Welcome to the home of The Question Evolution Project. Presenting information demonstrating that there is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution, and presenting evidence for special creation. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Monday, August 4, 2014

Evolutionists Deny the Facts on Soft Tissue Fossils

More original-tissue fossils are being found. Secular scientists are trying to explain away the facts, evolution enthusiasts even call creationists "liars", but the truth is not only out there, the evidence supports creation and Noah's Flood, not evolution.
First, a reminder that the word "fossil" does not necessarily mean something that has been permineralized, as explained here. There are evolutionists and atheists who will deny the fact that soft tissues have been found that are allegedly millions of years old; such a thing is not possible. To cling to fundamentalist evolutionary dogma, they have several possibilities: Deny outright that soft fossils exist (I've seen it happen), try to find excuses to explain away the evidence so they can reduce their own cognitive dissonance, or perhaps combining the denial and excuses by calling creationists "liars".

Soft tissues and non-mineralized fossils are actually not something from the last few decades. Actually, such things have been discovered for a much longer time. They are being examined much more thoroughly with modern scientific equipment, and denying the facts becomes much more difficult. Of course, long-agers want to escape this information, because it indicates that the earth is not billions of years old; original-tissue fossils are actually supporting the biblical account of creation and Noah's Flood.
Almost without fail, whenever an ICR scientist discusses original tissue in fossils, we hear well-intended explanations of how we got it all wrong—that the fossils in question are actually made of minerals. But they are not all mineral—that’s the primary point of the technical articles reporting these discoveries. Why do so many have such a hard time accepting these clear observations? Perhaps if more people knew about original-tissue fossil discoveries, they would better understand what fossils really represent.

Evolutionists frequently use the fossil record as “proof” that Earth’s history stretches back millions or even billions of years. The overwhelming majority of fossils are mineralized remains or impressions of once-organic, long-dead creatures. Maybe those mineralized fossils could last that long, but that’s not the issue we’re addressing. A completely different class of fossils holds remnants of animal biochemicals like proteins, pigments, and DNA that minerals never replaced, and lab tests indicate that these organic tissue components could not last a million years—that’s what we’re talking about.

Interestingly, the concept of millions of years of “deep time” grew in popularity even as original-tissue fossils were being discovered and described. Deep time refers to a practically endless series of events that supposedly occurred before the appearance of man in the world. Even locked in rocks, original tissues shouldn’t have lasted from way back then until now.
You can dig up the rest of the truth and read the article in context by clicking on "Original-Tissue Fossils: Creation's Silent Advocates". ADDENDUM 6-09-2015: See "More Dino Blood Found: Evolutionists in Denial".

 


Looking for a comment area?
You can start your own conversation by using the buttons below!

Labels