I’m not a believer in a literal reading of Genesis, but there’s no way that soft tissue could survive for sixty million years. If that stuff really is dino tissue, then the currently accepted timeline is wrong.
That soft tissue would have evolved into a Volvo by now.
I’d be careful of definitions. These were not “soft” “tissues” as in they didn’t cut into a fossil and find these “soft” (to the touch) tissues....they were fossilized “soft-tissue” (tissue other than bone) that had to be demineralized in an acid to dissolve the rock. Had they simply cut into a fossil and found actual “soft” to the touch “soft tissues” of the likes they’re finding once they dissolve the rock, I’d be more surprised.
Bingo, another person gets it... Midrashim and other literature and artwork indicate that there were a number of leftover dinosaurs walking around at a time just prior to the flood. The true main age of dinosaurs would have been several thousand or a few tens of thousands of years back, but not tens of millions.
Without a good embalmer it wouldn't last 60 years, let alone 6,000 years. What ever external forces preserved it beyond its "shelf life" disrupted any decomposition processes so presumptions have no place in the discussion.