Summations Only

You'll have all seen this somewhere on the internet ... ... but it doesn't have enough fossils. Or footnotes. I decided to remedy that. Comments? I can easily alter it, the original's an .odg file.

Thread copied here from the Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win. thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

Weird.You (who is "you") "have" the fossils? You're hoarding them?The fossils are creatures that died in the Flood. They show the range of life on earth before the Flood. That's all.

They're kept in museums and suchlike places. What a strange stroke of luck that this range of life on earth fits so well with evolutionary predictions. But I guess that's nothing to the massive sequence of coincidences by which the Flood sorted them into the right order. And rigged the radiometric dates in some way which is never properly explained.Or perhaps coincidence is the wrong word. If one believes there's a divine hand behind all this, then one must conclude that the entire fossil record is a vast lie to trick scientists into being evolutionists, one huge and gratuitous act of deceit on the part of the Almighty.

Trilobites and crabs, Faith. It seems I have brought them up before. Both were/are seafloor scuttlers, but your Flood sorted them so very well that their fossils NEVER show up in the same horizontal slab of rock.And it happens with hundreds of other fossils, Faith: the whole fossil record.

There is no "right order." They are sorted in a rough way according to size and original location, lower levels being generally smaller and marine, upper being land creatures. There is no gradation according to complexity or any clear criterion. Creatures of a kind are found together, just as they are found in life. Different races or varieties of the same creature are found together in different layers, not because the upper evolved from the lower but just because that's where they ended up. They're cousins that lived at the same time, and it's very possible the lower trilobites, for instance, microevolved from the upper. You have no way of knowing, you just make assumptions. A very careful study of the order would have to show no rational order at all.But of course it must be added that there is no rational explanation for the sorting of the sedimentary strata in which they appear either, as if eras of time could be characterized by only one kind of sediment. But we do know that moving water sorts sediments, river water, ocean water. The rising of the ocean water in the first months of the FLood would certainly have deposited sediments according to Walther's Law. The overwhelming evidence is that the layers in which the fossils are found were simply mechanically produced by water.And of course the very abundance of fossils can only be explained by a one-time water catastrophe, which provided the ideal conditions for fossilizsation, which otherwise hardly ever occur.It's merely fanciful imagination that invents time periods to explain them. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

{Non-topic material hidden - Adminnemooseus}Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Hide stuff.

So you're saying that dinosaurs existed in Noah's time but they never ate cows? I wonder why.Edited by ringo, : Changed "exited" to "existed" - though the dinosaurs exiting also works.

To take on just some of the falsehoods...

quote:

---

But of course it must be added that there is no rational explanation for the sorting of the sedimentary strata in which they appear either, as if eras of time could be characterized by only one kind of sediment.

---

They aren't. The geological record does not show any such order.

quote:

---

The rising of the ocean water in the first months of the FLood would certainly have deposited sediments according to Walther's Law.

---

No, it would not. You could expect an upward-fining order but that is not seen either - not as a feature of the entire geological record.

quote:

---

The overwhelming evidence is that the layers in which the fossils are found were simply mechanically produced by water

---

And that is an outright lie.The Flood explains neither geology nor the fossil record. The very idea is a joke.

Well, you are the queen of fanciful imagination. You imagine an imaginary flood and imagine that the fossils are in an imaginary order and imagine that the imaginary flood both deposited layers and eroded them.Reality does not happen the way you imagine. If you had ever done a careful study of the order you would know without any doubt that the order of the fossils is completely consistent with the explanation of modern science. All the evidence shows that the strata have been deposited and eroded over many millions of years and that lower layers are older than overlying layers.You have been shown all this in numerous threads, but you continue to deny reality and cling to your children's story like a child that will not admit there is no Santa Claus. We have the evidence and they lead to inescapable conclusions.You already said in other threads that your bible stories trump reality, so why are you bothering to continue arguing? We know your argument and are unconvinced.Evolution. We have the fossils. We win!

I'll be noting any bald declarations that lack support, in other words, enforcing rule 4 of the Forum Guidelines:

4. Points should be supported with evidence and reasoned argumentation. Address rebuttals through the introduction of additional evidence or by enlarging upon the argument. Do not repeat previous points without further elaboration. Avoid bare assertions.

Naturally I'll be enforcing all the other rules of the Forum Guidelines, too.

They were Hindus.Which also accounts for God not letting them survive the flood.

The strange thing about you people ... OK, one of the strange things about you people ... is that you continually try to explain away, not what the fossil record looks like, but what you imagine it looks like. This is like watching someone say: "Well the reason that like poles attract is because Jesus! As you'd know if you'd read the Bible! You ignoramus! The Flood did it!"

If they are 'roughly ordered' why are there no verified exceptions? Who said this?

EXCEPT FOR RULE #10 WHEN ATHEISTS BREAK IT? 10. Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics. Message 7