Triceratops soft tissue found and carbon dated

Why don’t the media admit that Alaskan hadrosaur bones are not turned to stone, as would be expected in millions of years?

Pre-Cambrian fossils of marine worms have their original tissue. Similarly for bacteria that feed on them.

The significant amount of soft tissue being found in dinosaur bones is causing evolutionists to grasp at straws in order to explain its existence.

A sneak preview from the soon-to-be-released Creation magazine. For twenty years now, dino bones have progressively divulged their contents to researchers who did not expect to find the likes of DNA and radiocarbon ‘millions of years’ after dinosaur extinction.

The best ever find of preserved soft tissue yet documented in the fossil record gives powerful evidence for the Bible.

Not just DNA, but even entire organisms capable of being brought back to life are increasingly being found in specimens supposedly ‘millions of years old’.

Mary Schweitzer announces even stronger evidence, this time from a duckbilled dino fossil, of even more proteins—and the same amazingly preserved flexible blood vessel and cell structures as before.

Were the reports of soft tissue in T. rex bones all wrong? Is it time to discard this powerful-seeming evidence? Not yet, it seems.

Do today’s definitions of the word ‘fossil’ rule out a biblical timescale by default?

Dr Mary Schweitzer discovered still-soft-and-stretchy tissue in a dinosaur fossil, igniting a controversy.

This 1997 report rocked the world of paleontology—how is it possible if dinosaur bones are millions of years old?