Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9178 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,104 Year: 5,361/9,624 Month: 386/323 Week: 26/204 Day: 2/24 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Do creationists try to find and study fossils?
foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 691 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


(3)
Message 98 of 182 (698260)
05-04-2013 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Faith
05-04-2013 9:52 PM


Yes, the past left evidence, unique evidence such as the bazillions of fossils in the miles deep stack of sediments that has not occurred on such a scale since and never will. It is open to interpretation in a way evidence formed in the present is not because in the present you have similar events for comparison. That is not the case with the prehistoric past. The evidence remains open to interpretation. The same evidence you take to prove evolution I take to prove the Flood and I think the interpretation of a stack of neatly horizontal sediments as eras in time is stupid in the extreme.
Why is it that those deep stacks of sediments always have the oldest dated rocks on the bottom and the youngest dated rocks on top? How did the flood manage to do that? Why is it that the least complex fossils are always found on the bottoms layers of sediment and the most complex fossils are always found on the top? How did the flood manage to do that? Lets just take fish for example. Why are there no modern fish found in the bottom layers? Why are the fish found in the top layers never found in the bottom layers? This is even true for fish of approximately the same weight. Why and how would a flood sort fish out in this manner?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Faith, posted 05-04-2013 9:52 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Faith, posted 05-04-2013 10:50 PM foreveryoung has replied

foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 691 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


(4)
Message 100 of 182 (698263)
05-04-2013 11:18 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by Faith
05-04-2013 10:50 PM


Why is it that most of the fossils found in the thick sedimentary layers you speak of don't exist today? If they all came off the ark 4000 years ago, you would think at least some of them would still exist.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Faith, posted 05-04-2013 10:50 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 1:14 AM foreveryoung has replied

foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 691 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


(1)
(1)
Message 141 of 182 (698330)
05-05-2013 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Faith
05-05-2013 1:14 AM


The answer to your question is that most of those fossils that don't exist are nevertheless within the same Species or Kind of those that do exist as their close cousins. Microevolution has occurred since the Flood acting on the small portion of the pre-Flood genetic picture that survived the Flood. The fossils show us the enormous variety that existed before the Flood.
Where are the descendants or cousins of T-rex? Where is the microevolution that descended from her?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 1:14 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by NoNukes, posted 05-05-2013 9:15 PM foreveryoung has not replied
 Message 145 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 9:48 PM foreveryoung has not replied

foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 691 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


(1)
Message 148 of 182 (698355)
05-05-2013 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by Faith
05-05-2013 10:02 PM


Re: a great example of how creationists do not study fossils.
The sedimentary layers are all originally horizontal, remarkably flat-topped, remarkably without the sort of erosion one finds on surface land,
Ever heard of the Great Unconformity in the Grand Canyon? That is a huge erosional surface. There was over a billion years of erosion and non deposition that occurred over that surface.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 10:02 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 11:22 PM foreveryoung has replied

foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 691 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


(2)
(1)
Message 164 of 182 (698402)
05-06-2013 5:46 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by Faith
05-05-2013 11:22 PM


Re: a great example of how creationists do not study fossils.
You said all the sedimentary layers are perfectly flat and show no signs of erosion like the current land surface does. I suppose that was off topic for you to mention it? Since you mentioned it, I am responding to it. There are surfaces that show erosion like the current land surface does. I just showed it to you. Now, it is up to you to tell me why the Great Unconformity is not an erosion surface like that of today.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 11:22 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 165 by Faith, posted 05-06-2013 7:13 PM foreveryoung has seen this message but not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024