Soft Tissue in Fossils Supports a Young Earth


(Chris) #1

Age of the earth: 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe
How long can soft tissue last in fossils? The experimental evidence is that it could not last millions of years. In desperation Mary Schweitzer tried preserving a tissue sample in concentrated blood but the results are unconvincing and the setup contrived. But there has been soft tissue found in dinosaur fossils. The latest claim from N Carolina State Uni is 180 million years! Seriously; soft tissue is more consistent with a Biblical time scale.

Adam and Eve had over 50 children according to Jewish tradition and these married each other.
Cain would have been in danger from brothers, sisters, nieces, and nephews.

As shown in link above (and repeated here “skeptical claims that biblical models are excluded by population genetics are unwarranted.”
The genetic effects of the population bottleneck associated with the Genesis Flood

Which is what scripture says.


The time scale of the bottleneck?
(Phil) #2

Chris,thank you for your contribution here.since you bring up the Dino soft tissue info, let me ask, how does that give evidence to a young earth? We know that tissue can be excellently preserved in the young earth time frame. The soft tissue found in Dino fossils are microscopic remnants of tough collagen framework. It is surprising and poorly understood perhaps, but hardly evidence of young age that a few of the original molecular strands of tissue persist. Now, if you found a spear point imbedded in a bony Dino fossil, that would make you wonder!


#3

And of course there is the rebuttal of every one of these

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/101_evidences_for_a_young_age_of_the_Earth_and_the_universe

From
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Soft_tissue_preservation


(George Brooks) #4

@aarceng

… that would be true … except at the molecular level, there is a virtual formaldehyde chemical reaction that does preserve it. Open your brain and read up about it:

.
.
.

The fact you even resort to this tells me that you are not as open to Evolution as you pretend to be. You aren’t even an Old Earth Creationist.

If what you said were true, then we find almost ALL soft tissues from dinosaurs just like we find with the great many mammoth bodies … because they died within thousands of years… not within millions of years.

As to your comments about Adam and Eve… it only works if Adam & Eve JOIN a larger and EVOLVED population with the diversity necessary to produce today’s modern population of great diversity in alleles.

If there was JUST an Adam and Eve, the episodes of Eden couldn’t have happened until sometime before 500,000 years ago … which pretty much wipes out the Young Earth scenario.


(Chris) #5

That’s old news. I even mentioned it above.


(George Brooks) #6

@aarceng

I think @JPM’s comments are perfectly on point.

If we have 1.5 billion years of potential fossils crammed together into 6000 years of sediments …

image

But let’s make it easier… let’s start with the Triassic period 252 million years ago.

Here’s an example of one exercise in approximation!:

image

Let’s layout 252 million years from Triassic to Jurassic to Cretaceous to the Pleocene, ending with the last 100,000 years (so we get one of the major ice ages).

The last 100,000 years is 4-tenths of 1% of the 252 million years of major fossilization. But if we apply the same percentages to a YEC scenario, with a stack of sediments four football fields high (400 yards x 3 feet per yard = 1,200 feet high, or a building 120 stories high!), we will have

243 feet for the Triassic;
267 feet for the Jurassic;
376 feet for the Cretaceous, leaving
314 feet for all the mammalian fossils we have larger than a rat or badger (cows, rhinos, tigers, etc.);
we devote just
6 inches for the last 100,000 years!

So, how is it that we can find massive chunks of soft tissue for creatures like mammoths, who represent 4 tenths of one percent of all sediments (6 inches), but anything buried 150 feet or deeper doesn’t seem to have any meat on them at all?

Science says all the mammoth carcasses we find are 5 million years old or younger… and we find mammoths with flesh. But all the other animals, whether giant, medium or tiny, who are supposed to have died at most 6000 years ago, have only the preserved capillary systems preserved in rock formations … with not a pound of dinosaur meat to show anyone?


(Chris) #7

The soft tissue comes in a variety of forms. not just remnants of collagen, or chiton as per @Bill_II’s rational wiki link. Including but not limited to

Fibres and cellular structures preserved in 75-million–year-old dinosaur specimens

Microstructure and Biogeochemistry of the Organically Preserved Ediacaran Metazoan Sabellidites

Soft tissue and cellular preservation in vertebrate skeletal elements from the Cretaceous to the present “flexible and fibrous bone matrix; transparent, hollow and pliable blood vessels; intravascular material, including in some cases, structures morphologically reminiscent of vertebrate red blood cells; and osteocytes with intracellular contents and flexible filipodia.”

Soft sheets of fibrillar bone from a fossil of the supraorbital horn of the dinosaur Triceratops horridus


(George Brooks) #8

@aarceng:

And so?

If all this Dino meat is as fresh as Mammoths and Mastodons … why don’t we find ANY like Mammoths and Mastodons?


(Chris) #9

Because most of them are frozen and relatively recent.


(George Brooks) #10

@aarceng:

Then where are the frozen dinos? There were several species that ate non-tropical evergreens…


(Matthew Pevarnik) #11

Everything in a YEC scenario is relatively recent. And we should be able to get DNA from them, in fact we should have a full Tyrannosaurus genome and the genome of everything that’s ever lived because we have been able to sequence genomes up to over 560-700 thousand years ago (to my knowledge that’s the oldest we’ve been able to find any DNA on):
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature12323

There are groups that actively research ancient DNA and can learn an awful lot. So where are all the dinosaur DNA papers? If someone claims that due to ‘bias’ they aren’t looking, then any YEC research could easily do the study. There should be loads of genomes readily accessible everywhere for every species! :In other words, we should be doing this soon:
image


(Chris) #12

I was thinking this needed to be split off into a new thread.


(George Brooks) #13

A “new” thread? You mean “newer” than “Soft Tissue in Fossils Supports a Young Earth”?

You don’t think this “Soft Tissue…” topic title doesn’t include asking where the DIno meat is?


(Matthew Pevarnik) #14

I named the thread @gbrooks9. If you or @aarceng have a better title we can change it.


(George Brooks) #15

@pevaquark,

I would be interested to know what name @aarceng would propose for a “branching off” discussion…

To me it seems like we’ve been completely “on point” as defined by the title you gave it.


(Chris) #16

@gbrooks9, @pevaquark, I’m quite happy with the title. I was just commenting that I thought this topic was due to be split off from the previous thread it was in.

Now let’s talk about pork chops. ( @jpm, @Bill_II, et al )

I have 3 pork chops. One I put in the freezer (say -5°C), one goes in the fridge (say +5°C), and one goes on the kitchen bench (say 25°C). How do you think they after 2 days, 2 weeks, 2 months, 2 years?

I think you already know. After 2 days on the bench that pork chop will starting to smell and will probably be fly blown. The one in the fridge will still be fresh enough to eat but after 2 weeks it will be off. After 2 months the one in the freezer will still be quite OK, and if wrapped well could still be edible after 2 years. If not wrapped it will probably be freeze dried after 2 years.

Now apply this common science to fossils. Mammoths preserved in the permafrost are still largely intact and freeze dried. Most dinosaur fossils died in warmer and wetter conditions and many appear to have drowned.
Some seem to have been buried rapidly soon after death and are found full articulated. Others seem to have been exposed for long periods and been completely decomposed before burial as individual bones.

From this you can understand why the amount of soft tissue preservation can vary from almost 100% to none at all.

Now back to those pork chops, or a nice rump steak. Will hemoglobin help to preserve them against decay as suggested by @gbrooks9 above? ( What preserved T. rex tissue? Mystery explained at last ). Try it and see. No, even a nice rump oozing blood will still rot if it’s not frozen. Mary Schweitzer used a concentrated solution and immersed the tissue sample in it, then put it in a sealed container. This is completely unlike what is likely to happen with real dead animals. From dead animals I have encountered on the side of the road i can assure you that the hemoglobin they contain does not preserve them. As i said above I thought it was a desperate reach for a solution to the soft tissue in dinosaur problem.

GTG but I’ll be back later.


(Matthew Pevarnik) #17

Did they? What exactly are you talking about? For example, here is a graphic of where dinosaur fossils have been found:

That seems like plenty of opportunities for dinosaur DNA.

What types of fossils are you referring to that ‘appear to have drowned?’

Naturally the person who found them and is kind of an expert on the topic doesn’t know what she’s talking about.


#18

Tiktaalik was found in Artic Canada not freeze dried. So where are all of the freeze dried dinosaurs?


(George Brooks) #19

@aarceng,

I think you are focusing on the wrong part of this topic. You want to emphasize the scientists’ difficulty in re-creating a process that we think took millions of years.

While, in point of fact, if you were correct that dinosaurs were all born and died within 6000 years, it should be easier, not harder, to recreate the soft tissue findings.

In the picture below, we are reminded that these soft tissue samples are locked up within SOLID ROCK!

Gentle dissolving of rocks by means of acid release the iron preserved collagens, and whatever else binds with these free radical iron molecules.

I will grand you the logic that preserving chunks of “vital” meat is harder to do when not in the frozen tundra. But how do you explain the complete lack of mammal meat, or even collagen, or even mammal carcasses of any variety, in all the sedimentary layers filled with dinosaur bones?

You seem to be blinding yourself to the big question: if all these animals died 6000 years ago, where are the millions of mammals… and millions of humans (or even thousands of humans) that should have died with them?


(Matthew Pevarnik) #20

I think you mean ~4 kya. Unless you go with AiG’s the dinosaurs went extinct sometime after the flood in 2250 BCE and before the sole ice age a century later. Surely rapid burial and instant geological formation could have got a few. And m despite rapid speciation of the dinosaurs on the ark they all went extinct by an ice age 100 years after. That is such an ice age could have helped preserve some nice dinosaur meat if they weren’t killed by the asteroid that hit 4 kya and the massive volcanic activity worldwide including on Mount Ararat all the while every ‘kind’ aboard the ark was experiencing very rapid speciation (including humans into Neanderthals and Denisovan and Homo Naledi).