Problems with the theory of evolution mount as more soft tissue discovered in fossilized bones

“How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?” — Sherlock Holmes speaking to ~~evolutionists~~, err… Watson

The fossils are supposed to be 130 million years old, but they apparently never received the latest evolutionary memo.

I am talking about a massive dinosaur find in China, that some have likened to Jurassic Park because of the incredible amount of fossils discovered. Throw in the fact they are finding soft tissue in the fossils and visions of cloning dinosaurs and yet another Jurassic Park sequel quickly flood your mind.

Called the Daohugou Biota, it involves a number of fossil-bearing rock deposits in inner Mongolia in northeastern China. One of the sites was found near the village of Daohugou, hence the name. Some of the beds contain a mix of dinosaur and mammal remains and are dated between 130 million to 160 million years old.

However, the Daohugou discoveries are proving problematic, as an article in the Daily Mail explains:

Fossils include complete or nearly complete skeletons associated with preserved soft tissues such as feathers, fur, skin or even, in some of the salamanders, external gills.

One is the feathered dinosaur Epidexipteryx whose soft tissues have been revealed by the use of ultraviolet light scanners.

A fossil of the salamander Chunerpeton shows not only the preserved skeleton but also its skin and external gills.

Soft tissue in 130 million-year-old fossils, this is disturbing for even the most hard-core evolutionist.

It shouldn’t be happening. Soft tissue can’t survive tens of million years — following Sherlock Holmes’ logic, then you must conclude these fossils are not that old.

The first scientist to find soft tissue

Oddly, the first scientist to discover soft tissue in dinosaur bones was an Evangelical Christian and molecular palaeontologist Mary Schweitzer. She stumbled upon it by accident.

If you watch 60 Minute’s interview with Schweitzer at the beginning of the article, you will see how she discovered the soft tissue. She was using acid to remove the non-fossil material, but left the samples in the solution too long. When she came back, the fossilized part had also been eaten away, leaving a pliable substance.

But molecular palaeontologist Mary Schweitzer — perhaps due to her different world view — was not letting evolutionary theory determine the facts. When she first discovered what appeared to be soft tissue in a fossil, she took it at face value and actually tested it and found it was the organic remains of a dinosaur. I wrote about her discovery in an earlier article.

I can’t believe other scientists hadn’t made a similar mistake, with the same results, but just ignored these disturbing findings because it didn’t support their evolutionary theory.

When Schweitzer first tried to have here findings published, it was initially turned down simply because the editor didn’t believe it was possible.

In evolution land, theory determines facts, not facts determine theory.

But Schweitzer persisted and eventually was published and her findings were immediately attacked. Evolutionists argued it was impossible for organic material in be in dinosaur fossils. And that was the problem, it was impossible for 160 million old bones to have soft tissue in them — therefore you can only come to one conclusion, the bones can’t be that old.

Now that they are actually looking for it, they are finding organic material in fossils all over the world.

Discover Magazine reports that Schweitzer has the following Bible verse hanging on the wall of her office:

“For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans to prosper you and not to harm you, plans to give you hope and a future.” (Jeremiah 29:11)

Carbon dating of dinosaur bones reveals disturbing results

When you aren’t stuck having your theory prove your facts, you do strange things. Such is the case of Hugh Miller, who in 1990 submitted two dinosaur fragments to a University for carbon testing. He purposefully hid the fact they were dinosaur bones.

According to Carbon 14 dating, carbon supposedly degrades at a constant rate. Based on this theory, the oldest any organic material could be, and still have carbon in it, is about 100,000 years. So it would be useless to test dinosaur bones if you believe they are over a 100 million years old.

The Apologetics Press provided more detail on Miller’s findings:

“In June of 1990, Hugh Miller submitted two dinosaur bone fragments to the Department of Geosciences at the University in Tucson, Arizona for carbon-14 analysis. One fragment was from an unidentified dinosaur. The other was from an Allosaurus excavated by James Hall near Grand Junction, Colorado in 1989. Miller submitted the samples without disclosing the identity of the bones. (Had the scientists known the samples actually were from dinosaurs, they would not have bothered dating them, since it is assumed dinosaurs lived millions of years ago—outside the limits of radiocarbon dating.) Interestingly, the C-14 analysis indicated that the bones were from 10,000-16,000 years old—a far cry from their alleged 60-million-year-old age.”

Remember the Evolutionary slogan: theory must determine the facts.

Read more: