| Origins Theology Forum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums. |
 | | 
23rd April 2008, 01:11 PM
|  | Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
      
| | Join Date: 9th February 2007 Location: United States of America
Posts: 5,829
Blessings: 57,953 My Mood 
Reps: 2,164,740,823,093,743 (power: 2,164,740,823,104) | | | To add to what Mallon said - how about the intermontane lakes of the eocene period that form the Green River Formation? Fossils galore and not catastrophic.
__________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
dir="ltr"> I'll be more enthusiastic about encouraging thinking outside the box when there's evidence of any thinking going on inside it.
Terry Pratchett |
23rd April 2008, 02:54 PM
| | Senior Veteran
62 
 | | Join Date: 25th October 2006
Posts: 2,598
Blessings: 93,776
Reps: 155,521,477 (power: 155,529) | | Originally Posted by Mallon 
I've examined some of the green river formation and it's fossils. The fossils there are indeed hydrodynamically produced. In some cases we have fossils that are of an unclear origin but the fact that special conditions have to exist for fossils to even form clearly limits the ways and means from where we get them.
To be clear here, I am not saying there are no examples at all of fossils formed outside of the global flood. They can be produced but they are rare indeed. True fossils demand rapid burial and extreme pressure with an oxygen free enviornment to be produced. Most of the fossils you say that are not from the flood are just relocated from their orginal compression site by erosion.
God Bless
Jim Larmore |
23rd April 2008, 03:01 PM
| | Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
| | Join Date: 9th February 2007 Location: United States of America
Posts: 5,829
Blessings: 57,953 My Mood
Reps: 2,164,740,823,093,743 (power: 2,164,740,823,104) | | | Evidence????
I have performed much research into the Green River Formation as well as similar sites across the world. It is not a case of a special condition...
Also, if fossils were eroded and re-deposited you would have signs of erosion on the fossil itself and it may not be re-deposited in sediment indicative of it's original environment...
You bring up more problems with YEC than you solve.
__________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
dir="ltr"> I'll be more enthusiastic about encouraging thinking outside the box when there's evidence of any thinking going on inside it.
Terry Pratchett |
23rd April 2008, 04:18 PM
| | Senior Veteran
62
| | Join Date: 25th October 2006
Posts: 2,598
Blessings: 93,776
Reps: 155,521,477 (power: 155,529) | | Originally Posted by Molal Evidence????
I have performed much research into the Green River Formation as well as similar sites across the world. It is not a case of a special condition...
Also, if fossils were eroded and re-deposited you would have signs of erosion on the fossil itself and it may not be re-deposited in sediment indicative of it's original environment...
You bring up more problems with YEC than you solve.
The area I observed was around "Fossil Butte" which is clearly a compression/wash in type dynamic. Literally millions of fish, insect and plant fossils.
God Bless
Jim Larmore |
23rd April 2008, 04:32 PM
| | Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
| | Join Date: 9th February 2007 Location: United States of America
Posts: 5,829
Blessings: 57,953 My Mood
Reps: 2,164,740,823,093,743 (power: 2,164,740,823,104) | | Originally Posted by Jimlarmore The area I observed was around "Fossil Butte" which is clearly a compression/wash in type dynamic. Literally millions of fish, insect and plant fossils.
God Bless
Jim Larmore
yes, a very well known, well researched area. Based on a quick review of the literature, there many hundreds of papers on the depositional environment of the facies in that area. Well researched, well known, nothing unusual.
Of course, if you disagree with the hundreds of published papers on this formation, then please provide evidence as to why the papers are incorrect.
Here are some papers that discuss both hydro and non-hydro fossils: You can obtain at your local library, or if you have access via an online service - you can probably obtain them from there. Simmons NB, Seymour KL, Habersetzer J, Gunnell GF.
Primitive Early Eocene bat from Wyoming and the evolution of flight and echolocation.
Nature. 2008 Feb 14;451(7180):818-21. Lowenstein TK, Demicco RV.
Elevated Eocene atmospheric CO2 and its subsequent decline.
Science. 2006 Sep 29;313(5795):1928. Johnson KL, Reinhardt KJ, Sianto L, Araújo A, Gardner SL, Janovy J Jr.
A tick from a prehistoric Arizona coprolite.
J Parasitol. 2008 Feb;94(1):296-8. Karlstrom KE, Bowring SA, Dehler CM, Knoll AH, Porter SM, Des Marais DJ, Weil AB, Sharp ZD, Geissman JW, Elrick MB, Timmons JM, Crossey LJ, Davidek KL.
Chuar Group of the Grand Canyon: record of breakup of Rodinia, associated change in the global carbon cycle, and ecosystem expansion by 740 Ma.
Geology. 2000 Jul;28(7):619-22.
The last paper sets the scene for the green river formation..........very interesting read and some fantastic data presented.
__________________ To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
dir="ltr"> I'll be more enthusiastic about encouraging thinking outside the box when there's evidence of any thinking going on inside it.
Terry Pratchett
Last edited by Molal; 23rd April 2008 at 04:38 PM.
| | |
| Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode |
| | |
