Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
If the strata were formed rapidly and catastrophically (and there are many indications that it was), then no, we would certainly not expect to find all life forms in all strata.
For starters, we would only expect to find remnants of benthic sea-floor ecosystems in the lowest layers of strata.
Why should we!?Why wouldn't we expect to see mammals in the oldest sediments?
There weren't any mammals prior to the flood?
No, it wouldn't. It would be a real problem, because what we have here is a clear lineage. It shows the gradual evolution from one animal into another. The whale's ancestry would not be called into question by say, an ambulocetus found very recently; however, given that it's currently understood that whales evolved from land-bound mammals, finding a whale fossil before land-bound mammals like pakicetus would most likely be very problematic. We'd need to examine if the entire sequence needs to be shifted backwards based on the fossil evidence, and whether that's even possible given the surrounding geological evidence.
Why wouldn't we expect to see mammals in the oldest sediments?
Why wouldn't these include whale carcasses, bony fish, and other modern species? Why is there a complete lack of modern bony fish in the lowest layers of marine strata?
Because mammals generally do not make their livings on the sea-floor.
This discussion would go on for dozens of pages. I've had it many times. Unfortunately we are limited to a lot of ad-hoc speculation without knowing what biogeography looked like before the catastrophe, among many other factors.
However, on principle alone, we know rapid catastrophic burial of all life on Earth would indeed produce some type of an order in the sediment layers.
How would it produce a fossil order?
How would it not? An order would be the inevitable consequence of a world of animals occupying different ecological zones and geographical regions while being catastrophically buried. It is simply irrational to believe everything would be jumbled up together in all layers.
If Evolution was false, and the strata represents hundreds of millions of years of life on Earth, then yes we would probably expect to find the same life forms in all layers. (or at least a similar presence/absence pattern in all layers)
If the strata were formed rapidly and catastrophically (and there are many indications that it was), then no, we would certainly not expect to find all life forms in all strata.
For starters, we would only expect to find remnants of benthic sea-floor ecosystems in the lowest layers of strata.
There are bony fish in every marine ecological zone. Why wouldn't we find them in the earliest sediments?
...Although personally, I'd like to see the evidence that a single flood can lay down multiple strata before we go any further, because as said, that contradicts the evidence we have.
Obviously because we don't know what zones they occupied or what their geographical distribution was before catastrophe. For all you know they could have been restricted to inland seas.
Is that what you are going with, a complete fantasyland where bony fish are limited to little pools?
This coming from someone who believes fish turned into people.
To me, an evolutionist is someone who generally believes in an Evolutionary creation narrative of the universe and everything in it.
If Evolution was false, and the strata represents hundreds of millions of years of life on Earth, then yes we would probably expect to find the same life forms in all layers. (or at least a similar presence/absence pattern in all layers) ]/quote]
We agree there.
If the strata were formed rapidly and catastrophically (and there are many indications that it was), then no, we would certainly not expect to find all life forms in all strata.
I would have to disagree with you there. Catastrophic formation would cause much disorder and mixing (fluvial sedimentology 101). Would you mind providing an example of catastrophic formation?
For starters, we would only expect to find remnants of benthic sea-floor ecosystems in the lowest layers of strata.
So clams, starfish, and crabs, to mention a few, would be only in the lowest layers?
Multiple horizontal strata is a direct prediction of a worldwide flood model, as demonstrated by sedimentology experiments.
Evolutionists hate that.
I love your logic, paraphrased: People who have AIDS are extremely likely to be HIV+; therefore, HIV causes AIDS.
Try this logic: People who have tuberculosis are extremely likely to have fevers; therefore fevers cause tuberculosis.
Multiple horizontal strata is a direct prediction of a worldwide flood model, as demonstrated by sedimentology experiments.
Actually none. A Flood "geologist" has tried to claim that the deposits are of the nature of a delta. The problem is that that would only explain the geologic column if it was all coarsely sorted. It cannot deal with the real geologic column at all with fined grained shales that could not have been deposited in that matter, carbonates that were definitely not deposited in that matter. It does not even explain sandstones that well since there are sandstones of different sources and different depositional environments. In other words it is the prefect ad hoc Floodist explanation since it only convinces the ignorant.What sedimentology experts?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?