Challenge: Explain the fossil record without evolution

[joshua 1 9]

Yes, it is. And your question indicates that atheism is another subject that you do not understand. Let me help you. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in a god or gods. I can assure you that it is a fact that I lack such a belief.

How can you believe or not believe in what you admit you do not understand?

 

[-57]

Floods happen all the time, and they drown large numbers of people and animals. Any book about natural disasters will tell you that.

I'll stick with the book that describes a world wide flood.

 

[lasthero]

I'll stick with the book that describes a world wide flood.

The Epic of Gilgamesh?

 

[Reasoning]

Atheism is a religion.

Saying it more often is not going to make it any more true.

 

[Subduction Zone]

How can you believe or not believe in what you admit you do not understand?

What are you talking about? I understand what I post about. Clearly you don't. You make basic science mistakes when attacking evolution and now you are making basic mistakes about atheism, showing that you have no understanding of that either.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'll stick with the book that describes a world wide flood.

It is not a smart choice to stick with a book that has been shown to be wrong. I guess that means you will disagree with any books that make such basic claims as "ice floats".

 

[joshua 1 9]

What are you talking about? I understand what I post about. Clearly you don't. You make basic science mistakes when attacking evolution and now you are making basic mistakes about atheism, showing that you have no understanding of that either.

Clearly you are guilty of what you accuse others of. It is called projection. Some consider it a law and under some conditions it is. It is considered to be one of the most challenging forms of self deception to understand. So no matter how you crunch the number you are the one that is guilty of not understanding. If you had not accused me I would not have known. When you accused me then you exposed yourself. This is one of those Bible principles that is well established in Science. Thus this is also an example of scientific evidence for the Bible. Not very often do I use the science of psychology as evidence but that is where you wanted to go with this one.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...201110/the-essential-guide-defense-mechanisms

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

 

[Reasoning]

Clearly you are guilty of what you accuse others of. It is called projection. Some consider it a law and under some conditions it is. It is considered to be one of the most challenging forms of self deception to understand. So no matter how you crunch the number you are the one that is guilty of not understanding. If you had not accused me I would not have known. When you accused me then you exposed yourself. This is one of those Bible principles that is well established in Science. Thus this is also an example of scientific evidence for the Bible. Not very often do I use the science of psychology as evidence but that is where you wanted to go with this one.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...201110/the-essential-guide-defense-mechanisms

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Right, awesome addition. So how did you explain the fossil record without evolution?

 

[fargonic]

The chemistry of you and your sect changing the bible?

No, the refutation of the Fe-preservation hypothesis that you claim was debunked in the book you read.

You DID read the book right? Explain to me the problems with the hypothesis....chemically. Please. Thanks.

 

[joshua 1 9]

I'll stick with the book that describes a world wide flood.

Actually in the Bible the Hebrew word is Adamah. There was a world wide extinction around 12,000 years ago. The date does not line up with Noah's flood around 4500 years ago. Although they seem to be tired together in some way. Just like today our global warming began around 12,000 years ago and this is just an extension of that. First the world was cleansed with water and soon the world will be cleansed with fire. Just as we are baptized and cleansed in water and then in fire.

0127 // hmda // 'adamah // ad-aw-maw' //

from 0119 ; TWOT - 25b; n f

AV - land(s) 125, earth 53, ground 43, country 1, husbandman 2,
husbandry 1; 225

1) ground, land
1a) ground (as general, tilled, yielding sustenance)
1b) piece of ground, a specific plot of land
1c) earth substance (for building or constructing)
1d) ground as earth's visible surface
1e) land, territory, country
1f) whole inhabited earth
1g) city in Naphtali

 

[fargonic]

Fossils are often found in the "death throse" position. The animals show signs of asphyxiation....head thrown back, hind limbs bent, tail extended. This stronly suggest rapid burial under muddy layers of now-hardened sediment which thwarted bacterial decay and predators. But then again you evos already knew that.

There is a scientific explanation for the "Death Pose" of which you speak, if you are interested in wandering afield of the stuff that will only confirm your bias.

The American Museum of Natural History has this: http://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/din...coveries/sauropod-biomechanics/the-death-pose

Of course the discussion is a bit nuanced and may include the "death throes" hypothesis you prefer, but your bias seems to allow only ONE mechanism to be in play.

Other researchers have done studies with recently deceased chickens (you may not know this but birds are descended from dinosaurs): http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/i...tists-study-dinosaur-death-pose/#.VqRAavkrLIU

The problem with YEC folks is that they reject outright anything that doesn't clearly confirm their bias and only allow those explanations that fit their bias. Real science takes into account all the evidence and often comes up with more subtle and nuaced explanations.

Oh, BTW, I'm still waiting for you to write out what you learned from the book about Fe-preservation of soft tissue. I mean you read the book, presumably you understood it enough to discuss it with us.

 

[bhsmte]

Right, awesome addition. So how did you explain the fossil record without evolution?

He explains it, by talking about everything, but the topic of the thread.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Clearly you are guilty of what you accuse others of. It is called projection. Some consider it a law and under some conditions it is. It is considered to be one of the most challenging forms of self deception to understand. So no matter how you crunch the number you are the one that is guilty of not understanding. If you had not accused me I would not have known. When you accused me then you exposed yourself. This is one of those Bible principles that is well established in Science. Thus this is also an example of scientific evidence for the Bible. Not very often do I use the science of psychology as evidence but that is where you wanted to go with this one.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blo...201110/the-essential-guide-defense-mechanisms

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

Don't be foolish. And quit playing childish games. Once again, I can support my claims. So far you have not been able to. But you are very good at copying arguments used against you. Now are you going to try to have an adult conversation here or not? It is clear that you are terribly ignorant about almost everything you argue about to date.

As I always tell creationists, when yo don't understand, ask questions, and do so politely.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Actually in the Bible the Hebrew word is Adamah. There was a world wide extinction around 12,000 years ago. The date does not line up with Noah's flood around 4500 years ago. Although they seem to be tired together in some way. Just like today our global warming began around 12,000 years ago and this is just an extension of that. First the world was cleansed with water and soon the world will be cleansed with fire. Just as we are baptized and cleansed in water and then in fire.

0127 // hmda // 'adamah // ad-aw-maw' //

from 0119 ; TWOT - 25b; n f

AV - land(s) 125, earth 53, ground 43, country 1, husbandman 2,
husbandry 1; 225

1) ground, land
1a) ground (as general, tilled, yielding sustenance)
1b) piece of ground, a specific plot of land
1c) earth substance (for building or constructing)
1d) ground as earth's visible surface
1e) land, territory, country
1f) whole inhabited earth
1g) city in Naphtali

And no, there was not a worldwide extinction 12,000 years ago. There were some events that can be tied very roughly to that time, but to call it a worldwide event would be an error on your part. So citation please. Show me this worldwide extinction event.

As to there being a local flood that the Noah's Ark story was based upon, that is probably true. The flood and not the Ark. The Ark never happened and would have been superfluous if it was ever made.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Right, awesome addition. So how did you explain the fossil record without evolution?

The fossils are understood in relation to where they are in the geological record. The book I am reading is called: "The story of the Earth". The reason he takes this perspective is that all life came from the elements or the rocks of the earth. So when your looking at the 4.5 billion year history of the earth you have to follow the flow of events from the beginning.

I just got a fossil in the mail today that dates back to the Cambrian explosion. So I am looking on the stone that the fossil is in. I can take a better photo this is just with my phone. This is the first hard body parts and they survived better then the soft body parts that came before them. We know that their carbonate bioskeleton contributed to massive resistant limestone layers. Limestone is a material that we use in Construction, in cement for example. Our buildings are made out of organic material. The limestone comes from the skeleton of a species that was alive at one time. So evolution or what we used to call nature takes this rock and turns it into life. Then we take the remains and use it for our construction material.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Don't be foolish. And quit playing childish games. Once again, I can support my claims. So far you have not been able to. But you are very good at copying arguments used against you. Now are you going to try to have an adult conversation here or not? It is clear that you are terribly ignorant about almost everything you argue about to date.

As I always tell creationists, when yo don't understand, ask questions, and do so politely.

What claim do you think you can support that I am ignorant and don't know nothing? How absurd we are talking about the sixth extinction and we are talking about the Cambrian explosion. People who don't know nothing, don't know nothing about extinctions and explosions and many other area of science that we discuss all the time. Your claim that is a violation of the rules is beyond absurd.

Again you accuse me of: "childish games". Which again means this is what you are guilty of. You need to study this concept a little bit better because you still have not figured this principle out. Again you are exposing yourself. That is fine with me if you want to reveal yourself in this way, but I am just not sure this is what you would consider to be in your best interest.

 

[Subduction Zone]

What claim do you think you can support that I am ignorant and don't know nothing? How absurd we are talking about the sixth extinction and we are talking about the Cambrian explosion. People who don't know nothing, don't know nothing about extinctions and explosions and many other area of science that we discuss all the time. Your claim that is a violation of the rules is beyond absurd.

You don't seem to even know what the word "ignorant" means, at least in the context that it was being used. You have demonstrated your ignorance on specific topics. When you made rather ignorant statements I called your attention to those errors of yours. When I pointed out your ignorance in some topics that does not mean that you are ignorant in all topics. Also your use of double negatives is indicative that you are rather ignorant about the English language as a whole.

Again you accuse me of: "childish games". Which again means this is what you are guilty of. You need to study this concept a little bit better because you still have not figured this principle out. Again you are exposing yourself. That is fine with me if you want to reveal yourself in this way, but I am just not sure this is what you would consider to be in your best interest.

And again, you are playing childish games. Can you grow up please? I am sure that you have been accused, rightfully, of projection many times in the past. Here is a hint, make sure that you are not projecting when you falsely accuse others of projecting.

 

[joshua 1 9]

And no, there was not a worldwide extinction 12,000 years ago. There were some events that can be tied very roughly to that time, but to call it a worldwide event would be an error on your part. So citation please. Show me this worldwide extinction event.

As to there being a local flood that the Noah's Ark story was based upon, that is probably true. The flood and not the Ark. The Ark never happened and would have been superfluous if it was ever made.

We are in the sixth extinction. It began at that time of the holocene extinction. I am reading the book:"The sixth extinction" that deals with all of this. It is a winner of a Pulitzer prize. Of course sense I am ignorant and don't know nothing about science then perhaps you can explain to me what the significance is of a Pulitzer prize. I am sure you know a lot more about "The sixth extinction" then I do. Actually I really have one question sense you offer. What percentage of the species went extinct during the holocene extinction?

Why do I have more likes then you even though you have four times as many messages as I do? Sense I am 64 and you feel I need to "grow up" then maybe I am going through my second childhood.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We are in the sixth extinction. It began at that time of the holocene extinction. I am reading the book:"The sixth extinction" that deals with all of this. It is a winner of a Pulitzer prize. Of course sense I am ignorant and don't know nothing about science then perhaps you can explain to me what the significance is of a Pulitzer prize. I am sure you know a lot more about "The sixth extinction" then I do. Actually I really have one question sense you offer. What percentage of the species went extinct during the holocene extinction?

Why do I have more likes then you even though you have four times as many messages as I do?

Reading does not mean that you understand. Here is your error:

"There was a world wide extinction around 12,000 years ago."

Please note that you used the past tense. The Holocene Extinction began about 12,000 years ago, it is still going on. Your sentence implied that it was finished when it just began. That is a hug error on your part.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Reading does not mean that you understand. Here is your error:

"There was a world wide extinction around 12,000 years ago."

Please note that you used the past tense. The Holocene Extinction began about 12,000 years ago, it is still going on. Your sentence implied that it was finished when it just began. That is a hug error on your part.

I only asked one question. What percent of the species went extinct on a world wide bases so far in this extinction?