Piltdown Superman

People are a mite confused about the word fossil,  seeing as how it's used to mean old stuff as well as organisms that are permineralized (organic material is replaced by minerals) or petrified  (turned to stone). I could call my mother-in-law a "fossil", but people would know it would be a disrespectful term about her old age, and they would have sense enough to know that she doesn't fit any scientific use of the word fossil.  When it comes to old dead things called fossils, sometimes scientists as well as us reg'lar folk do it. Ian Juby mentioned the shilly-shallying over that word in this video clip, starting at the 20 minute 13 second mark . Hadrosaur fossil. The 2010 article referred to both  fossil  and  bones. Image credit: Mark E. Jacobsen , Bureau of Land Management Believers in particle-to-parasaurolophus evolution don't cotton to having the news of soft tissues and actual bones being found because those facts refute their long-age presupposi

A study on preserved collagen and red blood cells in dinosaur bones, as well as the fossilization process, was marred by the evolutionary mindset of the researchers. Taking the approach that dinosaurs evolved into birds, they did some selective research on commonalities in some areas, and conveniently ignored how these things appear in other critters besides birds. Their unwarranted extrapolations did not  give them any clues to origins. The problem remains that blood and collagen should not last for millions of years, and is remarkable for having lasted the thousands of years after the Genesis Flood. Indeed, the biblical Flood models fit the actual observed facts far better than any evolutionary interpretations. Red blood cells and connective tissue may be preserved in dinosaur fossils more commonly than previously thought. This suggestion came from scientists on June 9, 2015 in Nature Communications as they unveiled the Cretaceous cells and collagen they recently found. The s

The third part of our layman's-level series on evidences for a young Earth sends evolutionists into a frenzy of denial and distortion of the facts. (Indeed, dinosaur DNA research itself is suspect , seemingly pre-censored.) The facts are simple: If dinosaurs have been extinct for sixty-five million years, finding soft tissue should be impossible. Some deny it, some invent a fanciful "explanation" that there is a previously unknown means of fossilization — but they avoid the plain facts that indicate their biases are erroneous and that the Earth may be far younger than evolutionists want to admit. Image*After Ask the average layperson how he or she knows that the earth is millions or billions of years old, and that person will probably mention the dinosaurs, which nearly everybody “knows” died off 65 million years ago. A recent discovery by Dr. Mary Schweitzer, however, has given reason for all but committed evolutionists to question this assumption. If

For the past two decades, paleontologist Mary Schweitzer has been at the cutting edge of research demonstrating that certain dinosaur remains contain original soft tissue. Of course, since this material should have completely decomposed after only thousands of years, none should be left after the millions of years assigned to these remains. And this is why scientists who have chosen to investigate soft tissue remain divided over the issue. Schweitzer’s latest technical report attempts to justify that in-bone collagen recovered from dinosaur remains is original to the dinosaur—and not a bacterial or lab-bench contaminant—on the basis of the peculiarities of the collagen protein’s three-dimensional structure. Collagen is a tough structural protein that bacteria do not manufacture. It forms long strands and acts like molecular strings that tie or connect other tissues such as skin and bones. Read the rest of "Latest Soft Tissue Study Skirts the Issues" here .

Let me see if I can put this together: Dinosaurs died out about 65 million years ago, yes? And it takes a long, long time for bones and things to turn into fossils, yes? So, in the huge amount of time required to turn bones into rock, other stuff must have rotted or fallen off, yes? Never mind that something soft can be exposed to the proper elements and conditions and become petrified . Here is another example of how philosophers of science will tap dance around the facts against evolution and still cling to their faith. Seems to me that it's not possible to find a Tyrannosaurus Rex bone with soft tissue still attached. But it happened. It shouldn't have happened. But it did. This article ignores the facts and scientists still manage to get excited: "To my knowledge, preservation to this extent—where you still have original flexibility and transparency—has not been noted in dinosaurs before, so we're pretty excited by the find," said Mary H. Schweitzer, a