Fossil Sorting in the Great Flood Part 2

Neither stronger nor bigger are needed to meet the criteria of evolution ... just survival to contribute to the next generation.Survival of the fittest is all that is needed for that. When stronger is fitter, they will survive. Being too muscular to escape predators will not.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

quote:

---

Exactly. In the fossil record, 65 million years ago there is a definite change in the type of fossils found. Almost 95% of the species that weighed over 50 pounds disappeared. At the same time we find evidence of a large meteor impact. It would seem that the environment created by the meteor impact strongly selected against large species, especially large reptillian ones.

---

Thank you! I almost always get my best answers from you guys yourselves. So what have we to work with here? A time when a major change took place (flood time?) A time when many things, such as comets were in great number! So, I think we may have to add this to the list of factors sorting things out here! (my latest post in faith and belief also raises another possibility, admittedly not yet well thought out.ha)

quote:

---

Not really sure what you are arguing here. What we see today is grass pollen that is very easy to distinguish from other pollens. In the fossil record, we see the appearance of this easy to spot pollen in the same strata where grass appears.

---

The question I asked people several times was was it possible grass pre flood, was different, in that it was not a pollen plant then? No one yet has ruled this out for me, so, if it is a possibility, then is it any wonder the pollen you would take as evidence of grass would not be found?

quote:

---

To claim that grass either didn't use pollen or the pollen looked different would take some kind of evidence, of which you have supplied none. Again, science is about evidence not about scenarios that have no evidence whatsoever.

---

For those holding court who are bible believers, God's Own recorded account is entered as evidence! Here, we have the difference with evo science, where He is always ruled out as inadmissable!

quote:

---

Genesis reads like a collection of parables, a collection whose purpose is to portray the relationship between God and his chosen people

---

His chosen people now, are those who chose Jesus. He had parrables too, all true stories, I believe. He also talked about the flood washing them all away, and the ark. You say certain books are 'to portray' this or that, but that is not a perspective shared by millions of bible believers. From my end, such an opinion seems to have been a causeal effect of holding man's 'wisdom' above God's.

So, then, in some cases, you suggest, the fittest could be, say a bunny, rather than the dino?

Agreed, and HIS own record is in the rocks, not in the Bible. It is the fossil record, geology and the Universe. And the record that GOD left says the Genesis is wrong.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Ah, so you think that the cretaceous boundary is the layer that is flood? Can we take that to another topic?"list of factors sorting things out here" -- LOLWould you like to summarize that list please and show how they sort anything the way it is recorded in the fossil record? Comets are part of the sorting process?!! If this is true then all the layers without pollen are pre-flood and all the layers with pollen are post flood. Is that what you are suggesting. Think carefully before you answer. Your ideas will be examined with this idea as part of your basic facts. (you are, btw, painting yourself into a corner).

look again at the data from the 65 million year old meteor event that left the iridium layer demarking the end of dinosaurs and the beginning of the age of mammals ....iow -- yes.this does not, however explain the absence of any 'bunny' fossils below the iridium layer -- it does not facilitate an ordering of the fossils within the geological strata.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

quote:

---

Agreed, and HIS own record is in the rocks, not in the Bible. It is the fossil record, geology and the Universe

---

And, unless you have the bible key He gave us to unlock the records, you will not be able to understand them. So, apparently you are suggesting that God wrote in the rocks something that is of more importance than what He gave us personally as the record? Or are you simply saying you don't really believe anyhow, but wanted to throw the "His own record" bit in there to make your rock interpretation sound good?

touche.man certainly didn't make the earth, however, it's a lot more likely man made "genesis"any flood-sorters wanna tell me how a flood some 4.5k years ago did stuff like this? or this?

god didn't give me the bible personally. i bought mine at the book store. actually, that's lie. i've never paid for a bible, i seem to get them for free.

The record he left us can be read without the Bible. It can be read by Buddhist or Christian, Jew or Hindu, Daoist or Muslim.The Bible is a Map, not the Territory.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

quote:

---

Ah, so you think that the cretaceous boundary is the layer that is flood?

---

What reason would I have to assume that the layer in question was not one of the many layers that the sequence of flood year events? Doesn't mean it was the beginning and the end of it, simply a phase of it?

quote:

---

Comets are part of the sorting process?!!

---

If there was a lot of comet activity at a phase of the flood, and, as the other poster suggested, this tended to wipe out the dinos, why would not this be a factor in the way things got buried and fossilized?

quote:

---

If this is true then all the layers without pollen are pre-flood and all the layers with pollen are post flood.

---

First, it's pretty well been long enough now, for me to start feeling like there could be something to this idea of a different type of grass! As far as 'all layers' then without pollen being pre flood, let's look at this. My first impression on this, is that if there was the 2 types of grass, how can we be certain that there was none of the pollen strain at all, however fairly rare it might have been, pre flood? Why would anyone jump to such a huge conclusion?

quote:

---

you are, btw, painting yourself into a corner

---

Not at all, and with a few brushstrokes, I can paint myself out of the corner into which you so desperatly would try to lead me.

why does the entire geologic column not look like a glorified flood plain?and more importantly, why do we have little flood events within the big one?why does the record show distortion that could not have been laid down in a level-sorting method, as the pictures i posted above show?and why are the strata sorted, when geologically, floods do nothing but jumble?

I think you need to describe your flood in a bit more detail then. Please describe what you think the flood was like. We have been given descriptions by others that make what you suggest seem very unlikely indeed. I guess your idea of what went on in that year is different.Please describe your flood model. There is one or two "comet" events (one really big one) at the time of the end of the dinosaurs. What "phase" of the flood was it?How many phases were there? What happened in each phase? Which geologic layers correspond to which "phases".I assume all these phases happened over one year. Could you correct me if that's wrong. It isn't a "jump" now. We have 1,000's of samples and none (or none that are carefully checked) of them have any of the right kind of pollen samples. We can only be as certain as the data we have. So far it says "NONE" in big bold letters. The only reasonable conclustion for now is NONE.I'm afraid that you might not recognize a corner when you bump into it. But keep painting.

quote:

---

why does the entire geologic column not look like a glorified flood plain? and more importantly, why do we have little flood events within the big one? why does the record show distortion that could not have been laid down in a level-sorting method, as the pictures i posted above show? and why are the strata sorted, when geologically, floods do nothing but jumble?

---

Why would the year of comets, continents sliding, etc, look like a modern floodplain?
Why little events in the big one? Why, with rising, then receeding waters, and maybe thousands of lakes, and seas at times, why would we expect anything else?
'distortion'? Well, funny you should bring that up. Look at the top picture you yourself posted. It almost looks to me like such a mighty folding would hav e been done when the mud, or whatever was not fully hardened! What could preasure it together, with so much force? Do you really need me to spell out some flood year possibilities here?
And floods now may jumble, but they also don't cover the world for a year and kill everyone! They don't usually seem to come with hurricanes, volcanoes, sliding continents, comets, and such as well! Not to mention likely cosmic influences.

oh i dunno, maybe because you're arguing a BIG FLOOD. could that be it? i mean, you know, it was a miracle, i guess the laws of physics didn't really apply. yes. we'd expect one big flood. what we have is a lot of little floods of rivers, interspliced with all kind of other geologic activity. and no big flood. curious. yes, you do actually.if the distortion happened while soft, why do the inclusions, and mineral elements also distort? if it happened to mud, they'd shift, not bend.also, how come we can continue to measure the rates of distortion today? 190 days, including the 40 it rained.and uhh, i live in florida. know when it floods here? when we have a hurricane. as far as vulcanism and continental drift, we have geologic record of that.This message has been edited by Arachnophilia, 07-03-2004 12:13 AM