I do not think to author is “attacking”, but I will look into it.
Maybe define attack??
questioning a hypothesis is not attacking
"Now take a step into the world of evolutionary science. According to evolution’s geologic timetable, since dinosaurs supposedly became extinct 65 million years ago, any dinosaur fossil found in the ground must be at least 65 million years old. But what if the fossils don’t “appear” to be that old? What if, when inspected by scientists, various dinosaur bones around the world are discovered with “highly fibrous,” “flexible,” and elastic bone tissue that “when stretched, returns to its original shape”? What if fibrous proteins such as collagen were found, along with “cell-like structures resembling blood and bone cells”? Would evolutionists come to a similar conclusion as most everyone would about a marathon-running, 130-year-old? Apparently not."
The author constucted a premise about a hypothetical discovery, then posed the question about whether the scientists would arrive at an logical conclusion based on that evidence, and then stated that they would not.
You'd be OK with it if I did that to you?