Traces of dinosaur blood, soft tissues (like blood vessels, collagen, and possibly nerves), and proteins have been found preserved within fossils, challenging how long ago they may have lived because it is understood that collagens, and other cells would fully degrade in less than 100,000 years.  Suggesting dinosaurs lived 1,000’s of years ago, not millions.

Widespread Evidence: Similar soft tissue traces (collagen, blood cells, nerves, vessels) have been found in various dinosaur fossils (theropods, duckbills) and across different environments, suggesting it’s not a fluke.

01-08-26 – It appears that around Sept 2024 MIT came out w/ a study about collagen to try and refute some of the more recent stuff here.  Always a controversy. 

Excerpt : ( RE: COLLAGEN ONLY AS FAR AS WE KNOW – NOT OTHER WET TISSUES ) – A new study from MIT offers an explanation for how collagen can survive for so much longer than expected. The research team found that a special atomic-level interaction defends collagen from attack by water molecules. This barricade prevents water from breaking the peptide bonds through a process called hydrolysis.

We used Google to ask the following :Date: 01-01-2026 – query: ‘dinosaur nerves and blood vessels found?’
‘Below we display the search results including ( if applicable ) our mark-ups in  ‘green italics‘

AI Results : 

Yes, scientists have found evidence of dinosaur nerves and blood vessels within fossils, though these are not soft, pliable tissues but remarkably preserved organic remnants like collagen, hemoglobin, and cell-like structures, identified through advanced chemical and imaging techniques in specimens like T. rex and Brachylophosaurus. These discoveries, pioneered by researchers like Mary Schweitzer, challenge older ideas about total soft tissue decay and offer insights into dinosaur physiology and how tissues can survive millions of years.

Key Discoveries & Methods:

T. rex (B-rex): In 2003, Dr. Mary Schweitzer found flexible, branching vessels and cell-like structures in a T. rex femur bone after demineralizing the fossil with acid.
Brachylophosaurus canadensis (Hadrosaur): Studies revealed similar blood vessel-like structures, confirmed to contain proteins like myosin, indicating actual blood vessels, not just bacterial films, were preserved.

Hemoglobin: Recent analysis of T. rex and Brachylophosaurus fossils found hemoglobin, a key protein in red blood cells, within these vessels.
Methodology: Scientists use methods like mass spectroscopy, X-ray microanalysis, and high-resolution imaging (like nano-CT) to identify these organic components within the mineralized bone matrix.

What Was Found:

Blood Vessels: Transparent, branching, vessel-like structures that match the expected shape and composition (collagen, elastin) of animal veins.
Cell-like Structures: Objects resembling red blood cells (erythrocytes) and cell nuclei have been identified, some with high iron content.
Proteins: The presence of proteins like hemoglobin and collagen confirms these aren’t just mineral casts but original biological material.

Significance:

These findings show that soft tissues, previously thought to disappear quickly, can persist in fossils under specific conditions (e.g., rapid burial, low oxygen).

They provide direct evidence of dinosaur physiology, metabolism, and even potential reproductive states (like medullary bone in female dinosaurs).

They help refine our understanding of how biological materials fossilize and change over geologic time. We have reviewed this Ai response and it appears in line with our understanding, which is limited to the study we have done over the years and we are not experts.  We are learning still as well always.  This is obviously a ‘new’ finding….and we are guessing MIT came up w/ something because this news had come out.  Let’s take a look deeper.  Also maybe we can look at some other questions to probe.  There is obviously controversy…so we ask other questions…see next topic….

We used Google to ask the following :Date: 01-01-2026 – query: ‘dinosaur blood and soft tissues and nerves’
‘Below we display the search results including ( if applicable ) our mark-ups in  ‘green italics‘

AI Results : 

What preserved T. rex tissue? Mystery explained at lastYes, traces of dinosaur blood, soft tissues (like blood vessels, collagen, and possibly nerves), and proteins have been found preserved within fossils, challenging older ideas that only hard bone could last millions of years, revealing insights into dinosaur physiology and evolution, though DNA extraction is unlikely due to its fragility. Paleontologists, notably Mary Schweitzer, discovered pliable blood vessels, red blood cell-like structures, and collagen in T. rex and other dinosaurs, suggesting that organic remains can survive by mineralizing or becoming part of a chemical preservation pathway, often in specific environments like oxidizing sandstone.

What Has Been Found?

Blood Vessels: Transparent, hollow, and branching structures resembling blood vessels have been found, sometimes containing microstructures like red blood cells.
Red Blood Cells: Round, red structures within the vessels show characteristics similar to red blood cells.
Collagen: Mineralized collagen fibers and protein banding patterns, similar to those in modern bone, have been identified.
Nerve Fibers: Recent research also points to the preservation of nerve fibers and nerves.

How Does It Survive?

Protein Preservation: Proteins like collagen can survive by becoming mineralized or forming stable polymers, especially in oxidizing environments (like sandstone) that facilitate chemical reactions preserving the structures.
Fenton Reactions: A chemical pathway involving iron, oxygen, and organic molecules (Fenton reactions) helps preserve soft tissues early in fossilization.
Protection: External mineral concretions (like nodules) can encase and protect delicate internal tissues.

Why Is This Important?

Dinosaur Biology: Insights into metabolism (warm-blooded vs. cold-blooded), physiology, diet, and diseases.
Evolution: Analyzing preserved proteins can help map evolutionary relationships between dinosaurs and other animals, like birds, notes Vox.com.
New Techniques: It validates new methods of studying fossils, like using specific light wavelengths to detect molecules like hemoglobin.

What About DNA?

DNA is far too fragile and breaks down much faster (estimated half-life of 521 years) than collagen or cells, making extraction from dinosaur fossils virtually impossible, despite popular culture ideas, according to Vox.com.

We have reviewed this Ai response and it appears in line with our understanding, which is limited to the study we have done over the years and we are not experts.  We are learning still as well always.  There is obviously controversy…so we ask other questions…see next topic….

We used Google to ask the following :Date: 01-01-2026 – query: ‘how long can collagen be preserved in fossils?’
‘Below we display the search results including ( if applicable ) our mark-ups in  ‘green italics‘

AI Results : 

Collagen, a protein in bones, can surprisingly survive in fossils for millions of years, far beyond its expected half-life of about 500 years, with documented discoveries in dinosaur fossils up to 195 million years old, thanks to its unique triple-helix structure shielding its peptide bonds from water, though the exact upper limit remains a subject of study, with estimates suggesting perhaps up to a million years under ideal conditions.

Key Factors & Findings:

Molecular Shielding: A 2024 MIT study revealed that collagen’s tight, triple-helix structure creates an “armor” that prevents water molecules from breaking its peptide bonds (hydrolysis).
Exceptional Longevity: Collagen has been found in dinosaur fossils dating back 195 million years, significantly exceeding the 500-year half-life of its bonds, notes SciTechDaily, MIT Technology Review and Silicon Republic.

Estimated Limits: Some biochemical studies suggest that even with ideal burial conditions, collagen might last up to a million years, though this is debated, with some findings showing preservation for tens of thousands of years in older specimens.

Ongoing Research: Scientists are working to understand the precise conditions and molecular mechanisms that allow collagen to persist for such vast spans of geological time.
In essence, while protein decay is expected, collagen’s robust structure allows for much longer preservation in fossils than previously thought, extending into the Mesozoic Era. We have reviewed this Ai response and it appears in line with our understanding, which is limited to the study we have done over the years and we are not experts.  We are learning still as well always.  This is obviously a ‘new’ finding….and we are guessing MIT came up w/ something because this news had come out.  Let’s take a look deeper.  Also maybe we can look at some other questions to probe.  There is obviously controversy…so we ask other questions…see next topic….

We used Google to ask the following :Date: 01-01-2026 – query: ‘if something has a half life of 500 years how much will be there in 100,000 years?’
‘Below we display the search results including ( if applicable ) our mark-ups in  ‘green italics‘

AI Results : 

After 100,000 years, an extremely small, negligible fraction of the original substance will remain, specifically approximately \(6.22\times 10^{-61}\) of the initial amount. Step 1: Calculate the number of half-lives passed The number of half-lives (\(n\)) that pass over a given time period (\(t\)) can be calculated by dividing the total time by the half-life of the substance (\(T_{1/2}\)):\(n=\frac{t}{T_{1/2}}\)Given \(t=100,000\text{\ years}\) and \(T_{1/2}=500\text{\ years}\), the number of half-lives is:\(n=\frac{100,000\text{\ years}}{500\text{\ years}}=200\)So, 200 half-lives will pass in 100,000 years. Step 2: Calculate the remaining amount The amount of a substance remaining after \(n\) half-lives can be calculated using the formula:\(N(t)=N_{0}\cdot \left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^{n}\)where \(N(t)\) is the final amount, and \(N_{0}\) is the initial amount. The fraction of the original amount remaining is \(N(t)/N_{0}\):\(\frac{N(t)}{N_{0}}=\left(\frac{1}{2}\right)^{200}=2^{-200}\)Calculating this value gives an extremely small number:\(2^{-200}\approx 6.22\times 10^{-61}\)This means the remaining amount is \(6.22\times 10^{-61}\) times the original amount. Answer: The amount of the substance remaining after 100,000 years will be approximately \(6.22\times 10^{-61}\) of the original amount. In practical terms, this quantity is essentially zero. 

We have reviewed this Ai response and it appears in line with our understanding, which is limited to the study we have done over the years and we are not experts.  We are learning still as well always.  This is obviously a ‘new’ finding….and we are guessing MIT came up w/ something because this news had come out.  Let’s take a look deeper.  Also maybe we can look at some other questions to probe.  There is obviously controversy…so we ask other questions…see next topic….

We used Google to ask the following :Date: 01-01-2026 – query: ‘challenges to mit study of dinosaur blood cells’
‘Below we display the search results including ( if applicable ) our mark-ups in  ‘green italics‘

AI Results : 

Challenges to the study of potential dinosaur blood cells and other soft tissues, including work done at MIT on the preservation mechanisms, primarily revolve around disagreement over whether the material is original organic tissue or contamination/biofilm, and the scientific plausibility of complex molecules surviving millions of years.

Key Scientific Challenges

Contamination vs. Original Material: A primary challenge is definitively proving the material is original dinosaur tissue and not a result of contamination (either recent or ancient). Critics suggest the structures that look like blood vessels and cells could be bacterial biofilms that have mimicked the original biological shapes.
Plausibility of Long-Term Preservation: Traditional understanding of molecular degradation suggests that complex, easily degradable molecules like proteins and DNA should not be able to survive for 65+ million years. Scientists studying this phenomenon, such as Mary Schweitzer, have had to challenge this long-held wisdom and propose novel preservation mechanisms to explain their findings.

Analytical Difficulties: The concentration of organic material in fossils is extremely low, making analysis difficult and requiring highly specialized, sensitive instruments and repetitive testing to validate results.
Authentication and Reproducibility: It is difficult for other research groups to consistently reproduce the findings, partly because the ideal samples (freshly excavated bones) are rare, and most paleontologists are not trained in the necessary molecular biology techniques.

Challenges to the MIT Research Specifically

MIT researchers, in collaboration with others, have focused on explaining how durable proteins like collagen might survive the millions of years, rather than studying blood cells specifically. Their work aims to address the preservation challenges by identifying a “molecular armor” that might protect these molecules.

Debate Over Explanations: The MIT explanation, which suggests specific molecular interactions (like the presence of iron from hemoglobin) can cross-link and stabilize proteins, is itself debated. Critics, particularly from young-earth creationist perspectives, argue that the experimental conditions in the lab do not accurately reflect the real-world conditions fossils experience over geological time, and thus the explanation is insufficient to bridge the gap of millions of years.

Lack of Consensus: The MIT work is a piece of a larger puzzle, and researchers themselves acknowledge that more work is needed across different types of dinosaurs buried in different environments to achieve wide acceptance in the scientific community.

These challenges highlight the highly controversial and interdisciplinary nature of the field, blending paleontology with molecular biology and chemistry.

We have reviewed this Ai response and it appears in line with our understanding, which is limited to the study we have done over the years and we are not experts.  We are learning still as well always.  This is obviously a ‘new’ finding….and we are guessing MIT came up w/ something because this news had come out.  Let’s take a look deeper.  Also maybe we can look at some other questions to probe.  There is obviously controversy…so we ask other questions…see next topic….