I’m sorry Thomas, but you’ve completely misunderstood what Mary Schweitzer actually found.
She did not find actual red blood cells. She only found round red microstructures that were the remnants of blood cells. Remnants of red blood cells are not actual red blood cells.
She also did not find any sequenceable DNA. She only found DNA breakdown products at best. DNA breakdown products are not sequenceable DNA.
Well if you don’t want to be accused of misleading people, then don’t mislead people.
Look, it’s as simple as this. Before you can make any claims whatsoever about what scientific evidence does or does not support, you need to make sure you are getting your facts straight about what the scientific evidence actually consists of. Claiming that someone found actual red blood cells, when they only found remnants of red blood cells, or that they found DNA when they only found DNA breakdown products, is misleading people. Period.
There’s something else you need to realise here. Personal incredulity is not a factor for consideration in deciding what is legitimate science and what isn’t. Science throws up strange results all the time – just look at quantum mechanics, for example. (Electrons are both waves and particles? C’mon!) The only thing that scientists go on in determining what is legitimate and what isn’t is, as I said, measurement. And it is measurement, not closed-minded dogma, that tells us that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old and not six thousand.