Soft Tissue Discovered Drops Bombshell On Evolution

Evolutionary scientists in their own little box never looked for soft tissues in fossils then in 2005, Schweitzer discovered soft tissue in T-Rex which was dated in the evolutionary framework to be 68 million years old! Why didn’t scientists search for soft tissue in the past? Because evolutionary scientists believe the earth is many millions of years old (4.54 billion to be exact) and the fact that soft tissue decays pretty easily. That is an undeniable scientific fact! So when Schweitzer’s discovery came along, it was a shock and opposition formulated but failed as confirmation after confirmation proved them wrong!

However, this discovery did not conflict whatsoever with the creationist model. In fact, soft tissue being discovered is observational evidence that the earth is not as old as evolutionists claim! This latest discovery blows all previous discoveries of soft tissue right out of the water! A fossil of sauropod eggs from China claimed to be anywhere from 190-197 million years old in the evolutionary framework has complex organic remains!

Here is the report of it…



Also in Answers in Genesis


Is there opposition formulating with this one? You bet! Because of the nature of this find which falsifies long age assumptions concerning the earth that is similar to what the T-Rex discovery went through in the beginning…

Science Now

“Other researchers are more cautious. “Almost every example of such organic material is hotly disputed,” and this one will likely be no different, points out Hans-Dieter Sues, a vertebrate paleontologist at the Smithsonian Institution National Museum of Natural History in Washington, D.C., who was not involved in the study. “You can never really totally rule out contamination.”

Here is the main bombshell admission…fossilized femur bones were delicate and porous, which made them vulnerable to the corrosive effects of weathering and groundwater.  How can a reasonable person believe soft tissue exposed to weathering and groundwater could survive almost 200 million years? Listen folks, evolution is not true! Evolutionary scientists use bluffs in their explanation all the time with data that doesn’t agree with evolution, which is not real science.

There is no way soft tissue being able to survive for that many years under those type of conditions, no way, no how…So evolutionary scientists reject the observational data, and then treat evolution like a cult to hold on to, than where the evidence leads! They are without excuse, science does in fact confirm creationism! This is an incredible discovery and there is in no doubt more to come, because there is more soft tissue out there, and scientists should be now looking for it more than ever!

Can Science Prove or Disprove The Existence of God?

In the previous post within this series, can science prove or disprove the existence of God, we covered Anthropologist, Bruce Latimer’s assumption about what constitutes something intelligently designed like the foot from the argument that sore feet is proof for a poorly designed foot to one of the most marvelous and advanced designs ever to be produced in the universe, the human brain!

Now let’s turn to the fossil record, deemed to be the best evidence for evolution, is actually one of the best evidences for God!

“Animals and plants appear in the fossil record fully formed and remain unchanged through (supposed) millions of years. No knowledgeable individual denies this.”

-Terry Scambray


-Stephen Jay Gould

For years, evolutionists have been trying to come up with a solution that solves this “uncomfortable paradox.” of hard evidence against evolution. Like poker players, they attempt to come up with explanations in order to bluff their way through a hand of cards that has been dealt to them unfavorably. Thus, they give an illusion that evolution is stronger than what it actually is, a theory with many falsifications!


-Charles Darwin

The Cambrian Explosion is not the only sudden appearance of fossils in the record but also the Ediacara Explosion which is believed to have preceded the Cambrian.

“Surprisingly, however, as shown by Shen and colleagues, these earliest Ediacara life forms already occupied a full morphological range of body plans that would ever be realized through the entire history of Ediacara organisms. “In other words, major types of Ediacara organisms appeared at the dawn of their history, during the Avalon Explosion,” Dong said. “Subsequently, Ediacara organisms diversified in White Sea time and then declined in Nama time. But, despite this notable waxing and waning in the number of species, the morphological range of the Avalon organisms were never exceeded through the subsequent history of Ediacara.” 

-Science daily

If evolution was true in nature, scientists would have discovered a wide range of transitional animals, more so than the species themselves rather they discovered animals fully formed, and very complex! For example, Cambrian animals are not what one would call, “simple” by no means, but rather they are highly complex creatures! Trilobite eyes themselves are astoundingly complex!

Why do you think Gould invented his own pet theory that proposed great acceleration in evolution?  Because gradualism, a structure in nature that is achieved by progressive steps from a mindless process as Darwin proposed was being falsified by hard evidence in the fossil record! On the other hand, the Bible refers to animals after their own kind, and the only way abrupt appearances of animals in the fossil record could only happen when available specified information was present and that information came from God!

One experiment which tested to see how natural selection would choose mutations to change a species or in other words add new information which is evolution. The experiment would have broken the back of the creationist model if proven to be true rather than just using assumptions or invented explanations to argue against it. I’m referring to of course is the fruit fly experiment!

After 600 generations, the fruit flies became what? resistant to change. And after millions of generations, they became handicap, less fit…The original generation had a much more advantage in fitness over the mutated ones! If evolution was true, the mutated ones should have been more fit than the originals! The experiment utterly destroys the whole notion of evolution and unwittingly confirms creationism!

What about reproduction? Does this verify or deny either creationism or evolution? If evolution was true, not only would new information have to be created but also would have to be passed on to future generations! Organisms have an array of very complex functions from the smallest one-cell animals to humans. However, science has revealed that only some of the functions are connected with reproduction! The other functions have nothing to do with reproduction so therefore evolution could not have created them! Because evolution requires selection from something!

So we see, evolution doesn’t create. Animals are discovered fully formed, no transitions and remain the same animal. Evolution is not an engineer, so that is why it doesn’t create biological complex function. Nature is not evolving upwards but rather in a downward trend. Even resistance to pesticides and antibiotics by bacteria is not evolution in action! Existing information is used or a loss of information nothing new created.

Can science disprove the existence of God? The answer is clearly, no! Evolution doesn’t not replace a creator, in fact science has shown confirmation for intelligent design by God, confirmation in the fossil record, confirmation with engineering principles that have purpose, fine tuning, mutation experiments, and so on. What it boils down to is belief rather than hard evidence for evolution! The hard evidence favors creationism!

Paleoanthropologist Debunks His Colleagues











Odd Marine Animal In Cambrian Turns Evolution Upside Down





