Weirdstuff (talk) 20:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
Come to think of it, RW could use a short snappy article on stereochemistry. Chirality is mentioned in CMI's rebuttal for answer #6 to the second unanswerable question: "...they are too dilute, contaminated, cross-reactive, and racemic (instead of being ‘one-handed’), to build anything." (That rebuttal remains unanswered there.)
The RW article on amino acids could be a place to spell out how stereochemistry factors into creationist arguments. Sprocket J Cogswell (talk) 21:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

Can Iron really preserve soft tissue?[edit]

Hello, I've read this article and it states "Further, it is not plausible that iron could be as good a preservative as formaldehyde, which directly forms covalent cross-links between protein chains, something iron can’t do." - http://creation.com/dinosaur-soft-tissue Is that true or is it just more creationist dribble? 20:44, 28 October 2014 — Unsigned, by: 81.153.227.145 20:44 / talk / contribs 28 October 2014

Ancient DNA[edit]

This should become a section:

Ancient DNA (also aDNA) is DNA from very old organisms -- on the order of thoudsands or millions of years. Related is soft tissue preservation of very old organisms.

Scientific[edit]

Neutral[edit]

Evolutionist[edit]

Creationist[edit]

RationalWiki[edit]