when you witness yourself the amazing preservation of the remains of blood product in dinosaur bone.is it not true that prior to this discovery that this was thought impossible.now it is thought perfectly feasible .the presupposition is that dinos died out 65 million yr ago so therefore it must be possible.creationists believing in a much younger world are not so surprised.the discovery is presented as evidence for dinos being relatively recent.
or am i missing something here?

Are you missing something? I should bloody coco! I'll tell you what you're missing. Real science, that's what. Real science does not dismiss anything as impossible. Real science has dating techniques (that you don't want to hear about as they don't fit in with your ignorant prejudices) that are rock-solid, ultra-reliable and repeatable. Real science gives us pretty accurate dating of any fossil remains you care to name. Not only that, real science has a ton of evidence from geology and evolution which corroborates dating. And guess what, pete. It all fits. Like a glove. There are gaps, of course, and they give concern to scientists and fuel doubts, but we wouldn't have it any other way. What don't fit are assertions plucked from nowhere that the Earth is a few thousand years old just because some long-dead deluded twat who probably never existed rattled on about a bloody ark or something and that dinosaurs chased Raquel Welch. I'm not surprised that you and you pig-stupid ilk pounce with delight on the findings about dinosaur blood (which I can't even be arsed to check, so maybe I'll take your word for it). I'm sure you'll derive great comfort from it. But, as ever, you are wrong. Stupidly, deludedly, blindly, ignorantly wrong. Get off your lazy arse, open your eyes and look for evidence.