Incredibly Preserved Fossils Discovered

These types of fossils have been a rare item in Chile, in fact it’s also one of the most difficult sites to explore. Scientists had to travel five hours by vehicle, then hike for 12 hours, sometimes in very bad weather. Set-up camp and sleep, and continue the journey for another two hours before they reach their destination. Quite a remarkable feat.

Now why would scientists go to all that trouble, practically risking their lives to get there? The answer: Air-breathing marine reptiles known as “ichthyosaurs” mixed in with plants were discovered! Among the fossils were juveniles and adults but that is not all, soft tissue was discovered as well which is considered to be 150 million years old in the evolutionary framework.

Soft tissue over the span of the evolutionary time frame has been a challenge to explain, but there is never a loss for an imaginative story on how it happened. This is no exception!

Phys.org created this story…

“The Tyndall ichthyosaurs were gregarious and likely hunted in packs in a submarine canyon near the east coast of this sea. Their potential prey, belemnites and small fishes, were abundant due to plankton blooms caused by cold water upwelling. Occasionally, high energy turbiditic mudflows sucked down everything in their reach, including ichthyosaurs. Inside the suspension flows, the air-breathing reptiles lost orientation and finally drowned. They were instantly buried in the abyss at the bottom of the canyon.”

Like always, it lacks logical sense and omits some key things! What about the plants, how did the ichthyosaurs get fossilized with plants? And that is not all, since we are dealing with an enormous time period with these burials (over a span of 50 million years in the evolutionary time frame) how was it possible for the ichthosaurs to be uplifted hundreds of feet above sea level without being disturbed?

It takes an enormous amount of faith to believe these fossils containing soft tissue supposedly 150 million years old which were subject to 50 million years of mud flows over and over again in the same area, then millions of years later be uplifted hundreds of feet above sea level could be so exceptionally preserved. Unlike this story about fossilization, reworking of soils and sediments by animals such as worms along with other animals is a factual occurrence. And no doubt, these fossils would have been subject to them.

What really happened to these fossils has nothing to do with the crazy story by phys.org rather it was a global flood known as Noah’s flood that buried the animals and mixed them up with the plants. And since the earth is not that old, it is not far-fetched finding soft tissue in fossils in fact, it’s hard-evidence the earth is not that old! No improbable story required :)  This is truly a great discovery!

Soft Tissue Withstands Another Challenge

While analyzing a newly discovered dinosaur fossil,  Mary Schweitzer stumbled upon one of the greatest evidences for a young earth ever to be discovered! In evolution’s time frame, the fossil was a 68 million old Tyrannosaurus rex which was found in Montana and various fragments were dissolved in acid in Schweitzer’s laboratory at North Carolina State University in Raleigh.

To her astonishment as well as her colleagues, Schweitzer announced she had discovered blood vessels and structures that looked like whole cells inside that T. rex bone which was the first discovery of its kind and would not be the last!  They never imagined even a trace of still-soft dinosaur tissue could survive such a long time because as various textbooks would tell you, when an animal dies, soft tissues such as blood vessels, muscle and skin decay disappear over time, while hard tissues like bone may gradually acquire minerals from the environment and become fossils.

It is quite possible that the soft tissue would have been discovered prior to Schweitzer’s discovery but paleontologists generally don’t dig their specimens out of the ground so they can destroy with acid like Schweitzer did!  She recalls, “I looked at this and I looked at this and I thought, this can’t be. Red blood cells don’t preserve.” She is right, not for millions of years they don’t!

As one can imagine, much controversy followed the discovery although it didn’t come creationists but rather evolutionists themselves which continues to challenge the soft tissue discovery. Creationists and Christians alike rejoiced around the world in such a discovery while evolutionists were on their heels, attacking creationists as “hijacking” the data,  that Schweitzer was evolutionist with no challenge from a creationist that she was not and trying to come up with a rescue explanation which would allow them to claim that soft tissue could survive for 68 million years.  Maybe the textbooks are wrong about fossilization they suggested or maybe it wasn’t soft tissue to begin with.

Mary Schweitzer decided to attend a meeting of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology this month where she presented more compelling evidence that has soft tissue withstanding another challenge!

In Nature News

“Schweitzer and her colleagues have continued to amass support for their interpretation. The latest evidence comes from a molecular analysis of what look to be bone cells, or osteocytes, from T. rex and Brachylophosaurus canadensis. The researchers isolated the possible osteocytes and subjected them to several tests.”

“When they exposed the cell-like structures to an antibody that targets a protein called PHEX found only in bird osteocytes* (birds are descended from dinosaurs), the structures reacted, as would be expected of dinosaur osteocytes. And when the team subjected the supposed dinosaur cells to other antibodies that target DNA, the antibodies bound to material in small, specific regions inside the apparent cell membrane.”

The talking point about dinosaurs to birds is storytelling, but this latest evidence for soft tissue is a valid scientific discovery, and it will interesting to watch for more evidence to come out of this research. As long as the soft-tissue claims hold up, they argue strongly against the consensus view that dinosaurs died out millions of years ago!

In the creationist model, it has no problem with dinosaurs, or soft tissue being discovered, because we believe the earth is young! In the evolutionary story which distorts history with complex conjectures that takes more faith to believe than God himself. In the creationist model, dinosaurs co-existed with another animals, and the fossil record bares this out with discoveries like ducks, squirrels, platypus, beaver-like and badger-like creatures that have all been found in ‘dinosaur-era’ rock layers along with bees, cockroaches, frogs and pine trees!

Fossil Evidence Challenges Evolutionary Ideas

In an article, New Scientist tries to deal with an ever-growing problem of soft tissues being preserved with an assumption of many millions of years.  T-Rex which is a popular dinosaur became a very controversial figure back in 2005. For the first time, soft tissues was recovered from a fossil that was deemed to be 68 million years old! The research was met with a lot of opposition in Darwinian circles but it was a tremendous scientific discovery for creationism!  In an effort to control the damage to evolutionary ‘theory’ the Smithsonian magazine wrote this…

“Meanwhile, Schweitzer’s research has been hijacked by “young earth” creationists, who insist that dinosaur soft tissue couldn’t possibly survive millions of years. They claim her discoveries support their belief, based on their interpretation of Genesis, that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Of course, it’s not unusual for a paleontologist to differ with creationists.

While the publication is playing with a poker face and elevating evolution to cult status in it’s attack,  young earth creationists were not the only ones who believe that soft tissues have a short life span.  Even the Smithsonian magazine point this out as well…

“The finding amazed colleagues, who had never imagined that even a trace of still-soft dinosaur tissue could survive. After all, as any textbook will tell you, when an animal dies, soft tissues such as blood vessels, muscle and skin decay and disappear over time, while hard tissues like bone may gradually acquire minerals from the environment and become fossils.”

In another research paper it says…

“A controversial finding that protein fragments can be recovered from dinosaur fossils has been replicated for the first time.  Two years ago, Mary Schweitzer, a paleontologist at North Carolina State University in Raleigh, and colleagues stunned the paleontology community when they reported discovering intact protein fragments in a fossil from a Tyrannosaurus rex that died 68 million years ago.”

“The claim has remained contentious, because proteins in tissue normally degrade quickly after an animal dies.”

So with a high rate of degrading, it’s reasonable to conclude that soft tissues found in fossils are not millions of years old, the discovery is certainly contrary to the evolutionary framework.  This is why soft-tissues discovered in T-Rex were met with such opposition. Archaeopteryx  was a fossil that was discovered back in 2009, it contained melanosomes which was still intact in a bird feather said to be 108 million years old using a scanning electron microscope!  Also, copper atoms were also detected with the synchrotron machine.

While creationist scientists would be more prone to look for soft tissue in fossils because for one, they believe the earth is young (thousands of years) and also don’t believe in the unrealistic time frame put on various animals, evolutionists on the other hand, are now embracing the idea and are becoming more bold for looking for it rather than waiting for another accident to happen. Preservation of soft-tissue provides verification for a young earth, thousands of years old and gives some unique insight on these special animals created by God!

Evolutionary Paleontologists Handling Of New Discoveries

Finding new fossils has been added to an ever growing complexity in the evolutionary time frame. Some fossils are discovered in the wrong place, at the wrong time period and in the wrong order. Evolutionary paleontologists were forced to fit these fossils in various ways into a phylogenetic tree to accommodate the ‘theory’ of evolution.

For example, a story in Live Science wants us to believe that triceratops were island hopping. Why? Because these horned dinosaurs which are commonly found in the Gobi Desert were recently discovered in Europe. The question is, how did they get there? Live Science reports a pretty imagination solution…

“Judging by skeletal features, the closest relatives of these horned dinosaurs come from the Gobi Desert. Their ancestors might have swum westward from island to island, or they might have walked to these areas when the islands were landlocked, only to get separated later when sea levels rose, Osi said.”

Xing Xu known for his work on trying to prove dino to birds commented on this new fossil found in Europe in a science journal called; Nature.  He started out by saying there are large gaps in the fossil record: “Reconstructing  the historical distribution of Earth’s fauna and flora is a challenging task, not least because of the incomplete, often poorly dated, nature of the fossil record,” he said.  “Such problems are particularly severe with respect to European biogeography in the Late Cretaceous period (about 100 million to 65 million years ago), when Europe was an archipelago.”

Indeed, the abrupt appearance of all the animals without  evolutionary precursors as well as being in the wrong place at the wrong time has really been a problem trying to put together a consistent fossil record for evolutionists. Here is another interesting find…

National Geographic known for it’s hype on fossils writes a story about the oldest human fossil even though there wasn’t enough bone to make a valid reconstruction. It also claims the human was a tree swinger cannibal who used tools (and perhaps, fire) in our ancestry.

National Geographic went on to speculate that this human was able to communicate through language and was intelligent. What is really fascinating when one looks closer at this. How could these humans walk on earth for almost 800,000 years using tools and having a language but never thought of inventing the wheel, planting crops, building a city, riding a horse, or even writing his own thoughts down till it exploded into existence around 3500 B.C?

The philosophy of evolution is not science rather it’s just fitting the data into a particular framework whether it makes sense or not, perhaps even have faith that somehow all this complexity will come together as one. History has bared this out, the more things change, the more they remind the same. The pattern of adding more and more complexity to evolution will continue as more questions keep popping up as the data is not fitting the framework.