Dinosaur footprints destroy flood geology.

[ChordatesLegacy]

Throughout the Mesozoic (Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous 250-56 ma) strata there are 10s of thousands of dinosaur tracks as well as tracks made by other creatures.

HOW CAN THIS BE, all these sediments are supposedly FLOOD DEPOSITS. Particularly in Britain where the Carboniferous is overlain by Mesozoic sediments, because creationists have already stated that the Carboniferous coal measures were formed from floating forests than sank, many time in the British coal fields case (of course this has been disproved a thousand times).

So if we believe the YEC, Britain was already a sunken Island by the time the Carboniferous was over, so how can you have dino footprints in sediments laid down on top of the Carboniferous, unless of course Britain was not cover by the flood.

Again YEC are wrong, their ideas are wrong, their geology is wrong, their religion is wrong.


Jurassic



Triassic





Cretaceous


All these footprints are in sediments which according to YEC show have been laid down well into the flood year.

YEC Wrong Again

 

[Nathan Poe]

Dinosaurs FTW.

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

These dino foot prints are in the Triassic of Wales, which overlays the Carboniferous indicating that the Triassic was not covered by the YEC Flood.

 

[AV1611VET]

Throughout the Mesozoic (Triassic, Jurassic and Cretaceous 250-56 ma) strata there are 10s of thousands of dinosaur tracks as well as tracks made by other creatures.

HOW CAN THIS BE, all these sediments are supposedly FLOOD DEPOSITS. Particularly in Britain where the Carboniferous is overlain by Mesozoic sediments, because creationists have already stated that the Carboniferous coal measures were formed from floating forests than sank, many time in the British coal fields case (of course this has been disproved a thousand times).

So if we believe the YEC, Britain was already a sunken Island by the time the Carboniferous was over, so how can you have dino footprints in sediments laid down on top of the Carboniferous, unless of course Britain was not cover by the flood.

Again YEC are wrong, their ideas are wrong, their geology is wrong, their religion is wrong.

I didn't understand a word of this.

Britian was already a sunken Island --- yet --- Britain was not cover [sic] by the flood?

I'm under the impression Britain wasn't even an island during the Flood.

I guess I'll just MYOB and let someone else handle this.

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

I didn't understand a word of this.

Britian was already a sunken Island --- yet --- Britain was not cover [sic] by the flood?

I'm under the impression Britain wasn't even an island during the Flood.

I guess I'll just MYOB and let someone else handle this.

OK; the point of this thread is this

YEC claim that the Mesozoic sediments are flood deposits

Dino foot prints proves them wrong

 

[AV1611VET]

OK; the point of this thread is this

YEC claim that the Mesozoic sediments are flood deposits

Dino foot prints proves them wrong

Again, what's the problem?

At the risk of getting on that fsbvd site, I'll ask this:

Okay, so the Flood left deposits that dinosaurs stepped in --- what's the Hullabaloo?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Again, what's the problem?

At the risk of getting on that fsbvd site, I'll ask this:

Okay, so the Flood left deposits that dinosaurs stepped in --- what's the Hullabaloo?

That would only be possible if the dinos survived the flood, and then stepped in the deposits laft after the flood waters receded.

The YEC position is that dinos were killed before/during the flood. But then the first question of many is: If the flood didn't kill the dinos, what did?

Not to mention the question of having to recalculate the logistics of Noah's magic boat, since we now have to allow for two each of several thousand dinosaur "Kinds."

 

[AV1611VET]

The YEC position is that dinos were killed before/during the flood.

Then YECs are wrong --- dinosaurs are mentioned in Job, who lived after the Flood.

 

[Nathan Poe]

Then YECs are wrong --- dinosaurs are mentioned in Job, who lived after the Flood.

Mentioned, yes... but do they actually appear?

And "YECs are wrong" should pretty much go without saying -- but it still leaves us with the problem of what happened to tens of thousands of species of dinosaurs?

Some sort of Jurassic Rapture?

 

[AV1611VET]

Mentioned, yes... but do they actually appear?

And "YECs are wrong" should pretty much go without saying -- but it still leaves us with the problem of what happened to tens of thousands of species of dinosaurs?

Some sort of Jurassic Rapture?

The dinosaurs that got off the Ark couldn't handle the new, sans water canopy climatology, and those that couldn't adapt died during the ice age that followed.

 

[Nathan Poe]

The dinosaurs that got off the Ark couldn't handle the new, sans water canopy climatology, and those that couldn't adapt died during the ice age that followed.

The beauty of your hypothesis lies in the fact that it's utterly unprovable. Why did the Dinos need the magic ice canopy?

Of course, that would also mean that the ice age had to have happened within the last, say... 4000 years or so.

Funny how nobody living at the time noticed how cold it was getting.

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

Again, what's the problem?

At the risk of getting on that fsbvd site, I'll ask this:

Okay, so the Flood left deposits that dinosaurs stepped in --- what's the Hullabaloo?

Sorry but your lack of geological knowledge is letting you down. Dino prints can be found throughout the Mesozoic sediments all over the world. Now if dino’s were leaving foot prints it is clear that the ground they were walking on was not below water, or at the very least shallow water. So the conclusion is; right through the Mesozoic there was dry land.

If this was not evidence enough, lets take a look at the Paleozoic ~543-248 ma. The YEC idea on how the Carboniferous coals formed is that there were floating forests that sank and formed the coal seams; this would have happened hundreds of times for the coal seams we see today to have formed. But these sediments are found below the Mesozoic sediments that contain dino foot prints.


So from the YEC parody of Earth’s history these sediments were laid down below water, but this is impossible because there is clear evidence that during the Paleozoic and Mesozoic there was dry land and that the sediments associated with these time periods are NOT global flood deposits.

Again dry land; these Mesozic sediments containing dino foot prints are not flood deposits.

 

[Assyrian]

The footprints in the first pic are obviously recent because there is a pen in it.

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

And this one is modern because theres a man in it

More dino tracks in so called YEC flood deposits

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry but your lack of geological knowledge is letting you down.

If I'm "let down," I'm "let down" because you guys cannot explain this to me. And I'm sorry, but I still don't get it; and the reason I conclude I don't get it is because your answers (and OP) are mixing long-history terminology (Mesozoic, etc.) with a short-history paradigm (YEC).

Dino prints can be found throughout the Mesozoic sediments all over the world.

What's a "Mesozoic sediment"? You're trying to fit a square peg (long-history paradigm) into a round hole (short-history paradigm).

Now if dino’s were leaving foot prints it is clear that the ground they were walking on was not below water, or at the very least shallow water.

This sentence is easy to agree with. The Bible makes it clear the waters were abated.

[bible]Genesis 8:3[/bible]

So the conclusion is; right through the Mesozoic there was dry land.

Here we go again.

If this was not evidence enough, lets take a look at the Paleozoic ~543-248 ma.

Okay --- I'm done --- I guess I'll just celebrate my confusion.

 

[Nathan Poe]

If I'm "let down," I'm "let down" because you guys cannot explain this to me.

Nobody ever said it'd be easy to teach the unwilling.

And I'm sorry, but I still don't get it; and the reason I conclude I don't get it is because your answers (and OP) are mixing long-history terminology (Mesozoic, etc.) with a short-history paradigm (YEC).

Because the facts do not fit the paradigm -- but your own pride prohibits you from abandoning it.

What's a "Mesozoic sediment"? You're trying to fit a square peg (long-history paradigm) into a round hole (short-history paradigm).

Indeed -- it's proving difficult -- and not worth the effort -- to show you the square hole into which the peg fits.

Okay --- I'm done --- I guess I'll just celebrate my confusion.

Be sure to give the Author of your confusion the proper credit.

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

If I'm "let down," I'm "let down" because you guys cannot explain this to me. And I'm sorry, but I still don't get it; and the reason I conclude I don't get it is because your answers (and OP) are mixing long-history terminology (Mesozoic, etc.) with a short-history paradigm (YEC).



What's a "Mesozoic sediment"? You're trying to fit a square peg (long-history paradigm) into a round hole (short-history paradigm).



This sentence is easy to agree with. The Bible makes it clear the waters were abated.

[bible]Genesis 8:3[/bible]



Here we go again.



Okay --- I'm done --- I guess I'll just celebrate my confusion.

OK; lets for the purpose of this decision accept the YEC paradigm, and that the global flood did occur. The best answer I can get from YEC about the global flood and where it fits in with geology is that all the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic sediments are flood deposits.

The top of the Palaeozoic is the Carboniferous, which is famous for its coal deposits, which according to YEC were formed by the sinking of massive oceanic (floating) forests. This has already been proved wrong in THIS THREAD which shows that the Carboniferous and indeed the Mesozoic are full of soil horizons, i.e. dry land.

Dinosaur foot prints, tracks and nests prove without question that the Mesozoic sediments are not the product of a global flood.

So the flood deposits have palaeosols (fossil soils), dinosaur tracks, dinosaur nests and land animal burrows. All of which even you must admit is all solid evidence that these sediments are not the product of the global flood.


Fossil Burrows in Mesozoic sediments (Land)

 

[AV1611VET]

OK; lets for the purpose of this decision accept the YEC paradigm, and that the global flood did occur. The best answer I can get from YEC about the global flood and where it fits in with geology is that all the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic sediments are flood deposits.

But suppose God removed the water upward --- say, took it to Mars, as Dad suggested; or Neptune, as I suggested?

How would that affect what we interpret today, geologically?

 

[Chalnoth]

But suppose God removed the water upward --- say, took it to Mars, as Dad suggested; or Neptune, as I suggested?

How would that affect what we interpret today, geologically?

Besides being more than a little absurd, it wouldn't affect this particular problem at all. Because in the layers that were supposedly laid down by the flood, we have many layers where footprints are found.

So, here's the picture: a dinosaur walks in some mud. The mud dries and hardens, solidifying the footprint. More junk washes on top, gently enough to not destroy the footprint, until later, another dinosaur walks in some other mud, leaving more footprints.

Tell me, how is it remotely possible for the above to happen during the flood?

 

[ChordatesLegacy]

But suppose God removed the water upward --- say, took it to Mars, as Dad suggested; or Neptune, as I suggested?

How would that affect what we interpret today, geologically?

If you do not mind lets just stick to one question for now.

Question: Are the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic sediments flood deposits, as YEC suggest.

If they are flood deposits they would not show any signs of terrestrial habitation. It has been shown in this thread and others that the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic sediments are full of palaeosols (fossil soils), coals with associated roots, dinosaur foot prints, dinosaur tracks, terrestrial burrows.

So to answer the above question is quite easy, there are only two answers i.e.

Yes; the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic sediments are flood deposits.

No; the Palaeozoic and Mesozoic sediments are not flood deposits.


All the evidence, which is overwhelming indicates a big categorical NO