Why do we only find fossils?

Ok, I got one for all you creationists out there.If all the fossils we find are only 6,000 years old, then how come we always find them as fossils?That is to say, we never find any non-fossilized dinosaur bones, trilobite shells, pakicitus skeletons. If these fossil creatures once lived along side our modern animals, how come all these ancient remains are always found as fossils. What are the chances that none NONE of their skeletons actually survived over the years?Some extra data to think about:Bones don't last for ever. They will break down in about 12 years when exposed to moist, humid, environments. However certain conditions will see the bones last much longer.Deserts, for example, will likely yeild bones many thousands of years old. Places like the labrea tarpits caught dozens of ancient mamals and perserved the bones (NOTE: It didn't catch any dinosaurs oddly, wonder why?).So it is concivable that 6000 year old bones would survive, at least in some environments. So how come all we see are fossils?This message has been edited by Yaro, 11-09-2005 08:06 PM

Biological evolution or geology?I'll promote it as soon as you remove that horrid avatar.

Bio Evo.

*poot*

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.It would be a misuse of power to force you to change the avatar. That was just my editorial comment on the dammed thing. Others have already expressed their appreciation for it (what that says I don't want to delve into).This message has been edited by AdminNosy, 11-09-2005 08:15 PM

I think you'll have to modify the "never".I have held in my hand a tyrannosaur fang that the researcher in the preparation lab said was the original (or mostly) tooth not mineralized replacement.I think that for things as recent as under 100 Myr ago there may be some bone that is not replaced but I don't know for sure.I think you are right about the trilobites etc. I'd suggest finding a reference talking about shell material from the time of Egypts height.

Actually, I got a good point to back me up here:La Brea Tar Pits - WikipediaThe La Brea Tar Pits have the following animals represented in them in great quantity:

quote:

---

Mammals

​

* American Camel (Camelops hesterus)
* American Lion (Panthera atrox)
* American Mastodon (Mammut americanum)
* Bobcat
* Capromeryx minor
* Columbian Mammoth (Mammuthus columbi)
* Cougar
* Coyote
* Dire Wolf (Canis dirus)
* Giant Bison (Bison antiquus)
* Harlan's Ground Sloth (Glossiotherium harlani)
* Jaguar
* Llama
* Peccary
* Raccoon
* Saber-Toothed Cat (Smilodon fatalis)
* Scimitar Cat (Homotherium serum)
* Shasta Ground Sloth (Nothrotheriops shastensis)
* Skunk
* Tapir
* Weasel
* Western Horse (Equus occidentalis)

​

Birds

​

* California Condor
* Eagle
* Falcon
* Teratorn
* Turkey
* Vulture

​

Reptiles, Amphibians, and Fish

​

* Arroyo Chub
* Garter Snake
* Gopher Snake
* Kingsnake
* Pond Turtle
* Rainbow Trout
* Rattlesnake
* Salamander
* Three-Spined Stickleback
* Tree Frog
* Toad

​

Invertabrates

​

* Fly
* Dung Beetle
* Grasshopper
* Pill Bug
* Scorpion
* Termite
* Water Flea

​

Plants

​

* California Juniper
* Coast Live Oak
* Poison Oak
* Ragweed
* Raspberry
* Red Cedar
* Redwood tree
* Sagebrush
* Sycamore
* Thistle
* Walnut tree

---

The tarpits only apeard after the last ice age, so they are rather recent geologicaly. Notice, NOT ONE SINGLE pre-ice age species was trapped in the pit.If dinos lived along side all these other animals, how come not a single specimen is represented in the Tar Pits?

Yaro, so if we find millions year old parts of dinosaurs according to evo dating does that mean ToE is wrong because it is not possible for parts not to have fossilized during that period.It's a serious question because even though I accept an old earth, I don't find evo explanations of why some parts of dinosaurs are found which are not fossilized, and even some soft parts, to be plausible. The idea that even small amounts of blood say could survive that length of time does not appear to me to be plausible, but then again, I have never really heard or seen any peer-reviewed analysis by evos that explain the issue one way or the other.Furthermore, can you state how long it takes for something to fossilize? My understanding is it can happen as quickly as a few years.

The wikipedia is not a reliable source all the time. I have seen enough of what I consider false claims by evos that eventually were reversed and these dealt with factual claims, such as claiming Pakicetus had webbed feet which wasn't true, that I am not inclined to accept any evo claim by evos not substantiated by non-evos.

Hey randman,Ya, it could be a few years given the right conditions. As I understand it, some bits (like the soft-tissue in T-Rex) aren't like pure protein. I mean, its not like you cracked the bone and there is the marrow.Think of it as like supper old jerkey or something Where the proteins have they themselves become different, yet organic, compounds. Kind of like the process of mummification, or turning something into leather. There are profound changes going on to the structure of the material.In any case, I think the Tar Pits, as mentioned above, is a better example of my point. Here we have a structure around since only the last ice age, which contains only creatures we find AFTER the ice age, yet no creatures before it!How come?

quote:

---

...such as claiming Pakicetus had webbed feet which wasn't true....

---

It would make sense that the first whale would not have had webbed feet.

---

"Intellectually, scientifically, even artistically, fundamentalism -- biblical literalism -- is a road to nowhere, because it insists on fidelity to revealed truths that are not true." -- Katha Pollitt

Ok, compare the list to La Brea's homepage:http://www.tarpits.org/education/guide/flora/index.htmlLooks pretty much the same to me. How come we don't have any remains of dinos?

Good example, Yaro.I was going to bring up mummies -- no mummified remains of any species radiometrically dated to be older than some certain date -- but tar pits is even better.PS. Who is that in your newest avatar?

PS. Who is that in your newest avatar?B-Ko, from the Project A-Ko cartoons

Hi Yaro Fossils were created by the sediments that washed over carcasses during the Great Flood. It is well known that fossils can be formed extremely rapidly under the right conditions.The flood was so powerful that it destroyed all organic life; only bones that happened to be fossilized left a trace of their existence. So all we see now are fossils of species that were destroyed in the flood. Individuals that weren't fossilized were blasted into smithereens.Dinosaurs, for example, failed to get onto the ark, and their organic material was completely destroyed by the flood, only their fossils remain.MickPS. It's fun being a creationist!