Fossil Sorting in the Great Flood Part 2

I don't think so. Why would god flood the whole world if the human population at the time only occupied a tiny portion of the habitable planet? Might I also add that it was the human population at the time that brought on god's wrath.But anyway, what was the real question that I missed?

---

The Laminator

​

This gets into the question of measuring time back to the date of the flood. Perhaps you would like to (a) tell us when you think the flood occured and (2) tell how you reconcile that with known dating methods from a number of sources that all confirm each other including counting of actual annual layers to 567,700 years?see {Age Correlations and an Old Earth}
http://EvC Forum: Age Correlations and an Old Earth
for more on this topic.

---

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

don't you always put the bottom layer of the cake down first, then the icing, next, etc? isn't it safe to assume the bottom layer of the cake was put on the baking sheet first? what about if half of the cake is ice cream? did both parts get made the same way? was it baked that way? was the ice cream made first, and put on the cake after?boundaries are NOT fictional. and layers are layers because they're different types of rock that are made by different processes. and unlike betty crocker may say, i've never made a cake instantly. there's a process involved.

Uhhh...Nope.
The San Andres dolomite out here beneath my chair a hlf-mile or so is Permian in age - pre-Cretaceous. And it started our as a reef that GREW IN PLACE, like reefs grow, which is to say s l o w l y. And after that it got converted from limestone to dolomite by rainwater percolating through it, even more slowly. Not just a few thousands of years, but thousands of thousands.Read some geology, Robert.

Ok here comes the answerman. First to Loudmouth the Bible says clean and unclean animals were in a 7:2 ratio. Suggesting the post flood world was too be different from the pre-flood world. Mammals would rule ,as before the others like dinosaurs did. Faunal demagraphic redistribution.To Mike King ( by the way welcome) there is no evidence of long geologic history only evidence of history and then human interpretation.
The trip you offer would only show the same thing as my backyard. Flat or folded or crushed rock creations. All explained, and more plausibly, by events and not slow development.
Look at any rock, almost, and it shows evidence of sudden destruction.
Flat rocks show evidence of uniform creation that dos not occur today anywhere because it does not happen. It takes a great event.
You say offer experiments. Well since you say yours is the dominate position accepted today. YOU FIRST. However you can't nor I since geology is not a scientific study but a historical study not open to testing.
Thank you all Rob

You aren't actually answering most of the questions put to you. This is a big understandable since there are a lot of them. That's why I'm trying not to add to the load. So I won't ask any new ones.However you have been asked why there isn't grass in all the layers. In fact, you've been asked why there aren't humans, mammels etc.So far your only explanation is that everything that was missing was rare and/or restricted in geography. Is that actually the only answer you are going to offer? Once we have clarified that we can continue.Also to clarify:
All the geologic layers are flood? You did say there aren't any pre flood didn't you? And you also said that the K-T boundary is the last of the flood layers. Is that correct too?

Your 7:2 ratio would be a nice idea, if it wasn't for the fact that God commanded Noah to sacrifice by burnt offering the extra clean animals once they were on dry land again.The reason the clean animals were specified to be in excess was because unclean animals are unworthy of sacrifice to the Lord.Not to mention you are not taking into acount reproduction rate (age to maturity, number of offspring per birth), which would have more to do with recovering from a bottle neck than if there were initially one or a few pairs of animals.Interestingly, your 7:2 ratio theory is potentially testable. Unclean animals should have 2/7 the genetic diversity relative to clean animals, due to your claimed numbers at the Flood bottleneck.However, as I specified above, I don't see burned carcasses as having much reproductive success...

Untrue. Geologists study sedimentation both in the lab and the field today, and can manipulate variables to see how outcomes change. And just because geology, like astronomy, is primarily a historical science, it is no less of a science.I would really like to see your Flood or pre-Flood explanation for the San Andres dolomite. Or for El Capitan, a 1600-foot-thick reef in the Guadelupe Mountains. Or for any of the evaporite rocks we really see in the real world. Or.....

How do you explain layers of sedimentary rock on top of volcanic rock on top of sedimentary rock ... above the KT boundary?Why is this rock no different from other rock layers below the KT boundary except for appearance of greater age?Why do some of these layers also have fossils of undersea organisms if they occured after the flood event?Why do these also look like layers below the KT boundary? This at least is consistent with a belief structure that takes a literalist approach. Of course this means that whole chunks of scientific knowledge must be regarded as nonsense to make it work -- what I call a high nonsense quotient on {Ideas of Reality} at
EvC Forum: Ideas of RealityDenial is no basis for science.enjoy.

---

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

That's a pretty common misconception about the "backwards-looking" sciences, like geology, paleontology, astronomy, etc. Moreover, it's trivially false - if science couldn't examine the past, there'd be no such field as "criminal forensics."But forensics does indeed exist, and is regularly employed to ascertain the nature of events in the past. These findings are considered reliable enough to put people in jail, so I rather suspect the same methods will suffice for something so banal as determining the history and age of the Earth.Of course, if we played it your way there's a lot of murderers in prison we'd have to let out.

To Mike King ( by the way welcome) there is no evidence of long geologic history only evidence of history and then human interpretation.
The trip you offer would only show the same thing as my backyard. Flat or folded or crushed rock creations. All explained, and more plausibly, by events and not slow development.
Look at any rock, almost, and it shows evidence of sudden destruction.
Flat rocks show evidence of uniform creation that dos not occur today anywhere because it does not happen. It takes a great event.
You say offer experiments. Well since you say yours is the dominate position accepted today. YOU FIRST. However you can't nor I since geology is not a scientific study but a historical study not open to testing.
Thank you all RobRob,
Not all rock shows evidence of sudden destruction. You can see geological happenings here and now around the world. Rivers carry fine sediment from eroded rock. The finer the sediment, the longer the erosion of a long long period of time. How would explain unconformities and conglomerate rock?Don't get me wrong, but Jesus is my lord and Saviour, but if we applied the same interpretation to the Bible as a historical docoment and not recognise the picture language used in Genesis 1 as a prose to remember the Sabbath, then how would you interpret John's vision of a third of all the stars falling to Earth in Revelation?

quote:

---

Good luck, I do sincerely congratulate you on your bravery and clarity. You are unusual in that (as evidenced by arkathon).

---

Brave and clear to define the flood line. Arky not brave and clear? Hmm, well, is Nosy brave and clear in defining a flood line? Or where it surely could not be even? ( Thanks for permission to publish your posts)

Of course there is no flood line. And once you have described in some detail what the flood was actually like (one big one, 10 of them or something else ) then we can show that whatever model you pick the evidence is not there for it and there are evidences against it.This however is NOT the topic of this thread. In this thread you are showing how whatever flood scenario you want to put forward managed to sort the fossils. In the end this will require, at later levels of detail, the description of just what is and isn't flood deposits.I think it is time to summarize again just what you and Rob (and any others) are listing as the sorting mechanisms. If I have it right Rob's is only one of preservation -- that is, all living things have been there from the beginning but only some were prevalent enough to have had a chance of fossilization. Do you have any Ark?When we have that clear then we can see if they work.This message has been edited by NosyNed, 07-08-2004 12:32 AM

AdminNosy/NosyNed,You asked me a question and I answered you, I don't know what your problem is, why ask a question you want an answer to, when you know its off topic, Ned, you were off topic being an administrator, to request an answer off topic, even though I answered on topic, if glaciers were formed suddenly then Razd's correlations pre-flood are in error, you by not being able to provide evidence that the glaciers drew down the oceans, are in fact supporting my premise, that Razd's correlations have no merit, cause of the bear lake study that never was addressed, that glaciers can affect the sedimentation layerings, or in this thread fossil sorting(cause they are dating the organic remains affected by leaching), etc...P.S. However, its an abuse of powers, when an administrator asks a question, requesting an answer from a member, so to then ban someone for answering his requested question, etc...This message has been edited by whatever, 07-08-2004 02:58 AM

Well, surprise. I thought about it for a moment. My concern, personally, at this moment, in geology, anyhow, is about extra flood mechanisms that may have resulted in fossil sorting. I understand this may not fit on your thread. What I said about the cambrian layer, and the possible cause of death, and fossilization as a result of the split, why not? Not enough power to kill people, but enough to quicken the death of cambrian type life? So, anyone, why not?