Flood Geology Can’t Explain Dino Droppings 

A recently published paper in Nature caught my attention.  It reported the analysis of an unconventional but illuminating source of data: fossilized dinosaur droppings and vomit! While dinosaur bones typically get all the attention, it turns out that studying prehistoric poop (technically called coprolites) can tell us an incredible amount about how dinosaurs changed and diversified over millions of years.

Watch my full analysis and breakdown of this fascinating research here:

In this video, I review how researchers analyzed hundreds of coprolites and other digestive remains from five different fossil assemblages in Poland’s Triassic and Jurassic rocks. These fossils reveal a clear pattern: the earliest dinosaurs started small and were mainly omnivorous generalists, but over time they diversified into specialized plant-eaters and meat-eaters of increasing size. The pattern of increased size of the animals is also preserved for us as increased size of coprolites as one progresses up the fossil record.

Using cutting-edge imaging technology, scientists can now peer inside these fossilized droppings to identify exactly what ancient dinosaurs were eating – from beetle shells to plant material to fish scales and bone fragments. The preservation is so remarkable that in some cases, they can even see individual plant cells! This dietary evidence shows how dinosaurs gradually expanded into new ecological niches, eventually outcompeting other reptiles to become the dominant land animals.

But beyond the fascinating story told by fossil digestive material, I was especially interested in thinking about how this research poses a significant challenge to young-earth creationist models. If all these rock layers were deposited by a single global flood just a few thousand years ago, how do we explain:

  • The clear progression from small to large coprolites as one moves up the geological column matching the size increase in dinosaur species
  • The preservation of millions of delicate fecal specimens that would have been destroyed by flood conditions
  • The consistent sorting of different species into distinct layers over time
  • The correlation between coprolite contents and the evolution of specialized feeding strategies

As I discuss in the video, young-earth creationists are forced to either dismiss this evidence entirely as fabricated (despite the work of many Christian scientists in the field) or resort to increasingly strained explanations that conflict with basic and well-established physics and geology principles. The coprolite evidence joins the overwhelming body of data pointing to an old Earth with a long history of evolutionary change.

For anyone interested in dinosaurs, evolution, or the questions of origins, this new research provides fascinating insights into how we can reconstruct ancient ecosystems and animal behavior from the most unlikely of sources. The detailed imaging and analysis techniques used also give a look at the ingenuity of modern paleontology.

Whether you’re a science enthusiast curious about dinosaur evolution or someone wrestling with questions about creationism and the age of the Earth, I think you’ll find this discussion both enlightening and thought-provoking. The story told by ancient dinosaur droppings may not be glamorous, but it provides some of our clearest windows into life in the distant past.

Link to original paper: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-024-08265-4 

3 thoughts on “Flood Geology Can’t Explain Dino Droppings 

  1. My comment seems to be held so I will try again…

    I would just like to make one point in response to the following:

    “young-earth creationists are forced to either dismiss this evidence entirely as fabricated (despite the work of many Christian scientists in the field) or resort to increasingly strained explanations that conflict with basic and well-established physics and geology principles.”

    I agree that the majority of YECs fit into these two categories. However, there is a third alternative which is what I would call a post-flood diversification model.

    There are a number of mainly European creationists who believe that the fossils of terrestrial creatures are a record of post flood diversification of creatures coming off the ark.

    We are working with a model that sees the flood (mabbul) as a destructive cataclysm that lasted for 40 days. During this time all terrestrial air-breathing creatures were wiped out without leaving any fossils. In this model any trace and body fossils of terrestrial air-breathers are post flood and a record of life over several centuries following the flood. We basically work with the evidence as published and the only thing we reject is the millions of years.

    Thanks

    Like

    1. Thanks for pointing that out. I have talked about the third way in the past when I done videos on my YouTube channel about the Flood/post-Flood boundary. I have gotten to the point where that third way seems to be losing ground to the other two and as far iI’ve seen hasn’t really been part of the discussion much in the past 5 years so I admit that I don’t mention it as much anymore. Yes, it has a greater chance of explaining trace fossils than the other two models but at the cost of not being able to explain other things that the other models explain.

      Like

  2. Hi Joel,

    You write:

    “Yes, it has a greater chance of explaining trace fossils than the other two models but at the cost of not being able to explain other things that the other models explain.”

    If you have the time I wonder if you could give a couple of examples of things that the other model do explain better?

    Like

Comments are closed.

Up ↑