Christian answering questions.

[Redbeard The Pink]

Do I even want to get into this?


Sure, why not?


GC, there's a major problem with your line of reasoning and your understanding of science.


You seem to be insisting that because we've found soft tissue inside a meager fistful of fossils (if that), that the fossils can't be that old because millions of years would have certainly destroyed the soft tissue no matter what. Do I have that about right?


Here's the problem with that: the process that preserves soft tissue inside fossils is extremely rare, even rarer than the process that makes the fossils themselves. Out of the literal billions of fossils we've managed to dig out of the ground, very few of them exhibit this phenomenon. The vast majority of them are dry as dust (which is exactly what we'd expect), and the exceptions to this rule are super rare because time nearly always destroys the tissues we're talking about.


If, on the other hand, the world were only 6,000 years old and they all died in the flood or something, then we would expect to find many more fossils like this because they would all be much, much younger. We don't, though. The vast majority of the ones we find have no soft tissue in tact, which is exactly what we'd expect if they were millions of years old.