Recent pollen has been found in old rocks (Talk.Origins)

Claim CC341:


 * Pollen has been found in Cambrian and Precambrian rocks, particular the Hakatai Shales of the Grand Canyon. By standard evolutionary models, these rocks pre-date the evolution of pollen-bearing plants.

Sources: (NB: Talk.Origins' link is is out of date. The Creation Ex Nihilo article is here.)
 * Burdick, C. L. 1966. Microflora of the Grand Canyon. Creation Research Society Quarterly 3(1): 38-50.
 * Burdick, C. L. 1972. Progress report on Grand Canyon palynology. Creation Research Society Quarterly 9(1): 25-30.
 * AIG, 1990. Fossil pollen in Grand Canyon overturns plant evolution. Creation Ex Nihilo 12(1): 38-39.

CreationWiki response:

While Chadwick did show that Clifford Burdick blundered, he did not conclusively conclude that the pollen was a result of contamination. Rather, he only showed that it was sufficiently likely that Burdick's conclusions could not be reproduced and authenticated, so the results were questionable. Furthermore, Chadwick goes on to cite a better and thoroughly-documented example.

This is true, but a more recent study team of scientists from the Creation Research Society reexamined these so-called Precambrian layers, taking every possible precaution to prevent or account for any contamination. The study is the subject of one of the sources cited by Talk.Origins (AiG, 1990). These scientists got their samples from deeper in the rock while avoiding cracks in the rocks thus eliminating environmental contamination. They also checked two other nearby layers&mdash;with negative results&mdash;as a cross-check since contamination would affect all three layers. The results showed that fossil pollen is contained in "Precambrian" shale.

Neither is there any indication that the pollen fails any of these tests. As mentioned above, the study went to considerable lengths to not only avoid contamination but to check for contamination, yet Talk.Origins' response is cast doubt without actually refuting the results.

A picture of some of the pollen at one of the sources cited by Talk.Origins (AIG, 1990) shows some evidence of flattening. And while the black and white photo makes it hard to judge the color, there are signs of darkening.

Surely the researchers would have been careful enough to avoid such areas, and the results indicate that they did find fossil pollen, despite Talk.Origins' attempts to cast doubt.