Still Soft after Half a Billion Years? | The Institute for Creation Research

Still Soft after Half a Billion Years?

Original soft tissue fossils are revolutionizing our understanding of how and when fossils formed. Secular researchers have described dozens of them over the years, from mummified skin and hemoglobin to dried up retinas—all in rock layers designated at least tens of millions of years old.1 The science of tissue decay does not permit these long ages, calling into question the "age" of the most recent discovery: original, pliable, marine worm tube tissue found in Pre-Cambrian fossils.

Publishing in The Journal of Paleontology, a trio of European researchers described, in detail, delicate fossil casings, manufactured by beard worms long ago. The worms were quickly buried and locked in rock like a natural time capsule. The chitin-containing worm tube fossils look the same as those made by modern worms of the same type, complete with high-tech structural cross-layering.2

First, the study authors described what did not happen to these fossil worm casings, which were not mineralized at all. The scientists' research ruled out preservation by various means of "mineralization"—where minerals take the place of original biological material. Silicification, phosphatization, carbonization, pyritization, phyllosilicate metamorphism, and apatite permineralization all are processes known to contribute to fossilization in other instances—but not in the case of these worm sheaths.

According to the Paleontology report, "Minerals have not replicated any part of the soft tissue and the carbonaceous material of the wall is primary [not replaced], preserving the original layering of the wall, its texture, and fabrics." The paper included electron micrographs of some of those fabrics' fossilized fibers.2

The study authors described the worm wall as still "flexible, as shown by its soft deformation." And just to be clear, they wrote, "The body wall of S. cambriensis [fossil worm] comprises a chitin-structural protein composite."2

Fresh-looking material like this soft chitin and its associated proteins should not cause researchers to merely doubt the worm fossils' 551 million year-old age assignment, but to utterly reject it. However, unless secularists pay homage to the Geologic Time Scale's age designations for characteristic rock layers, their work would almost certainly fail to be accepted as "scientific."

The idea that chitin or any unaltered biological material—soft tissue that has not yet decayed—can last longer than a million years does not have any experimental support.1,3 What decay rate measurements back the claim that soft tissues can last for half a billion years? The still-flexible tube tissue of this lowly ancient marine worm matches well with the relatively recent Flood explanation—a worldwide event that buried these sea floor worms beneath hundreds of feet of sediments.

References

  1. Thomas, B. 2013, A Review of Original Tissue Fossils and their Age Implications. Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Creationism. Pittsburgh, PA. Creation Science Fellowship.
  2. Moczydlowska, M., F. Estall, and F. Foucher. 2014. Microstructure and Biogeochemistry of the Organically Preserved Ediacaran Metazoan Sabellidites. The Journal of Paleontology. 88 (2): 224-239.
  3. Secular thinking might argue that observing thin, soft tissues in rocks that are 551 million years old counts as observational evidence that tissues can last that long, but this merely begs the question by assuming the age—the very premise under review.

Image credit: NOAA

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Article posted on May 5, 2014.

The Latest
NEWS
Are Creationists Conspiracy Theorists?
Paul Braterman, emeritus professor of chemistry at the University of Glasgow, recently claimed online that creationism “meets all the criteria”...

NEWS
How Algae Do Fine When Tossed at Sea
How would you do if someone spun you around every few seconds all day long? Marine algae repeatedly get tossed about in coastal surf, and they cope quite...

NEWS
Butterfly Wing Design Repudiates Evolution
The takeoff and flight of butterflies has long been derided by evolutionists as being an unstable and inefficient product of evolution. However, a new...

NEWS
Reconciling Two Different Calculations of the Hubble Constant
An interesting article1 on physics.org caught my attention. Its title is “Solved: The Mystery of the Expansion of the Universe.”...

ANNOUNCEMENTS
Institute for Creation Research Awarded Highest Rating from Charity...
DALLAS, February 11, 2021–The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) recently earned a 4-star rating from Charity Navigator—America’s...

NEWS
Reminder: Saturn’s Moon Titan Really Looks Young
Scientists led by Valerio Poggiali of Cornell University’s Center for Astrophysics and Planetary Science have used Cassini spacecraft data to learn...

NEWS
Is Newfound Dinosaur Fossil the Biggest Ever?
Whether dealing with athletes, sports teams, skyscrapers, or animals, we always want to know who or what takes the top spot. Researchers just published...

NEWS
Inside February 2021 Acts & Facts
What is the mission of the Institute for Creation Research? What legacy did Dr. Henry M. Morris III leave behind? How will our Ice Age model impact...

ACTS & FACTS
Creation Kids: Jupiter
You’re never too young to be a creation scientist! Kids, discover fun facts about God’s creation with ICR’s special Creation Kids learning...

ACTS & FACTS
Planting, Watering, and God's Increase
During construction of the ICR Discovery Center for Science & Earth History, I spent a lot of time working with various crews of artists and craftsmen....