Whale Fossils Discovered High Up In Andes Mountains

Open Heart

Well-Known Member
Aug 3, 2014
18,521
4,393
62
Southern California
✟49,214.00
Country
United States
Faith
Seeker
Marital Status
Celibate
I have all Sumerian accounts of the Flood and different translations of each account. One translation is short and broken and doesn't contain enough information to know much of the details. The epic of Atrahasis and Gilgamesh are both global Floods. Evolutionists only get away with saying these accounts are not global because they don't expect people to actually go out and get these documents.
Again, I'm not an atheist. Please stop calling me an atheist.

It has nothing to do with not expecting people to go out and actually get the documents. I hope people get the highest education they can. I'm sure you don't have the actual manuscripts. You either have copies of the manuscripts which you can't read, or you have translations of the manuscripts which you can read, or both. Whichever, I think it's really cool that you do.

What seems strange to me though is that you don't recognize that the literature is legend, but think that it's history. You do get it that it differs with the Noah account, so they can't both be history?

Basically, any cataclysmic local flood is going to be *experienced* as a "worldwide" flood, meaning the all the world as that community knew it at that time. There were no phones or planes or telegraphs or anything to connect the world back then. A large local territory was, for all practical purposes, "the world." It would then be encoded into legend as a worldwide flood.
 
Upvote 0

Isaiah60

Anglican
May 30, 2018
141
65
53
Janesville
✟13,235.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Again, I'm not an atheist. Please stop calling me an atheist.

Not sure how you got atheist over what was said. I merely pointed out that evolutionists make claims that are not true about Flood accounts.

It has nothing to do with not expecting people to go out and actually get the documents.

Yes it does. Evolutionists would be saying the things they do if everyone had those accounts to read at home. Most people don't. That is why they get away with lying.

I'm sure you don't have the actual manuscripts. You either have copies of the manuscripts which you can't read, or you have translations of the manuscripts which you can read, or both. Whichever, I think it's really cool that you do.

Well lets just hope that evolutionists have enough respect for their own religion of ancestry to be able to translate Sumerian accounts. Because all of the Sumerian accounts that I have (which are many) are translated by evolutionists. Even my Egyptian accounts are done by evolutionists. So lets hope they know how to translate their own religion. I would never trust evolutionists translating the Bible. Gees, atheists have already made false translations with the NIV'11 (which corrupts 40% of the NIV'84), the NRSV and NAB (all flat earth books). These translations are so obviously done by atheists its impossible to trust them. But at least they should probably show more respect for Babylonian antiquities since that is where their religious philosophies are traced to.
With that said, I have multiple translations of Flood accounts from Sumer-Babylon.

What seems strange to me though is that you don't recognize that the literature is legend, but think that it's history. You do get it that it differs with the Noah account, so they can't both be history?

The Babylonian legends are firmly rooted in history. There is truth to them. However, God agreed with the Genesis account. That account also has an ark that floats.

Basically, any cataclysmic local flood is going to be *experienced* as a "worldwide" flood, meaning the all the world as that community knew it at that time. There were no phones or planes or telegraphs or anything to connect the world back then. A large local territory was, for all practical purposes, "the world." It would then be encoded into legend as a worldwide flood.

That would only be true if the details of these accounts supported that hypothesis. Both these accounts, whether we are talking about the Genesis account, Babylonian accounts or whatever, they describe the ark above the mountains of the earth. When you read this stuff it cannot be a local Flood if the ark is above the mountains in all accounts. Only one account, the Eridu account, does not supply much for details and is very short without enough information to say much about it. I have that account and if anyone says it was either a global or local flood then they have not read the account. There is next to nothing for information in that account. But the Atrahasis epic and the more popular known Gilgamesh epic are global Floods in which the waters rise above the mountains just as we also read in Genesis.

I have no problem believing Genesis as the word of God. Some churches teach that Genesis never happened. But that is not the tradition of the church. So many churches today teach that Mark is the first Gospel written. That is not true either and tradition doesn't support it. Matthew was the first Gospel written which is why to this day its the first Gospel of the NT. I personally don't follow this liberal brand of Christianity as its too obviously fake. Therefore I live my life knowing I can trust God at His word and by doing so I am not stumbling over all these traps and zaps set by atheists meant to deceive us out of our faith. I just keep my eyes focused on Christ and don't care what liberals say about the Bible.
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,406
60
✟92,791.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
The conditions of fossilization, again, are rare. It takes a quick and rapid burial process to make it happen. Slow and gradual uplifts don't make fossils and whales dying a natural death don't become fossils. Everyone knows this but many want to deny it. The Flood covered the entire earth. Anything that died during this event was subject to rapid burial. Thus both land and marine creatures both discovered in sedimentary rock where we would expect to find fossils of living things that died in the Flood. Not being a politically driven person, my mind is free to think clearly without having to conform my thoughts to a political view. Therefore to me the Flood explains everything well.

Evolutionists believe life on earth died out when a large asteroid hit the earth. Big problem: the nuclear strength firestorm which circles the earth kills everything. Feathered birds could not have survived this catastrophe. Water would have all been dried up by the immense heat of the firestorm and the burning acid rainfall which came in the form of molted rock which had been flung up into the atmosphere and came back to further devastate the earth. All water on earth is gone. Nothing is left alive. Firestorms do not produce a fossil record in sedimentary rock. You can try to argue that these fossils are from an earlier date than the K-T event but you cannot explain-away why each and every fossil, including fossils from the alleged Cretaceous period, are all found lumped together in sedimentary rock, found in the order of the fastest/smartest moving creatures to the slowest moving creatures. Those creatures smart enough would take the high ground long before the Flood waters reached them. Whales, being very intelligent, would stay close to the surface of the waters to prevent from drowning. So some whales would be caught in the sediments during the Flood and others would be caught in receding waters and beached, per se, on the mountains. The process of rapid erosion would further corrode landmass and dead bodies still being buried in the sediments.
The damage of the Flood is clearly seen in what is now known as the large ocean basins. These were once all landmass before the Flood.


Job 14:18-19 New International Version (1984)
18 “But as a mountain erodes and crumbles
and as a rock is moved from its place,
19 as water wears away stones
and torrents wash away the soil
so you destroy man's hope.

Job witnessed, observed, erosion in his one lifetime and knew it was because of the Flood God sent on earth to destroy man's hope in Godlessness.
The whales would have had to be up there in the Andes, maybe hiking????? for your rapid flood covering theory to work.

There have been many floods and many continental movements over hundreds of millions of years that created the fossils that we dig up today.


Your mind is far from free to think outside of your religious bias.
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,406
60
✟92,791.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
The Bible is the written Word of God - every jot and every tittle.

God told us the story and He did not "invent" it. It is the truth.

Jesus, the living Word of God, is the embodiment of all truth. The Bible is the written Word of God and it is God breathed.

They are both reality - if you can receive it.


I can't speak for any particular scientist. It is my opinion that many have compromised their faith and taken the easy way out with their peers and the world.

I only know for sure what my relationship is to the Holy Spirit and I am trusting that He is guiding me into truth - because Jesus told me so.

That truth, in this case, is that the creation story is dependable and that evolution is pure nonsense.
That being the case your intellectual and spiritual growth is stunted, its limited by the doctrine of the inspiration of the scriptures. No amount of evidence will ever convince you. While confessing the sins of the world, religion fails to confess its own institutional pride.
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,406
60
✟92,791.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married

"four distinct levels, suggesting four separate mass strandings over a period of more than 10,000 years"

credit source The Washington Post

By Joel Achenbach February 25, 2014


New report studies amazing graveyard of fossilized whale skeletons unearthed in Chile

An ancient whale graveyard lies amid the Pan-American Highway project in Chile in 2011
Fossilwhales021393264993-k0MB--606x404@wp.com.jpg


The whales were found more than 120 feet above sea level, about two-thirds of a mile from the ocean, in ancient sandstones below what is now the northbound lane of the Pan-American Highway in the Atacama region of northern Chile.

Highway construction workers found the first skeletons. They called a nearby museum, and said: We found bones.

It has turned out to be one of most extraordinary marine mammal fossil sites on the planet. Scientists discovered more than 40 skeletons, most of them baleen whales, strewn across a small area in four distinct levels, suggesting four separate mass strandings over a period of more than 10,000 years. In one spot, the skeletons of two adult whales lay on top of the skeleton of a juvenile whale.

The site includes two seals, an extinct species of sperm whale, a walrus-like toothed whale, and an aquatic sloth. Most animals were belly-up, suggesting death at sea or shortly after washing ashore, said Nick Pyenson, curator of fossil marine mammals at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History.

Pyenson is the lead author of a paper describing the assemblage of cetacean fossils, published Tuesday evening in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B.


The likely cause of the mass strandings were harmful algal blooms, sometimes known as red tide. That’s the only obvious mechanism that could have repeatedly wiped out a variety of animals high in the food chain, Pyenson said.

The scientists estimate the age of the rock formation, and thus of the skeletons, at 6 million to 9 million years. In the time since, the tidal cove where the whales and other animals washed ashore has been lifted high above sea level by the immense tectonic forces that also created the Andes.

The existence of whale bones in this coastal desert has been known for years, and is reflected in the name of the site: Cerro Ballena — “Whale Hill.” But when the highway expansion began in 2010, and scientists were alerted to this new cache of fossils, they were astonished at the profusion of intact, highly articulated skeletons that showed no sign of having been scavenged before they were buried and fossilized.


A new report on the extraordinary discovery of a whale graveyard in the path of the Pan-American Highway











 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,406
60
✟92,791.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Something to consider to solve our disagreement, celestial beings, the Life Carriers, agents of God, created and fostered life on earth starting 550,000,000 years ago. That is to say, God created life as we know it using the technique of evolution.

Genesis is/was a pseudo-biographical narrative for consumption by the Israelites intended to buttress faith.
 
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
View attachment 230029
How long did this canyon form?
  • 4+ Billion yrs (evolution)
  • 6000 - 10,000 yrs (creation)
  • 6 days (the extreme opposite to evolution)

View attachment 230030
How long did this canyon form?
  • Billion of yrs (evolution)
  • 6000 - 10,000 yrs (creation)
  • hours (the extreme opposite to evolution)

View attachment 230031
How did this soft sediment of layers form?
  • Billion of yrs (evolution)
  • 6000 - 10,000 yrs (creation)
  • hours (the extreme opposite to evolution)

twin.spin,

You are pursuing only one theory of creation - young earth creationism. There are conservative evangelical Christians who consider there is evidence for an older earth than 6,000 - 10,000 years.

These scholars include Gleason Archer, Norman Geisler, Walter Kaiser, Hugh Ross and John Lennox.

Much of the publicity has promoted young earth creationism but there are arguments for an older earth among evangelicals.

Oz
 
  • Like
Reactions: Colter
Upvote 0

OzSpen

Regular Member
Oct 15, 2005
11,541
707
Brisbane, Qld., Australia
Visit site
✟125,343.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Private
There are many potential candidates in the geological record, such as the Black Sea deluge theory, the draining of glacial Lake Agassiz, the impact that created the Burckle Crater, etc.

I don't presume to know which one was the flood of Noah, however.

Don't you consider the biblical data that states:
  • 'The waters [of Noah's flood] rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits [20-30 feet or 6.8 metres] (Gen 7:20 NIV).
  • This is confirmed in Psalm 104:5-9.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,454
✟84,598.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
That being the case your intellectual and spiritual growth is stunted, its limited by the doctrine of the inspiration of the scriptures. No amount of evidence will ever convince you. While confessing the sins of the world, religion fails to confess its own institutional pride.
You've misrepresented yourself here.

You're not a seeker.

You're a prideful rebel and like men of old, professing to be wise, you've become a fool.
Something to consider to solve our disagreement, celestial beings, the Life Carriers, agents of God, created and fostered life on earth starting 550,000,000 years ago. That is to say, God created life as we know it using the technique of evolution.
I rest my case.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,406
60
✟92,791.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
You've misrepresented yourself here.

You're not a seeker.

You're a prideful rebel and like the men of old, professing to be wise, you've become a fool.
We have the bones and the earth, you have a story written by the self important people who killed the Son of God. All's you can do is call people names.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Strathos

No one important
Dec 11, 2012
12,663
6,531
God's Earth
✟263,276.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Don't you consider the biblical data that states:
  • 'The waters [of Noah's flood] rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits [20-30 feet or 6.8 metres] (Gen 7:20 NIV).
  • This is confirmed in Psalm 104:5-9.

That same Psalm says that the earth doesn't move, so forgive me for not taking it 100% literally. That said, I admit it's quite possible that some mountains were submerged.
 
Upvote 0

Marvin Knox

Senior Veteran
May 9, 2014
4,291
1,454
✟84,598.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Married
Genesis is/was a pseudo-biographical narrative for consumption by the Israelites intended to buttress faith.
We have the bones and the earth, you have a story written by the self important people who killed the Son of God. All's you can do is call people names.
Funny it doesn't sound much like you are seeking anything related to Christianity.

The Bible is inspired by the Spirit of the Son of God.

You believe the Son of God killed the Son of God?

Your foolish state is self evident and it doesn't need me to point it out to everyone here.

As for calling you names - I'm only repeating what the scriptures say about you.

"How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken!" Luke 24:25

By the way - it is the Son of God Himself who calls you these names.

You aren't alone in the foolishness of exchanging the truth for the lie of evolution. There are many here who obviously have done the same.

As you rightly point out -- there are men who are professed scientists who have done the same and have therefore become fools as well - the otherwise brilliant Hugh Ross for instance.

I single him out because he has not only believed a lie himself but has taken it upon himself to drag other believers into his foolish state.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,196
11,429
76
✟367,814.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Don't you consider the biblical data that states:
  • 'The waters [of Noah's flood] rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than fifteen cubits [20-30 feet or 6.8 metres] (Gen 7:20 NIV).
  • This is confirmed in Psalm 104:5-9.

There are mountains in the Black Sea that were covered when the basin flooded, so that makes sense.
 
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,196
11,429
76
✟367,814.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
The conditions of fossilization, again, are rare.

For most vertebrates, it's unusual. But for marine inveretebrates, it's rather common.

It takes a quick and rapid burial process to make it happen.

Say, a whale dies, sinks to the bottom of an anoxic area, and is slowly covered by sediment. That's the usual way.

Slow and gradual uplifts don't make fossils and whales dying a natural death don't become fossils.

The fossils were there before the ocean bottom was uplifted. You couldn't have marine limestone forming out of the water. Thought you knew.

Evolutionists believe life on earth died out when a large asteroid hit the earth.

Just some of them.

Big problem: the nuclear strength firestorm which circles the earth kills everything.

Don't believe everything you see on You Tube. The Chicxulub object was maybe 12 kilometers across, too small to cause such an effect. You'd need something hundreds of kilometers across to do that.

Feathered birds could not have survived this catastrophe.

Most land animals bigger than a few kilograms died out, but many of the smaller animals came through it. The oceans did better, it seems.

Firestorms do not produce a fossil record in sedimentary rock.

There wasn't a worldwide firestorm. But dust did go worldwide, as evidenced by Iridium in the KT boundary.

You can try to argue that these fossils are from an earlier date than the K-T event but you cannot explain-away why each and every fossil, including fossils from the alleged Cretaceous period, are all found lumped together in sedimentary rock

They aren't. No dinosaurs in the Permian. No trilobites in the Creataceous.

found in the order of the fastest/smartest moving creatures to the slowest moving creatures. Those creatures smart enough would take the high ground long before the Flood waters reached them.

So the swift sloths outran the slow velociraptors? (Try saying "swift sloths" three times, real fast) And the speedy oak trees out ran the slow alethopteris?

?
 
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,406
60
✟92,791.00
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Funny it doesn't sound much like you are seeking anything related to Christianity.

The Bible is inspired by the Spirit of the Son of God.

You believe the Son of God killed the Son of God?

Your foolish state is self evident and it doesn't need me to point it out to everyone here.

As for calling you names - I'm only repeating what the scriptures say about you.

"How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken!" Luke 24:25

By the way - it is the Son of God Himself who calls you these names.

You aren't alone in the foolishness of exchanging the truth for the lie of evolution. There are many here who obviously have done the same.

As you rightly point out -- there are men who are professed scientists who have done the same and have therefore become fools as well - the otherwise brilliant Hugh Ross for instance.

I single him out because he has not only believed a lie himself but has taken it upon himself to drag other believers into his foolish state.
skulls.gif


When the Israelite holy men were writing their history they didn't know anything about evolution or science. They just assumed that Adam and Eve were the first humans. They were writing for other Israelites who had simple child like minds.
 

Attachments

  • grandcanyon-rocklayers.jpg
    grandcanyon-rocklayers.jpg
    277.2 KB · Views: 5
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Isaiah60

Anglican
May 30, 2018
141
65
53
Janesville
✟13,235.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
For most vertebrates, it's unusual. But for marine inveretebrates, it's rather common.

Boy you got philosophy for everything don't you. But its not science. Your philosophy is not witnessed for observed. The Flood was. So you are to have me believe that the earth at one time was covered with water and whales existed on the evolutionary timeline at this point in time before landmass? I have plenty of maps of the early earth according to evolutionists and there is more landmass and even mountainous landmass long before whales are alleged to evolved. So since there are marine fossils at all mountain peaks, you are to have me believe that all the mountains of the world we see today were all ground level at one time? Perhaps the whales were before the first mountains? Nothing you say makes any sense and cannot be verifiable. Its philosophy and sophist philosophy at that.



Say, a whale dies, sinks to the bottom of an anoxic area, and is slowly covered by sediment. That's the usual way.

Then this usual way should be seen in dead whales from back in the 1800s as well. Here again what you are saying here is sophist philosophy which is not science. Its good for arguing but bad science. You assume the mountain peaks were never above sea level but the early earth model doesn't even explain the origin of water let along an entire earth that is all water before landmass appears. You're coming up with excuse after excuse and none of it makes any logical sense.



FThe fossils were there before the ocean bottom was uplifted. You couldn't have marine limestone forming out of the water. Thought you knew.

Again, this assumes the Darwinian timeline is flexible enough to believe whales evolved on earth before mountainous ranges. There is zero evidence the mountains were not mountains before whales using your own Darwinian timeline. So your are arguing to win but not learning anything.



Don't believe everything you see on You Tube. The Chicxulub object was maybe 12 kilometers across, too small to cause such an effect. You'd need something hundreds of kilometers across to do that.

ALL evolutionist documentaries on youtube first are seen on the Science Channel. Do your gods lie? When the gods speak do you listen to them? I have seen documentary after documentary and your gods all show the entire earth being encircled by the firestorm. That is what all your gods say. All videos put out show a catastrophe that nothing can survive. So in your argument you defy what all your gods whom you worship say about evolution. So deviating from the theory is not convincing. You are aware that evolutionists are slowly trying to accept the worldwide Flood, right? Perhaps you need to be updated. Evolutionists, your gods, know the Flood explains mass extinction and because of everything I've said here. But you defy your own gods, being the mere mortal men they are. No surprise.



Most land animals bigger than a few kilograms died out, but many of the smaller animals came through it. The oceans did better, it seems.

No. Nothing would have survived all that. Every single documentary says the same thing. The model of the asteroid, in reality, would have wiped out all life. How do you explain how feathered birds made it? What do you know about birds? The noxious cloud would have wiped them all out. But the firestorm itself is enough to destroy the entire ecosystem of life on earth. You evolutionist don't seem to understand how the chain of life works.

There wasn't a worldwide firestorm. But dust did go worldwide, as evidenced by Iridium in the KT boundary.

You place too much trust in mortal men who make up fanciful and complex theories they themselves cannot break down to any for of rational explanation. You may disagree with your own timeline, make up excuses that have no support, but its all hollow philosophy. The truth is simple and its been right in front of us the whole time. You are allowing yourself to be deceived and all because you don't want to be saved. Sad.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: USincognito
Upvote 0

The Barbarian

Crabby Old White Guy
Apr 3, 2003
26,196
11,429
76
✟367,814.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Libertarian
Barbarian,regarding fossilization:
For most vertebrates, it's unusual. But for marine inveretebrates, it's rather common.

Boy you got philosophy for everything don't you.

Facts, not philosophy. Most limestone is made of fossils of marine invertebrates. Here's a simplified discussion of the fact:

Limestone is a sedimentary rock made almost entirely of fossils.
OLogy

But its not science.

They lied to you about that. As you now see, most limestone is made of marine invertebrates with a few vertebrates here and there.

Your philosophy is not witnessed for observed. The Flood was.

Well, no one today ever actually saw it, but the evidence for a great regional flood in what is now the Black Sea basin is pretty good.

So you are to have me believe that the earth at one time was covered with water

Nope. Never completely. But mostly covered.

and whales existed on the evolutionary timeline at this point in time before landmass?

Nope. I have no idea how you got that notion.

So since there are marine fossils at all mountain peaks, you are to have me believe that all the mountains of the world we see today were all ground level at one time?

Can't think of any that weren't. The eastern part of the Andes, like the Himalayas, were at one time under the sea. That's why they are mostly made of marine fossils.

Perhaps the whales were before the first mountains?

No one suggested that. You made that up on your own.

Nothing you say makes any sense and cannot be verifiable. Its philosophy and sophist philosophy at that.

You'd probably do better if you left your philosophy behind, and just dealt with the facts.

Then this usual way should be seen in dead whales from back in the 1800s as well.

Yep. Here and there, there are bones of dead whales being buried. Sometimes, we find them. A few of them end up in anoxic areas where they are buried before they decompose.
091202-02-whale-bones-worm-habitat_big.jpg



You assume the mountain peaks were never above sea level

Those, like parts of the Andes and the Himalayas, that are composed of the fossils of marine organisms, make that certain.

Maybe a quick introduction to geology would be a good thing for you to learn.

Barbarian observes:
The fossils were there before the ocean bottom was uplifted. You couldn't have marine limestone forming out of the water. Thought you knew

Again, this assumes the Darwinian timeline is flexible enough to believe whales evolved on earth before mountainous ranges.

Nope. Just before those particular mountains. Just north of me are the remains of Cambrian mountains, almost completely worn down. They are much older than whales. Again, a short intro to geology would help you a lot.

Barbarian suggests:
Don't believe everything you see on You Tube. The Chicxulub object was maybe 12 kilometers across, too small to cause such an effect. You'd need something hundreds of kilometers across to do that.

Do your gods lie?

There's only one God. And He is truth. Sorry about yours.

I have seen documentary after documentary and your gods all show the entire earth being encircled by the firestorm.

I took a look on You Tube. The ones I see are simulations of what would happen if a 500km asteroid hit the Earth. The Chicxulub object was maybe 12 km. So that's why there wasn't a global firestorm.

You are aware that evolutionists are slowly trying to accept the worldwide Flood, right?

I know that there aren't many Christians who accept the modern doctrine of a global flood. Even among evangelicals, who aren't as up on the Bible as most of their fellow Christians, are beginning to accept the flood story as written, rather than as a global flood.

No. Nothing would have survived all that. Every single documentary says the same thing. The model of the asteroid, in reality, would have wiped out all life.

See above. You were confused by the simulation of a 500km asteroid; the real one was more like 12 km.

How do you explain how feathered birds made it? What do you know about birds?

Smaller land animals tended to survive. All the large ones died. As you know, birds tend to be small.

Remember, the more you know, the less likely you are to be fooled like this.
 
Upvote 0

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,442
2,801
Hartford, Connecticut
✟296,178.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Well that's an interesting theory you have and a desperate one at that. Very creative, though. However, we are faced with the reality that we no longer have any modern whale fossils. Decomposition does not automatically=fossil. And these slow and gradual uplifts actually hurt this theory as fossilization, as everyone knows, is a process which involves a quick and rapid burial of a creature in the sediments. It is here that we see the physical process of fossilization occur on land and sea. Fossilization is very rare and doesn't happen all the time. So the whales in the Andes were more than likely killed in the global Flood which has been an account preserved by all ancient antiquity which was an event not equaled in any other history.
But as usually, atheists will reject the Flood because with the Flood comes accountability of the soul. That is why the Flood is rejected. That is not science. Atheists come up with all these wild and super complex theories when the truth is so simple.
Fossilization occurs independently of uplift . The timing and occurance of fossilization really has nothing to do with the uplift.

Why do you think that rapid burial for fossilization is in conflict with gradual uplift?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Job 33:6

Well-Known Member
Jun 15, 2017
7,442
2,801
Hartford, Connecticut
✟296,178.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
@Isaiah60

You're mistaken in suggesting that there are whale or marine fossils on top of every mountain. Most, if not all mountains, may, in part, contain rocks of marine origin. But this is not the same as saying that all marine rocks contain whale fossils, nor that all mountain tops contain whale fossils.

Also, marine layers are not always at the peaks of mountains. If many layers are raised during uplift, typically in mountains you get a mix of terrestrial and marine rock.

For example, you can find terrestrial tetrapod fossils along mountain ranges of the east coast in the US. These are not marine fossils. So mountains often consist of both marine and terrestrial fossils.

Catskill Formation - Wikipedia
fig56.jpg

NortheastAppalachiansMap.jpg


See, catskill at the top,
" The rocks of the Catskill are predominantly red sandstone indicating a large scale terrestrial deposition during the Acadian orogeny"

These are devonian, and have terrestrial tetrapod fossils within the catskill at the peak of mountains in new york.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: USincognito
Upvote 0