Tiktaalik ha ha

[EternalDragon]

The dry land did not contain any grasses or flowering plants during the Devonian. None.

That is because it is not a "time period". You will find the
grasses and flowers in upper sediment that was buried by
the world wide flood later.

 

[dad]

First you say that life evolved,then you call evolution a "Godless fable".Which is it?
You can't be on both sides of the ball court at the same time!
GOTCHA!

Nothing evolved that did not start out created first. Later, the former nature did allow evolving and adapting, of course. It allowed it to happen in a rapid way unlike we now observe also. In fact, it is possible that the living animal evolved rather than the offspring only! Now that would be fast! Science cannot even address the juicy issues.

 

[Loudmouth]

That is because it is not a "time period". You will find the
grasses and flowers in upper sediment that was buried by
the world wide flood later.

That is one of the funniest things I have ever read. When there is a flood on the plains, does the grass uproot itself and move to the top of the flood seidments? Do you realize how ludicrous that is?

 

[dad]

The whole fossil record is one big extinction event. The flood!

That would be a lot of fossils in one year. Have you any samples of men killed in the flood?

 

[Queller]

Last I heard, Trilobites were mostly scavengers living on the ocean floor.

Shellfish, crabs, crayfish, lobsters, halibut, flounder, catfish, and some sharks live and feed on the ocean floor but their fossils have NEVER been found with trilobites.

Same with grasses and flowers. They grow on land.

There are many types of grasses that grow underwater.

Funny how almost every period has a mysterious "extinction event" that scientists can't seem to explain.

You name an extinction event that "scientists can't seem to explain?

The whole fossil record is one big extinction event. The flood!

A worldwide flood would not the leave the fossil record the way it is. It's impossible.

 

[dad]

Oh, I didn't realize it was just a "silly dead fish"!

You did realize it was dead at least?

What a compelling counterargument to the variety of mosaic features it displays. Did you really just make an ad hom against the topic of discussion. It's particularly strange to pretend you never cared in the first place considering you started this thread.

The issue is not the poor dead fish, but the poor dead fables put on it. That is somewhat concerning, since it is part and parcel of an ungodly belief system.

The record attested to only by you. I'm new here, but I'm guessing your record consists of failing to argue the your views conform to reality and then invoking your endlessly convenient different-state past and then declaring victory.

I did not write Genesis. Really.

"Who cares" is the response of a surly teenager, not a real counterargument.

Seems to have gotten your goat.

... many things did not start dieing and showing up in the fossil record at the same time.

Things that died, like lions and men and most animals and even fish in the early days, could not fossilize. Why is not important. The different state past simply had other accommodations.


Therefore if you want to start claiming that all things that died ought to be in the early fossill record you are doing no more and no less than stating your belief in a same state past. A belief that can not be supported, rest assured.

Try to do more than preach here, it is a science forum.

 

[dad]

No, I do not. I believe what the bible states.

The trilobites and fish died in the early stages of the flood and were buried in sediment.

OK. Thanks. Did not men and a lot of other animals die in the early stages also? Would they be around too?

 

[dad]

Are you having trouble reading? Who did the designing is not the point.

It is all that matters in a design. Rubber and metal only do the bidding of their makers.

Nobody claims that the ancestor of an organism designed anything about the descendent organism. Where do you get this stuff?

Try to get the scene straight. If we are talking about creation day, then there were no ancestors. If you are talking about another scene, you need to be clear, so we can all look at it.

 

[Queller]

Things that died, like lions and men and most animals and even fish in the early days, could not fossilize. Why is not important. The different state past simply had other accommodations.

How do you know they couldn't fossilize? And yes, the why part of that question is very important. What is the evidence for a different state past?

 

[dad]

Oh, don't worry, logic won't bother him.

I used to be into flood geology. The problem is that once one starts to look at the vast amount of evidences in different areas the position becomes unsupportable.

 

[Queller]

It is all that matters in a design. Rubber and metal only do the bidding of their makers.

No one claimed anything different.

Try to get the scene straight. If we are talking about creation day, then there were no ancestors. If you are talking about another scene, you need to be clear, so we can all look at it.

We are talking about Mustangs, F150s and Model Ts. None of those were around on the day of creation. So a four-year can tell what scene we are talking about.

 

[dad]

Why not?

Well, how could we know? I could guess at a few factors. But we live in this state.

Specialized microbes and creatures could have specialized in rapid decomposition of certain creatures. We have in this state the snotworm, for example. That might give us some idea, but of course that is just a shadow of what coulld have happened in the different state past.
Man went from dust to dist...not to fossil apparently!

 

[Loudmouth]

I used to be into flood geology. The problem is that once one starts to look at the vast amount of evidences in different areas the position becomes unsupportable.

Then how do you explain the lack of dolphins, whales, flowering trees, grasses, mammals, reptiles, birds, and dinosaurs in Devonian strata? Why do we find forests of simple ferns, but not a single forest of elms or oaks? Why can't we find a single grassland environment in the Devonian?

 

[dad]

Because the former state has whichever property dad can think of to justify his beliefs.

In the future the bible talks of men decaying away while on their feet. That could be something that is aided and abetted by the return of the different state! Similarly man will live near a thousand years again.

 

[dad]

Then how do you explain the lack of dolphins, whales, flowering trees, grasses, mammals, reptiles, birds, and dinosaurs in Devonian strata?
Why do we find forests of simple ferns, but not a single forest of elms or oaks? Why can't we find a single grassland environment in the Devonian?

Good questions. I have to run, but plan to address in some detail this post maybe tonight.

 

[Queller]

Well, how could we know? I could guess at a few factors. But we live in this state.

Specialized microbes and creatures could have specialized in rapid decomposition of certain creatures. We have in this state the snotworm, for example. That might give us some idea, but of course that is just a shadow of what coulld have happened in the different state past.
Man went from dust to dist...not to fossil apparently!

I love it when you cut out part of my questions that is directly relevant to your claims. It just shows how intellectually dishonest you are.

I'll try again.

What is the evidence for a different state past?

 

[Herman Hedning]

I used to be into flood geology. The problem is that once one starts to look at the vast amount of evidences in different areas the position becomes unsupportable.

Indeed. The vast amount of evidence against floodism is very compelling. I'm glad to hear you admit to that.

 

[EternalDragon]

That would be a lot of fossils in one year. Have you any samples of men killed in the flood?

Define a lot. How many species of animals did we have then? How many humans were there in Noah's day?

On the other hand.....

Millions of years of human evolution with populations of say 100,000 people would leave lots of fossil evidence. How many do we have today? A couple hundred? Maybe a bit more if you count the ones they say are part ape but are just humans. But not that much.

Not sure where you are in terms of what is the correct view of the past.

 

[CabVet]

Not sure where you are in terms of what is the correct view of the past.

I am sure where he is: as far away from correct as you can get.

 

[BaconWizard]

You can see evolution.

The End.