Dinosaurs and the Limits of Evolutionary Thinking

By Jonathan Silcox

When new discoveries challenge long-held assumptions, we have an opportunity to reconsider the story we’ve been told about the past. For years, evolutionary scientists have insisted that dinosaurs lived millions of years ago, evolving into birds over time. Yet fresh research continues to turn that narrative upside down—revealing evidence far better explained by creation science.

Consider two recent findings that cut against the evolutionary framework.

1. Original Dinosaur Biological Material
More original biological material was discovered in a fossilized Edmontosaurus of the Late Cretaceous, dated at 75 million-years. According to evolutionary assumptions, this should be impossible. Biological material should decay completely in less than a million years, yet here they are—original dino collagen- surviving inside fossils supposedly tens of millions of years old.

The debate over such discoveries goes back to 2005, when paleontologist Mary Schweitzer first identified hemoglobin in a T. rex fossil. At the time, her peers dismissed the findings as contamination because they “knew” organic material couldn’t last millions of years. As Science News Today noted, “For many years, scientists believed that fossilization was a process that completely destroyed any original organic molecules, leaving only the hard structures of bones and shells behind. The prevailing thought was that the intense pressures and chemical changes during fossilization would eliminate all traces of original organic materials, leaving us with only mineralized remains to study.”

But repeated discoveries keep confirming the presence of biological material in dinosaur fossils. If such remains exist, perhaps these fossils aren’t millions of years old after all. The evidence fits far more naturally with the creationist view that dinosaurs lived thousands of years ago and were rapidly buried during a global flood—preserving their remains for us to discover.

2. Cheek Muscles in Dinosaurs
Another surprising find for evolutionists comes from research into another Edmontosaurus: the discovery of cheek muscles. This is remarkable because the evolutionary narrative insists dinosaurs evolved into birds—yet birds do not have cheek muscles.

For decades, scientists have reconstructed dinosaur muscles by comparing them only to birds and crocodiles, their supposed closest living relatives. As paleontologist Henry Sharpe explained, “There’s just one problem with this approach. Every muscle you would ever reconstruct in a dinosaur would only be one that’s in a crocodile or a bird.” He went on to ask, “What if dinosaurs had their own muscles that either weren’t present in the dinosaurs that led to birds, or that birds lost or adapted into something else?”

Exactly. By forcing the evidence into evolutionary expectations, scientists are inhibiting science. The presence of cheek muscles directly challenges the idea that dinosaurs became birds and demonstrates the danger of restricting science to an evolutionary lens.

The Bigger Picture
Both discoveries—original biological material and unique dinosaur muscles—point to the same conclusion: evolutionary thinking is not the best explanation. Instead of clarifying the past, it obscures it. Instead of encouraging discovery, it limits it.

Creation science offers a better alternative. A global flood explains the widespread burial of dinosaurs and the preservation of their tissues. The uniqueness of dinosaur anatomy points to creative design, not blind chance.

When we examine the evidence honestly, we find that the evolutionary story keeps falling short. But the biblical account of creation and the flood provides a coherent framework that not only makes sense of the data but also encourages further discovery. Far from being outdated, it remains the most powerful explanation of the evidence before us today.

13 thoughts on “Dinosaurs and the Limits of Evolutionary Thinking”

  1. “Biological material should decay completely in less than a million years, yet here they are—original dino collagen- surviving inside fossils supposedly tens of millions of years old.”

    it’s hilarious how creatoinists lie about this. The collagen was mineralized, so your lies about it being “original dino collagen” are simply wrong.

    • Why do you think it’s creationists who are lying and not evolutionists? Did you read the article? Let me quote directly from the original article. It says:

      “For many years, scientists believed that fossilization was a process that completely destroyed any original organic molecules, leaving only the hard structures of bones and shells behind. The prevailing thought was that the intense pressures and chemical changes during fossilization would eliminate all traces of original organic materials, leaving us with only mineralized remains to study. However, a groundbreaking study conducted by researchers at the University of Liverpool has revealed something extraordinary: Mesozoic fossils, including dinosaur remains, can still preserve original organic molecules, including proteins like collagen, long after the organisms died. This discovery not only challenges long-standing assumptions but also provides new insights into the potential preservation of ancient biological material, opening doors to studying ancient life forms in ways that were once thought impossible.”

      The article goes on to say, “Collagen, a key protein in bones, tendons, and skin, was previously thought to degrade completely over millions of years, leaving behind only mineralized structures. But the researchers’ results strongly suggest that at least some organic materials, such as collagen, can survive fossilization under specific conditions.”

      It’s not me who’s lying. You’re the one claiming that the collagen was mineralized. Those who conducted the study say otherwise. So who’s lying? Are you calling them liars?

      Perhaps you should stop using that term so cavalierly. I don’t think it means what you think it means.

      • Creationists are lying since creationists have no evience for their claims and they can’t even convince each other when it comes to which set of baseless nonsense they want to claim is true.

        The article shows that you simply lie yet again. Creationists keep claimng that meat and collagen are in fossils and that means they were recent occurences. That is a lie per this article and reality. These tissues were mineralized and that is not a quick process. A few molecules is not what creationists are claiming. They are claiming flesh, and hoping no one will call them on their lies.

        it’s hilarious how the article says exactly what I did, so you fail miserably again. Collagen was mineralized. It is in a mineral matrix with only molecules left.
        So you fail again. Nothing new at all. Creationism, in all of its forms, is still a lie.

        It’s a shame you have no idea what you are reading, and then try to invent strawmen from it.

        • Truth: The existence of original soft tissue is evidence that the animal died fairly recently, not millions of years ago. Secular scientists are the ones who claim it was impossible for such material to exist. So either they were lying then, or they’re lying now. Creationists are correct to point out that the animals can’t be millions of years old. Evolutionist claims have been refuted and proven wrong.

          Truth: Mineralization can occur quickly under the right conditions. We can observe mineralization happening quickly, within months to years. Not millions of years. At Tateyama Hot Springs in Japan, wood submerged in silica-saturated lake water undergoes rapid opal deposition. Studies have shown that this process can begin within days and result in significant mineralization over a few years, preserving the wood’s structure through spherical silica precipitation. At Mother Shipton’s Cave in Knaresborough, England, a natural petrifying well fed by mineral-laden groundwater causes rapid encrustation of objects placed under its flow in just 3–5 months. This is a natural process, accelerated by the water’s high mineral content, and has been documented since the 1600s. Comparable rapid mineralization occurs in other mineral springs, such as historical sites in South Dakota.

          All this is evidence that the Bible is correct, and the earth is about 7,000 years old. Believe the truth.

          • Oh dear, and even more lies. How nice.

            There is no “original soft tissue” existing from dinosaurs. It was mineralized, and thus you fail again. Scientists said it was very unlikely to happen, not impossible, and you fail again.

            Mineralization can indeed happen quickly in the right conditions, and surprise, those dinos weren’t in those conditions. We can see that from the rock surrounding the fossils. Hot springs have very distinct geology and these fossils were not found in that geology. They were found in normal sedimentary rock.

            Same with the various petrified forests.

            So your laziness and ignorance fail you again, and you are a wonderful example of how creationists lie.

            • You’re free to decide what is truth and what is a lie. I just hope you come to recognize the truth before you die so that you can spend eternity with Jesus (not in hell).

              At some point you will have to acknowledge the truth of dinosaur soft tissue (not mineralized). What will you ever do if they actually clone a dinosaur or some other plant or animal that died more than 65 million years ago??? What lies will you resort to then???

              A global flood would have provided the right conditions for preservation, and that’s why we have so many fossils to study.

              • Yep, there we go when you admit you have nothing and have to whine that it’s up to me to decide what is the truth and what is a lie. It’s not up to me, dear, it’s up to the facts.

                It’s hilarious how now all you have are the usual impotent threats about your imaginary friend and your sadistic fantasies about hell.

                There is no dinosaur soft tissue that has not been fossilized. If they clone a dinosaur, then it will be from mineralized tissue. It’s so sweet that you have fantasies, and nothing more.

                Unsurprisngly, your global flood presents no right conditions for preservation, since it never happened, and again, christains themselves can’t even agree on how, when, where and if the magic flood happened.

                We have fossils to study thanks to many different events from many times all around the globe. Again, if there was your world-wide, 28,000+ foot deep flood as described by the bible, there would be one massive layer with all fossils in it sorted by the physical characteristics.

                We don’t see that at all.

Leave a comment