Fatty Oil Discovered In A Fossil

The earth is young, some of its processes are much quicker than evolutionists want to believe because their assumption is that the earth is billions of years old along with evolution moving at a very slow pace. If that is the case, why are scientists discovering soft tissue in fossils which they assume are many millions of years old? Prior to 2007, they didn’t even attempt to look for it. Soft tissue was discovered by accident in a T-Rex. Now a new discovery surfaces which have absolutely stunned them! 

“As a rule, soft parts do not withstand the ravages of time; hence, the majority of vertebrate fossils consist only of bones. Under these circumstances, a new discovery from the UNESCO World Heritage Site “Messel Pit” near Darmstadt in Germany comes as an even bigger surprise: a 48-million-year old skin gland from a bird, containing lipids of the same age.”

 Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum

“As shown by our detailed chemical analysis, the lipids have kept their original chemical composition, at least in part, over a span of 48 million years. The long-chain hydrocarbon compounds from the fossil remains of the uropygial gland can clearly be differentiated from the oil shale surrounding the fossil,”

Mayer claims this is a very rare occurrence, or really? They never tested the fossils for soft tissue prior to 2007, how does he know its rare? Oh, the age assumption! How can organic material which is known for decomposing within weeks, sometimes years last many millions of years? How is that possible? It takes a lot of faith and denial of what goes on in the real world to believe in evolution. Here comes an unproven invention of how…

“It is possible that hey hardened into nore [sic, more] decomposition-resistant waxes under exclusion of oxygen. In addition, the researchers assume that one of the properties of the preen oil played a role that is still shown by modern birds today – its antibacterial components. They may have been the reason that after the bird’s death only few bacteria were able to settle in, preventing the full-on decomposition.”

Nobody will be able to test such an explanation but from human experience, we all know that soft tissue degrades quickly! And even with the earth was billions of years old, evolutionists claim the earth went through extreme climate changes over a course of millions of years and if this was true, it would have affected the soft tissue.  

And there is another thing, this fossil doesn’t show any evolution because this ancient bird had a gland that is identical to modern birds of today. Overall the ancient bird is not that much different than we see today and yet it is assumed to be 48 million years old with fatty oil still present. Any common sense would tell you the remains indicate the bird did not fossilize very long ago! It confirms creationism, not evolution! Not long ago more soft tissue was discovered in a turtle claimed to be 54 million years old! The list continues to grow. 

We live in exciting times, a young earth will provide a lot of information from the past that normally evolutionists assume should have been gone a long time ago because of their view on materialism moving very slowly. 


How Gaps Are Filled In Evolution

What is science according to the framework in evolution? Check out this hypothesis,  bow ton particles is perhaps the elusive dark matter scientists have been searching for, which is now responsible for killing dinosaurs!

In Nature,

“Despite its speculative basis, Randall says that the exercise is valuable. “This is trying to turn this somewhat crazy idea into science, by saying we will make predictions based on it,” she says. “We’re not saying we think it’s 100% going to be true.”

Historical science is nothing more than coming up with a crazy idea, and make predictions with it! It’s true, one cannot claim it’s 100 percent accurate, because there is no way to replicate such predictions that can no longer be observed today.

But what if something can be observed today? Does coming up with “somewhat crazy” ideas apply? A grad student in London has proposed “chemical ghosts” for his explanation on how organic material can survive for 65 million or more years. He doesn’t mean “chemical ghosts” in a literal way, rather it just jargon to supposedly rescue evolution which is based on old age of the slow and gradual variety.

But the earth is not that old which is why scientists are discovering soft tissues from dinosaurs. Before 2005, there wasn’t any scientist searching for soft tissues, since the discovery of T-Rex having blood vessels and protein in the fossil, it has become a major problem for evolutionists to explain. So out pops the crazy ideas, making predictions on assumptions based on evolution rather than where the evidence leads.

The grad student writes

For me, this is one of the greatest steps in recent palaeontology – no longer do we just have bones, but we have other soft tissues like feathers, skin, and internal structures, adding a whole new bio-chemical dimension to how we perceive fossils. Of course, this opens up a whole new wealth of knowledge to be uncovered about extinct animals, their physiologies, and their evolutionary roles.

The previous lines of evidence supporting the cellular-level preservation of soft tissues (see bullet points below) all require a mechanism whereby preservation and mineralisation outpaces the decay of soft tissues…These organic molecules containing mostly carbon and hydrogen are delicate to the ravages of time, relatively speaking. They aren’t usually preserved in fossils that paleontologists unearth to tell the story of our planet’s past. For them, it is vital information lost forever”

It is really more common than he thinks, if scientists were searching for soft tissue rather than discovering it by accident. But he is right, organic material is delicate to the ravages of time, that is a fact when it comes into science fiction that is when you hear jargon like “tissue fixation”…Does that term prove it’s observable? It’s very strange to invoke special conditions but when the evidence is falsifying your theory, one doesn’t have a chose. The grad student even knows this explanation would not have been accepted in the scientific community before the discovery of soft tissue…

“Only a decade ago, this hypothesis would have been laughed at by fellow scientists. While many still remain unconvinced, there is growing evidence that molecular tissues may actually have been preserved. Now the question is: how much have palaeontologists missed by not considering these potentially high levels of preservation in dinosaurs? And how much is there that is still left to be found at such levels of detail?”

May actually? No! Molecular tissues have been preserved, there is a lot out there to be discovered because it’s not million of years old which is a good thing because there is a great deal of information to be discovered with advancing technologies about soft tissue, to learn from a creationist prospective which doesn’t have to resort to crazy ideas that will eventually be considered supposed science because you make wild predictions with them! Such ideas created for the purpose to defy the evidence only means the theory such as evolution is not true.

Soft Tissue Discovered Drops Bombshell On Evolution

Evolutionary scientists in their own little box never looked for soft tissues in fossils then in 2005, Schweitzer discovered soft tissue in T-Rex which was dated in the evolutionary framework to be 68 million years old! Why didn’t scientists search for soft tissue in the past? Because evolutionary scientists believe the earth is many millions of years old (4.54 billion to be exact) and the fact that soft tissue decays pretty easily. That is an undeniable scientific fact! So when Schweitzer’s discovery came along, it was a shock and opposition formulated but failed as confirmation after confirmation proved them wrong!

However, this discovery did not conflict whatsoever with the creationist model. In fact, soft tissue being discovered is observational evidence that the earth is not as old as evolutionists claim! This latest discovery blows all previous discoveries of soft tissue right out of the water! A fossil of sauropod eggs from China claimed to be anywhere from 190-197 million years old in the evolutionary framework has complex organic remains!

Here is the report of it…

“But it is not just the age of the fossils that is notable, the researchers say. Spectroscopic analysis of bone-tissue samples from the Chinese nesting site revealed the oldest organic material ever seen in a terrestrial vertebrate. That was surprising because the fossilized femur bones were delicate and porous, which made them vulnerable to the corrosive effects of weathering and groundwater, says Reisz.

“That suggests to us that other dinosaur fossils might have organic remains,” he says. “We just haven’t looked at them in the right ways.”

Also in Answers in Genesis

“About 200 disarticulated dinosaur embryo bones excavated along with a good bit of eggshell from early Jurassic rock represent various stages of the development of sauropodomorphs. These long-necked dinosaurs grew to be about 30 feet long. The large vascular spaces indicated in purple in the bone cross-sections are consistent with a fast growing animal, suggesting these dinosaurs had made a good start on life by the time they hatched and may well have hit the ground running. These are the deepest dinosaur embryos yet found in the fossil record.” 

Is there opposition formulating with this one? You bet! Because of the nature of this find which falsifies long age assumptions concerning the earth that is similar to what the T-Rex discovery went through in the beginning…

Science Now

“Other researchers are more cautious. “Almost every example of such organic material is hotly disputed,” and this one will likely be no different, points out Hans-Dieter Sues, a vertebrate paleontologist at the Smithsonian Institution National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C., who was not involved in the study. “You can never really totally rule out contamination.”

Here is the main bombshell admission…fossilized femur bones were delicate and porous, which made them vulnerable to the corrosive effects of weathering and groundwater.  How can a reasonable person believe soft tissue exposed to weathering and groundwater could survive almost 200 million years? Listen folks, evolution is not true! Evolutionary scientists use bluffs in their explanation all the time with data that doesn’t agree with evolution, which is not real science.

There is no way soft tissue being able to survive for that many years under those type of conditions, no way, no how…So evolutionary scientists reject the observational data, and then treat evolution like a cult to hold on to, than where the evidence leads! They are without excuse, science does in fact confirm creationism! This is an incredible discovery and there is in no doubt more to come, because there is more soft tissue out there, and scientists should be now looking for it more than ever!

In A Remote Area: Soft Tissue Discovered

One of the greatest scientists to have ever lived was Issac Newton! He believed that by performing the scientific method, one would come to a conclusion through observations of nature, that God was the designer. He writes…

“And there is no other way of doing any thing with certainty then by drawing conclusions from experiments & phaenomena untill you come at general Principles & then from those Principles giving an account of Nature…One principle in Philosophy is the being of a God or spirit infinite eternal omniscient, omnipotent, & the best argument for such a being is the frame of nature & chiefly the contrivance of the bodies of living creatures.

All the great land animals have two eyes, in the forehead a nose between them a mouth under the nose, two ears on the sides of the head, two arms or two fore leggs or two wings on the sholders & two leggs behind & this symmetry in the several species could not proceed from chance, there being an equal chance for one eye or for three or four eyes as for two, & so of the other members”.

“Nothing is more curious & difficult then the frame of the eyes for seeing & of the ears for hearing & yet no sort of creatures has these members to no purpose. What more difficult then to fly? & yet was it by chance that all creatures can fly which have wings? Certainly he that framed the eyes of all creatures understood the nature of light & vision, he that framed their ears understood the nature of sounds & hearing, he that framed their noses understood the nature of odours & smelling, he that framed the wings of flying creatures & the fins of fishes understood the force of air & water & what members were requisite to enable creatures to fly & swim: & therefore the first formation of every species of creatures must be ascribed to an intelligent being.

So through observation of the data, one would come up with an inference that God was the creator, who thought out all these processes and made them work! Science does in fact confirm creationism, which leads us to our next story, soft tissue which had been highly disputed by secular scientists in 2005, with the T-Rex fossil. This latest discovery like the previous ones, adds more complexity rather than clarity when it comes to explaining evolution.

In a vast cold area of the north, known as arctic in Canada, scientists discovered soft tissue of seal fossils? No! Scientists discovered soft tissues of ancient polar bears? No! What about fish? No! You would never guess what they discovered in Canada’s arctic known as Ellesmere Island! What they actually discovered was soft tissue which came from…a  camel! Yep, a camel, found in a place where the weather produces massive snowstorms along with months of perpetual darkness. Dated in the evolution’s ever expanding inaccurate framework to be 3.5 million years old.

Scientists like everyone else were surprised of the discovery because of the cold and harsh climate. Not only that, but these ancient camels were better adaptive to more environments and 30 percent bigger than modern camels today! Wouldn’t that be considered evolution going backwards? In creationism, nature and the universe is in a downward trend and this discovery confirms it rather than complicates it.

How did these camels get there? Where are the transitions that lead to these camels who lived in Canada’s arctic? This is another case of a fully formed animal all of a sudden popping up in the fossil record without transitional forms. If evolution was true, there should be more transitional forms than the animals themselves! Here is another case of a great discovery found in a remote location that confirms the biblical account of creationism!

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!

Scientists Discovering More Soft Tissue in Fossils

With an infrared analysis on the fossil, Roy Wogelius, a geochemist was able to find organic compounds and trace metals in the skin of a fossil assumed to be 50 million years old. Science Daily reports…

“This image had never been seen by the human eye, until a team led by Dr Roy Wogelius and Dr Phil Manning used state-of-the-art infrared technology at The University of Manchester to reveal and map the fossilized soft tissue of a beautifully-preserved reptile.”

“These infrared maps are backed up by the first ever element-specific maps of organic material in fossil skin generated using X-rays at the Stanford synchrotron in the USA, also by the Manchester researchers. Chemical details are clear enough that the scientists, from the School of Earth, Atmospheric and Environmental Sciences, are even able to propose how this exceptional preservation occurs.”

The amazing inventions of infrared and X-ray technologies opens up new doors for science in a  non-destructive exploration of fossilized material. The article failed to explain how it was possible for organic molecules being able to last for millions of years except to state that they are using “modern analytical chemistry and 21st century techniques to understand how such remarkable preservation occurs….” The dance around this explanation is because soft tissue in fossils does not last for millions of years which is why there was so much controversity over soft-tissues discovered with T-Rex back in 2005 which was later confirmed!

However, the BBC with their article and showing pictures of the data, they make an attempt to explain using a newly man-made invented bridging process that somehow miraculously preserved the fossil. The reporter failed to elaborate what causes bridging to occur in the first place, or why an assumed 50 million year old fossil closely resembles a modern gecko skin using the same analysis techniques.

Another interesting aspect to this story, it wasn’t  Wogeulius first analysis, him and his team tried to analyze fossilized dinosaur skin which was assumed to be 67 million years old but were unable to map any biological structure – not because the soft tissue was absent, but because it tended to fall apart too easily.

“The fossilized remains, discovered in 1999, included not just bones, but fossilized soft tissues like skin, tendons and ligaments. Most importantly, it was the first-ever find of a dinosaur where the skin “envelope” had not collapsed onto the skeleton. This has allowed scientists to calculate muscle volume and mass for the first time. The fact that the skin is mostly intact allows for the exciting possibility that some of its original chemistry is still present.”

Evolutionary paleontologists are aware that creationists are going to beat them over the head with any discovery of preserved soft tissue and biomolecules, so one has to wonder how hesitant they are to reveal what they discover. One thing is for sure, in order to put finding soft-tissue in what is deemed to be millions of years of rock, promising this is all leading to more understanding of evolution, but is it?

Basically it’s a bluff full of puff, what the evidence is pointing to is not millions of years but rather thousands of years like the Bible indicates! In a young earth framework, its not surprising to find soft-tissue in fossils, in fact that’s a confirmation of it!  That’s where the understanding is, not in the ever growing complexity of evolution due to falsifications.

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!