Hat tip to BGHater for turning me on to this story.
It would seem that finding unfossilized soft tissue supposedly tens to hundreds of millions of years old is becoming quite commonplace. Just as the evos believe that biology is the study of complicated of complicated things that give the illusion of having been designed for a purpose, they believe that Jurrasic soft tissue gives the illusion of being young, but is in reality tens to hundreds of millions of years old. Why? Because the Temple of Darwin says so, that’s why.
Thanks for the ping!
“It would seem that finding unfossilized soft tissue supposedly tens to hundreds of millions of years old is becoming quite commonplace”
No it isn’t. So far it hasn’t ever happened. If you read this article, you’d have understood that they aren’t saying anything like you claim. This is just like your previous prevarications on other “soft tissue” posts.
Leave science to people who are qualified, and leave the lying to “creation science” - it’s all you folks know how to do.
150 million.
Right.
sure.
Please explain how it turned to stone and was imbedded in stone without invoking ID.
Maybe Charles Fort was on to this long before Pabodie and his crew from Miskatonic U. Charles Fort wrote a couple of quite loony but interesting compilations of weird reports and so on and started up the "Fortean Times" as a repository of such stories. Very entertaining reading, much more so than the offerings of the current crop of boring evolution scientists, and probably more credible too. Anyway, in his books and magazine you'll find tales of miners hacking open petrified logs and finding living frogs inside, and so on. Fun stuff.