padib said:
Dr.Grass said:
Rath said:
padib said:
Rath said:
So, apparently there has been a lot of research done on that on the creationist side and in fact they have found many anomalies in the fossil record, things that shouldn't appear in one place appear there in masses. It can mostly be explained due to the washing out by massive waters and depositing them in an unusual region, where you would not expect them (e.g. mountaintops, sea creatures in deserts). Did you also know that the process involved in the flood is an excellent means of fossilisation, if not the best? Apparently, there's a way to make fossils using home appliances that you can do at home (I think it's part of a kid's program or something). You make a mix of mud and water and make it tumble in a drier or washing machine, I can't remember which. The other mechanisms explained by the secular model leave place to erosion and predation to destroy the bones and structures found in fossils. Enlighten me here again, I'm limited on the secular explanation of fossils (for now)."
Fossils are relatively rare compared to the number of creatures that have existed because fossils do not form particularly easily. If the biblical flood did happen a single distinct geological strata with mixtures of fossilised flora and fauna of all types would be found. Instead there are distinct geological eras with distinct flora and fauna - you will never find dinosaur bones at a Cro-Magnon site for example. |
Sorry for the quadruple posting. I have a hard time with 5 quotes within the same post though, so I almost prefer multi-posting. So, the explanation is given in the article I provided:
http://www.nwcreation.net/fossilsorting.html
|
That article makes no sense. You find sea dwelling creatures such as the Plesiosaur amongst the dinosaurs and huge lowland dwelling creatures such as the Diprotodon amongst humans and other more recently existing creatures. Once again it's doing its best to make the evidence fit the theory, rather than looking at the evidence and building up a theory around it.
|
May I ask that you bow out from the 'young-earth' discussion? Trust me, its going nowhere, and is not necessarily on topic since everyone who believes in creation isn't a Christian, and many Christians don't even believe that the earth is only a few thousand years old.
|
For the sake of argument and going forward I would be willing to back from it, but I won't and I'll tell you why.
It does me less good because that's the position at the moment that fits my understanding of things. Since we're here to understand things, why shouldn't my view also be thrown into the mix and challenged as it has been up to now, I was fine with it. If it can help clarify things for me, and others, then why not? It's not like it's totally bogus, an age is but a number. Given variable rates, anything can change.
FTR I understand that not all Christians are young-earth creationists, that not all Christians are creationists, that not all creationists are Christian and that Christianity is not the only religion, and that not everyone is religious, that not all religions are monotheistic and everything related. I was just stating my position.
|
