There is no proof that DNA can last that long - just another hopeful ‘monster’ or philosophical pandering.
In fact no evos even made a claim like that until presented w/ 65 million year old t-rex soft tissues.
“There is no proof that DNA can last that long - just another hopeful ‘monster’ or philosophical pandering.
In fact no evos even made a claim like that until presented w/ 65 million year old t-rex soft tissues.”
—There’s also no reason to believe that DNA *can’t* last that long. When it comes to the preservation of such molecules, conditions are everything.
If we can dig up mammoth carcasses that are tens of thousands of years old (at least thousands even by most YEC’s timing) that look like they literally just died the day before, than finding microscopic bits of soft tissue (if a few protein molecules can really be called that) protected deep inside large bones that are tens of millions of years old hardly seem outlandish IMO.
It’s also untrue that such findings of soft tissue was wholly unexpected. I recall throughout the 80’s scientists saying that with the latest technology that we should soon be able recover dino dna (which has yet to happen yet btw). I’ve heard Crichton say that that’s what inspired him to write Jurassic Park in 1990.
The proof is right there, for anyone willing to look at it: DNA surviving in "suspended animation" for hundreds of millions of years.
Add a little water, and the critters start swimming around again, having a jolly old time, reproducing, just as if they had never been "dead".
Hmmmmmmmmmmm.....
"In fact no evos even made a claim like that until presented w/ 65 million year old t-rex soft tissues."
You truly don't understand how science works, do you?
Science cannot claim what it has no evidence to support.
When it has confirmed evidence, then a "claim" becomes a scientific fact -- such as basic evolution.