Okay, so if 100 bits of evidence point to an Old earth and 1 new bit potentially (and at this stage still unproven) points to a Young earth then you say we should ignore the 100bits?
You must realise that any theory/model, in your case a Young earth model, must be able to account for all/vast majority of evidence/data. You cannot simply ignore the Old Earth Data just because you do not like it's conclusions (i.e. you are pre-judging based on a previous belief/assumption - this is NOT how sciece works).
If (and a big if) this is indeed true soft tissue preservation, then Science WILL NOT simply sweep it under the carpet/ignore it. It will be studied, explained and incorporated into a unified theory. That is how Science works.
You mischaracterize both the balance of the evidence and the response of the scientific community to it. There are tons of evidence that points to a young earth/universe. Aside from those that I pointed out above, there is:
- Planetary magnetic fields
- Geologically active moons (Ganymede, Io, Titan, Triton & more)
- SaturnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s rings
- Galaxy rotation curves
- Paucity of Supernova Remnants
- Sharp bends in the strata of sedimentary rock
- Helium retention
- Excess carbon-14 in nearly everything, including fossils & diamonds
LetÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s focus on moons for a moment. All of these planetary satellites should be cold and dead, being much too small to stay active for 4 billion some years.
JupiterÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s moon Ganymede has an active magnetic field that it has no business having if it is billions of years old; tidal flexing accounts for some heat, but not enough. Another of JupiterÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s moons, Io, is the most volcanically active body in the solar system.
SaturnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s moon Titan has an atmosphere, which it should not have if it is billions of years old. Further, the atmosphere is dominated by methane. This is a problem because sunlight breaks methane down into ethane. So either there is a monstrous reservoir of methane that keeps replenishing the atmosphere or Titan just isnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t that old. The problem with the first explanation is that any such reservoir should have long ago been depleted.
Another of SaturnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s moons, Encaldus, has an extremely active geyser sending tons of material into space and contributing to SaturnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s rings. Further, EncaldusÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ south pole is very active. Additionally, both Titan & Encaldus have Ã¢â‚¬Ëœyoung surfacesÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ (supposedly having been Ã¢â‚¬ËœresurfacedÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ in the relatively recent past) which is further proof of continuing geological activity. This activity should have long ago ceased on this small body, yet it persists.
Similarly, NeptuneÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s moon, Triton, is said to have a Ã¢â‚¬Å“negligible surface age.Ã¢â‚¬Â
These observations (and more) have not and likely cannot be accounted for within the framework of a multi-billion year age for the solar system. While they have been studied, they have not been explained nor have they been incorporated into a unified model. They are, at best, characterized as Ã¢â‚¬Ëœopportunities for researchÃ¢â‚¬â„¢ and, at worst, swept under the rug.
All of these observations, and more, are very consistent with a solar system on the order of thousands of years old and pose enormous difficulties with one on the order of billions of years old. Yet, the possibility of a young system is consistently dismissed and not even considered.