|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,913 Year: 4,170/9,624 Month: 1,041/974 Week: 368/286 Day: 11/13 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The Great Creationist Fossil Failure | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Even as a creationist, I agree with you that there would be fossils before the flood. I place the flood at the PT boundary which is where the flooding evidence exists. All fossils before the PT boundary are pre-flood fossils. Why do the pre-flood fossils look so different to organisms living today, when they were in fact all created in the same week and all lived together at the same time? For example, why do we have fossils of pre-flood trilobites but not pre-flood lobsters? Fossils of tabulate corals from before the flood, but not pre-flood scleractinian corals? Fossils of pre-flood gorgonopsians and diadectomorphs but never a pre-flood crocodile or lion --- or dinosaur, if it comes to that?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Well this isn't the thread to discuss the flaws of radiometric dating. Right. The correct thread is one I proposed months back, and to which no creationist has yet contributed: EvC Forum: Assumptions involved in scientific dating Care to try your luck?Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.5 |
quote: Since bacteria don't die of old age, and since the most famous pre-Cambrian fossils are stromatolites rather than individual bacterial cells it is certainly not obvious.
quote: I don't know why you think that. Especially as you claim that the order of the fossil record indicates deaths rather than creation. The fact that early representatives of the phyla don't necessarily look an awful lot like later forms is another issue. And isn't the late appearance of the Bryozoa rather a big problem for you ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
Good point. But there are pre-flood archosaurs. Precursor to dinosaurs and modern crocodiles. And most current phyla are represented in the Cambrian Explosion. I do believe in rapid adaptation, relating to changes in allele frequencies. ie we have nearly unchanging DNA structures over time, but some adaptation expressed in the physiology. And so we don't always see the modern breeds/forms expressed in the original fossil record.
But Creationism does predict that increasingly modern kinds will be found fossilised in ancient strata, and occasionally vice versa (as per the coelecanth). In addition our modern terrestrial environment was not a prevalent ecosystem in pre-flood times. ie generally the more prevalent terrestrial conditions before the PT boundary were of a cold wet, low lying nature. These low-lying regions were susceptible to marine transgressions, not the place for burgeoning human settlements. One would expect human settlements to have being in the less vulnerable regions with eco-systems similar to ones where mammals currently thrive ie where angiosperms are a prevalent part of the eco-system.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
Stromatolites still make my point. It's the correct order.
You say:" I don't know why you think that. Especially as you claim that the order of the fossil record indicates deaths rather than creation" Obviously the order of fossilisation relates to death. There would be dead bacteria cells accumulating within hours of creation, and yet the first exoskeleton of a trilobite some time later. Generally creatures are more likely to fall to the ground and get covered by sediment when dead. Generally a live creature would squirm out of falling sediment, less likely to be buried and fossilised.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
One would expect human settlements to have being in the less vulnerable regions with eco-systems similar to ones where mammals currently thrive ie where angiosperms are a prevalent part of the eco-system.
As has been pointed out, humans came along about 250 million years after the period you're discussing. All your wishin' and hopin' isn't going to change that.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Good point. But there are pre-flood archosaurs. Precursor to dinosaurs and modern crocodiles. I know that basal archosaurs are precursors to dinosaurs and crocodiles, but if you are going to admit that into your explanatory scheme then ... welcome to our side. We accept your surrender.
But Creationism does predict that increasingly modern kinds will be found fossilised in ancient strata ... On what basis does it predict this?
In addition our modern terrestrial environment was not a prevalent ecosystem in pre-flood times. ie generally the more prevalent terrestrial conditions before the PT boundary were of a cold wet, low lying nature. These low-lying regions were susceptible to marine transgressions, not the place for burgeoning human settlements. One would expect human settlements to have being in the less vulnerable regions with eco-systems similar to ones where mammals currently thrive ie where angiosperms are a prevalent part of the eco-system. I didn't mention human settlements. I did mention lobsters and trilobites, were all the lobsters living on mountains before the Flood?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
There have been many ooparts. Out of place artifacts, signs of early humans before the PT boundary. Scientists tend to steer clear of studying these because their careers are normally based on the status quo and they would be belittled and their academic status undermined if they give support to radical theories which undermine the status quo.
Human footprints have been found before the PT boundary. A bell was found in Carboniferous coal. The Narmer tablets record dinosaurs with humans in early Egyptian society. as do Sumerian seals. Anyone is able to discover this information in the internet, I wont even bother posting the links here because you guys obviously will not accept those OOPARTS (out of place artifacts) as scientific evidence. But my main point is that vast areas of earth have not been studied for early mammals, including humans. The environment where mammals would be would be similar to today, because these rare pre-flood creatures now dominate in a world of angiosperms, So the pre-flood region we should be studying should be one where angiosperms existed before the PT boundary.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 314 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
I wont even bother posting the links here ... Well, I'm convinced.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2136 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Sorry, your oopsies are nonsense.
First, to have humans traipsing around some 250+ million years ago would mean that they were present in all time periods since. The evidence shows that's not the case. Second, the fossil record shows a pretty good progression from early primates to modern humans over the last 60 or so million years. But what you would ask us to believe is that these huge masses of evidence are all wrong because of a few dubious finds. That's pretty silly.Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9516 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
Mindspawn writes: There have been many ooparts. Out of place artifacts, signs of early humans before the PT boundary. Ok, lets see them.
Scientists tend to steer clear of studying these because their careers are normally based on the status quo and they would be belittled and their academic status undermined if they give support to radical theories which undermine the status quo. Bollox. This is an excuse for having nothing.
Human footprints have been found before the PT boundary. A bell was found in Carboniferous coal. The Narmer tablets record dinosaurs with humans in early Egyptian society. as do Sumerian seals. Anyone is able to discover this information in the internet, I wont even bother posting the links here because you guys obviously will not accept those OOPARTS (out of place artifacts) as scientific evidence. So you just thought it enough to spout crap and then run away? Let's have them, one at a time and we explain why you're wrong so that you won't need to keep making the same silly mistakes.
But my main point is that vast areas of earth have not been studied for early mammals, including humans. The environment where mammals would be would be similar to today, because these rare pre-flood creatures now dominate in a world of angiosperms, So the pre-flood region we should be studying should be one where angiosperms existed before the PT boundary. Why are you wasting time talking bollox on an internet forum when you could be out there digging up this fantastic missing evidence that science in its blind conformaty has not thought to look for? So you've still got nothing....Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. "Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edge Member (Idle past 1736 days) Posts: 4696 From: Colorado, USA Joined: |
Human footprints have been found before the PT boundary.
Please provide evidence for this.
A bell was found in Carboniferous coal.
Really? You believe coal miners when they tell you something? A reference would be nice here.
The Narmer tablets record dinosaurs with humans in early Egyptian society. as do Sumerian seals. Anyone is able to discover this information in the internet, I wont even bother posting the links here because you guys obviously will not accept those OOPARTS (out of place artifacts) as scientific evidence.
Actually, the reason is that we have done it before. They all are either of dubious chain of custody or have otherwise been refuted. Most are old stories from a more naive time. Edited by edge, : No reason given. Edited by edge, : No reason given. Edited by edge, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
mindspawn writes: There have been many ooparts. Out of place artifacts, signs of early humans before the PT boundary. Scientists tend to steer clear of studying these because their careers are normally based on the status quo and they would be belittled and their academic status undermined if they give support to radical theories which undermine the status quo. Human footprints have been found before the PT boundary. A bell was found in Carboniferous coal. The Narmer tablets record dinosaurs with humans in early Egyptian society. as do Sumerian seals. Anyone is able to discover this information in the internet, I wont even bother posting the links here because you guys obviously will not accept those OOPARTS (out of place artifacts) as scientific evidence. I know that Creationist sites make such claims but so far have never presented the evidence or explained why things like the bell are even out of place. Creationists have had many decades to produce some evidence but have NEVER been able to do so. Oh sure, they do well at the Carny side show but never make it into the main tent.
mindspawn writes: But my main point is that vast areas of earth have not been studied for early mammals, including humans. The environment where mammals would be would be similar to today, because these rare pre-flood creatures now dominate in a world of angiosperms, So the pre-flood region we should be studying should be one where angiosperms existed before the PT boundary. So why have no Creationists ever looked there?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mindspawn Member (Idle past 2690 days) Posts: 1015 Joined: |
Its not surrender, its obvious that kinds can adapt rapidly by changing allele frequencies. Even the original wolf-like kind has developed into a number of breeds like bears, wolves, huskies, poodles etc. This is an obvious fact accepted by many creationists. This diversity is proven, but does not involve major changes to the DNA structure as per evolutionary theory.
You say: "But Creationism does predict that increasingly modern kinds will be found fossilized in ancient strata ." Creationism claims that creatures are relatively unchanged since creation. So logically we would expect to find more and more modern creatures reflected in the fossil record. something that is happening. Regarding lobsters, it's possible that the prevailing environment during the Cambrian was too sulfuric or too anoxic for them. Its hard to find fossils from niche environments, easier from common environments. Who knows , maybe one day we will find a Cambrian fossil haven of lobsters. Or even modern trilobites currently living in a niche sulfuric or anoxic environment. Niche environments can become common. common environments can become niche. Crustaceans like Canadaspis and Perspicaris do exist in the Cambrian so with my view of rapid adaptation maybe there was significant adaptation. Unfortunately we do not have the DNA to prove biological relationships from the Cambrian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4 |
All bullshit when looked at objectively and scientifically. Why do you think you only find this crap on fringe, nonscientific websites.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024