Five Important Soft Tissue Problems for Evolutionists

For people who pay attention to the origins and deep time controversies, it is no surprise to learn that soft tissues in fossils are increasing constantly. (Not as fast as Democrat "votes" in a rigged election, though.) They are not just about dinosaurs.

Soft tissues in fossils, including useable ink, have been churning in the background for many years until they Big Banged on the scene in recent years. If there were one or two instances of soft tissues, those could be considered outliers for further study, but that's not happening. The hands at the Darwin Ranch get on the prod when people discuss such things, but they cannot change the facts. Deny, obfuscate, distract, or other things, but the facts remain. There are five noticeable problematic trends in soft tissue reports, indicating recent creation and not evolution, that need to be addressed.

In December 2019, the journal Expert Review of Proteomics published a paper I authored with Stephen Taylor titled “Proteomes of the past: the pursuit of proteins in paleontology.” The article features a table that lists 85 technical reports of still-existing biomaterial—mostly proteins—discovered inside fossils.

Can proteins last millions of years? Not according to decay rate measurements. Five incriminating trends emerged from these 85 secular reports. Our review sharpens the tension between how short a time biochemicals last and the supposed age of the fossils that contain them. We wrote:

See what was written and the five problem areas at "Soft Tissue Fossils Reveal Incriminating Trends".