Are Scientists ‘Scared’ of Dinosaur DNA?

Are scientists afraid to study claims of Dinosaur DNA? Are they afraid to look for dinosaurs that might be preserved in recent permafrost sediments?  These are some claims made by a young-age creationist’ professor. In response, I tackle some bold claims made by Karissa, who recently appeared on Sal Cordova’s YouTube channel to discuss her experiences as a young earth creationist educator.

The main focus of my discussion revolves around the preservation of soft tissues in dinosaur fossils – a topic that has become a cornerstone argument for many young earth creationists. Karissa, like many others in the young earth community, sees the discovery of these preserved tissues as compelling evidence for a young earth. But is this interpretation scientifically sound?

First, let me give you some context. The “hemoglobin challenge” I mention in the video is my ongoing effort to address misconceptions about soft tissue preservation in fossils. Many creationists claim that the discovery of “fresh” tissues or even intact blood cells in dinosaur fossils proves these remains can’t be millions of years old. However, this interpretation fundamentally misunderstands the nature of what’s actually being found.

In the video, I break down the science of hemoglobin preservation. I explain how what we’re finding in these fossils isn’t actually fresh blood or intact cells, but rather the highly stable breakdown products of original biomolecules. For instance, the heme unit in hemoglobin can degrade into porphyrins – incredibly stable molecules that can persist for millions of years. This is very different from finding “fresh” tissue as it’s often portrayed in creationist’ literature and videos.

I also address Karissa’s claims about DNA preservation in dinosaur fossils. While it’s true that some studies have shown evidence of DNA-like structures in fossil cells, it’s crucial to understand that this doesn’t mean we’re finding intact, sequenceable dinosaur DNA. The reality is much more complex, involving partial preservation of extremely stable molecular fragments.

One of the most intriguing parts of Karissa’s interview that I discuss is her suggestion that evolutionary biologists and theistic evolutionists are “scared” to fully investigate dinosaur DNA. She implies that there’s a fear of what such investigations might reveal. As a scientist myself, I find this claim both puzzling and, frankly, a bit offensive. In the video, I explain why this accusation doesn’t align with the reality of how science operates and the genuine excitement most paleontologists would feel at the prospect of sequencing dinosaur DNA.

I also commend Karissa for one aspect of her approach – she’s actually proposing testable predictions based on young earth creationist beliefs. She suggests that if dinosaurs were on Noah’s Ark just a few thousand years ago, we should be able to find exceptionally well-preserved specimens, perhaps even in permafrost, with recoverable DNA. While I disagree with her premises, I appreciate that she’s willing to put forward concrete ideas that could be investigated.

Throughout the video, I try to balance respectful engagement with Karissa’s ideas while also providing clear, scientifically accurate information. I believe it’s crucial to address these claims head-on, as they often gain traction in certain communities and can lead to widespread misunderstandings about the nature of scientific evidence.

One of the key points I make is about the nature of scientific inquiry itself. Contrary to the idea that scientists are afraid of certain discoveries, the reality is that most researchers would be thrilled to make groundbreaking findings – even if they challenge existing paradigms. The idea that there’s a conspiracy to hide evidence that could overturn evolutionary theory simply doesn’t match up with how science actually works.

I also look into some technical details about DNA preservation and sequencing. For those interested in the cutting edge of paleogenomics, I discuss some of the latest advances in sequencing ancient DNA and what we might realistically expect to find in fossils of various ages. This includes a discussion of the oldest DNA sequences we’ve recovered so far and what that tells us about the limits of biomolecule preservation.

Towards the end of the video, I issue a challenge of sorts to young earth creationists. If they truly believe that dinosaurs lived just a few thousand years ago and that some may have been preserved in permafrost, I encourage them to pursue this line of research. After all, if such evidence exists, it would indeed be revolutionary. However, I also explain why, based on our current understanding of molecular degradation over time, such findings are extremely unlikely.

In wrapping up, I want to emphasize that my goal with this video, and with the hemoglobin challenge in general, is not to mock or belittle those who hold young earth creationist views. Rather, it’s to promote a more accurate understanding of the scientific evidence and to encourage critical thinking about these complex topics.

I believe that engaging with these ideas openly and honestly is crucial. It’s okay to have different interpretations of evidence, but it’s important that those interpretations are based on a solid understanding of the underlying science. My hope is that this video contributes to a more informed discussion about soft tissue preservation in fossils and what it really tells us about the age of the earth.