Seashells on tops of mountains.

Seashells cannot be evidence of a global flood, because:

• The seashell fossils found, range in age from 1 to 30 years old.
• The seashells are found in multiple layers.
• Each layer shows mature marine growth of entire ecosystems.
• Later layers grow on the debris of previous layers.
• Layers of seashells extend deep inside mountains.
• The combined age of the layers extends into decades if not millenia.
• The purported duration of the biblical flood (~100 days) is too brief for any marine growth to occur, other than what one would see on a ship (some weed and slime).
• The type of growth on ships in a 100 day period is not the type of growth seen in the fossil seashells layers.

Enjoy.

I presume that you mean millions of years old. But as I understand it, the Himalayan seashell fossils are older than 65 million years. They are all extinct species. True. True. But creationists don't understand that mature ecosystems develop over millennia. True without question. True. Not "on top of mountains", but deep inside the mountains - in several layers that indicate several succeeding ecosystems. You got me here. The age of the layers date from about 50 million years to about 200 million years. Actually, the biblical flood lasted for a bit over a year. But still, your point is well taken, except that you fail to mention barnacles. OK. But I miss your point. Thanks. I did.Edited by pandion, : No reason given.

I think I understand what Zen Deist is getting at. He's referring to layers of continuous deposition. Layers representing continuous periods of deposition for decades or even millennia could not have formed in a single flood year.--Percy

I always say the evidence is in the fauna fossil record. In short the reason they push for a k-t line is the reason i use. except i say its the flood line.
The same great events separating fossil assemblages above the k-t line is the measuring stick I use.
This is the evidence in the field.
Then I add interpretation of the data.
Yet its not accurate to say I'm not providing evidence.
Its the same field evidence for everyone.

Too many questions.Its fine about when the mountains were made.
Yes those below the k-t line were from the flood year. those above from later events. I understood many are from above the k-t line.Marine deposits, like shells, would only be found below the k-t line.
So if they are not there its because the mts came later or that area did not receive marine deposits during the flood.
Simple concept.
nothing I say has to do with bible verses except biblical boundaries.

Nope.
Seashell ages are irrelevant to the flood or just wrongly dated.
Segregated flows would deposit shells etc in segregated layers like everything else.
It could only be that way.

What is a segregated flow? Can you give us an example of a segregated flow sorting shells according to species? Can you give us an example of a segregated flow or anything else transporting shells around in such a way as to leave the arrangement of the shells looking just the same as beds of undisturbed shells?

But there are in fact Tertiary marine sedimentary rocks, as you could have found out by googling on tertiary marine sedimentary rocks.

Such a chaos of powerfully moving water could only do such actions of being segregated and desposting material in segregated flows.

When water sorts objects, it does so by size and shape.You can test this yourself.If "the Flood" were really happening, we'd expect to find the same thing in the fossil record. We'd see all the large animals together - T-rex, elephants, giraffes, wooly mammoths, giant sloths, all in big heaps.And we'd expect to see chickens, dogs, rabbits, microraptors, etc all in other heaps.That never happens.What we find are elephants and jackels and mice together in fossil beds.That only makes since of those animals were living in a different time and place from the T-rex.Further, we never find the elephants and the mice in the same level as the T-rex and the microraptors.Also we never find them in a lower level.If the Flood were the explanation, then it would have to be that ALL dinosaurs were bad swimmers and drown, while ALL mammals were good swimmers. And THEN, we'd have to say that sabertooth tigers were worse swimmers than giraffes, etc.Of course, this doesn't make sense when we consider the fact that there are layers of marine fossils.Also, when we consider the fact that marine fossils from the dinosaur era or earlier are never found in the same level as marine fossils containing whales or seals, etc.So, now we have to say what? That aquatic dinosaurs were worse swimmers than camels?No, the physical evidence does not support a "great flood" which is fine because it's a MYTH.It was never meant to be taken seriously. It's a bedtime story.

QFT. This is probably true, but only in languages where "chaos" means "order." English is not one of those, Robert.

Hi Robert,I'm going to request that you cease participation in this thread until such time as you begin supporting your assertions with evidence. You need evidence for the following:

• That the k-t line is from a geologically recent flood.
  ​
• That the age of things like seashells isn't relevant to the dating of events, or is dated incorrectly (this also seems to be a contradiction - if the age of seashells isn't relevant, then why would it matter whether or not they're dated correctly).
  ​
• That chaos segregates things into the order found in the geologic column above the k-t layer.

In the past your responses to my requests for evidence indicated that you do not understand what it means to connect evidence to ideas, and I have been reluctant to carry out any enforcement action when you didn't understand what was being asked of you. But this has happened too many times. It is long past the time when you should have been able to figure out how to support your ideas with evidence. If you post again without evidence I will remove your posting privileges in this forum.Edited by Admin, : Typo.

Do you know what the word "example" means?

It is true that they got there because of the flood.Now this happend because the water had to rise above the highest point on earth so there was no escape from death.So the shells rise with the water because certain organisims can only live so deep in the water,and then when the water goes down they are left stranded on the mountain.

I feel like there's a problem with your explanation, and it's this: where did the water go? If there's enough water on Earth to cover all mountains, then there's no way to move it around such that it doesn't keep covering all mountains.