Evolution's Brick Wall

[Job 33:6]

How can you accurately predict with uncertain dates is the point.

The power in evolution is less about whether a rock is 485 or 480 million years old, and more about what rocks sit on top of, or below of other rocks.

And this is important to understand. The geologic succession, and the ability to call something devonian versus not devonian, is something that...pre-dates absolute dating methods. The red rock sits on top of the blue rock. This statement is what defines what devonian is or is not.

So, when it comes to predictions in evolution, they depend upon the question of if the red rock sits on top of the blue rock.

For example, lets say there is a layer of blue rock across the planet, and we call it the early devonian. And above that blue rock, there is orange rock, and we call it the middle devonian, and above the orange rock, there is red rock and we call it the late devonian.

If the early devonian, which is the blue rock, is packed with fish, and the red rock that sits on top is packed with tetrapods, then if evolution is true, then the orange rock in the middle should contain tiktaalik.

Whether the orange rock is 380 million years old, or 390 is a different discussion from what the order of the rocks are, and what the order of the fossils are.

And so its important to understand, as a scientist, super position, lateral continuity, cross cutting relations, inclusions, and things like this. Moreso than whether the middle devonian rock is 385 or 390 million years old.

In fact, tiktaalik fossils have been dated with ages ranging in i believe 5 or so million years. So whether tiktaalik is actually 385 million years old, or 390, is irrelevant to whether or not tiktaalik is pre and post dated by organisms that would be predicted to pre and post date it.

 

[Job 33:6]

Uh, yes, I think so. See you're learning.


You obviously don't have a clue.


And predict from it... oh boy, I give up.

I'll be the bigger man and will try not to attack your intelligence.

With the above noted, I do this stuff for a living. You know I actually worked with geologic logging on natural gas rigs as well, which depends upon us knowing where devonian rock is (thats where the natural gas is).

If we were too confused by folds in devonian rock that we couldnt identify it, indeed there would not be a natural gas boom in the united states.

 

[Job 33:6]

At the risk of mockery, I will admit that not being fluent in geological terms, I can see your point. I'm only saying how can accurate "predictability" and "plate tectonics coupled with unknown forces and uncertain dates" be that dependable, that's all.

Youre absolutely correct in acknowledging that rocks do bend and fold.

But I can assure you, this doesnt take away our ability to identify their location.

For example, see the figure above, this is actually of a region in which there are devonian rocks.

Notice how all the rocks are folded and buckled and broken and faulted. But it doesnt mean that we somehow loose our ability to see where ordovician rock outcrops, or where it is in the subsurface.

And if you cant see the figure, hit the reply button to view it.

 

[46AND2]

At the risk of mockery, I will admit that not being fluent in geological terms, I can see your point. I'm only saying how can accurate "predictability" and "plate tectonics coupled with unknown forces and uncertain dates" be that dependable, that's all.

Well, according to the rest of the wiki article you quoted, we DO have dates to go by, it's just that there was debate...in the 1800's...about what delineated (physically, not radiometrically) the beginning and end of the Devonian period.

However, regardless of whether we know the actual dates or not, we can still identify strata through relative ages. Even if radiometric dating did not exist, and indeed it did not when the Devonian was being defined, we could still make the prediction. If only fish were found below what we now identify as the Devonian, and land creatures are found above it, we can make a prediction that "if evolution is true, then we should find an intermediate fossil, with these specific features, in the Devonian."

 

[Job 33:6]

Youre absolutely correct in acknowledging that rocks do bend and fold.

But I can assure you, this doesnt take away our ability to identify their location.

For example, see the figure above, this is actually of a region in which there are devonian rocks.

Notice how all the rocks are folded and buckled and broken and faulted. But it doesnt mean that we somehow loose our ability to see where ordovician rock outcrops, or where it is in the subsurface.

And if you cant see the figure, hit the reply button to view it.

Indeed, only a blind person would be unable to see that the shawangunk outcrops at mt tammany and the martinsburg outcrops just east of that prior to the great valley.

 

[Heissonear]

I'm still on the same subject . In order to understand the prediction, you have to understand fundamental concepts. Such as...what is devonian strata? And where is it? If you don't know these things, then you will never understand why how the prediction was made in which tiktaalik was discovered within said devonian strata.

So I ask again, can you identify devonian strata near you? If not, then u won't be able to understand paleontology nor could you understand the theory of evolution.

It's ok to say that you don't know. It would explain why you don't understand the prediction.

Sorry, but it appears you have posted enough to not understand structural geology, stratigraphy, petrology and paleontology in textbooks and application in the field.

I could bring up point by point, but do not need to. It's not in scope of OP.

Now, evolution has ran into a brickwall and shown by fossils it is built on the conjecture-based conclutions of man.

Do you understand how this has happened?

Do you understand thst this historically has happened?

And now you without geologic higher education are trying to support a faith, evolution is a faith?

 

[inquiring mind]

Well, according to the rest of the wiki article you quoted, we DO have dates to go by, it's just that there was debate...in the 1800's...about what delineated (physically, not radiometrically) the beginning and end of the Devonian period.

However, regardless of whether we know the actual dates or not, we can still identify strata through relative ages. Even if radiometric dating did not exist, and indeed it did not when the Devonian was being defined, we could still make the prediction. If only fish were found below what we now identify as the Devonian, and land creatures are found above it, we can make a prediction that "if evolution is true, then we should find an intermediate fossil, with these specific features, in the Devonian."

I just don't have the heart to argue with you even if I disagreed, especially with your comeback to my (being cute) D.B. Cooper post. I have to tell you I laughed till I cried two or three times when reading that. You just have to enjoy the humor sometimes.

 

[Job 33:6]

In conclusion, or unless my responses are addressed,

We can determine where devonian rock is, and with an understanding of the succession,

See the figure above to understand how identification of bedding is possible despite folds and faults. The bedding is still clearly visible even with faults and folds running throughout.

And with that, we can also observe what fossils are in the martinsburg, what fossils are in the shawangunk, what fossils are in the bloomsburg etc, and we can identify a fossil succession.

And with this succession in mind, we are able to make predictions with use of the theory of evolution, in which i defer back to my original post.

Post #1260

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/evolutions-brick-wall.8075571/page-63#post-73140603

"And I always turn to the popular example. The devonian is the age of fish. Fish dominated devonian strata. Terrestrial life dominates the Carboniferous. If evolution were true. Then fish-like tetrapods should exist in the mid to late devonian, after domination of fish but before the terrestrial takeover of the Carboniferous.

Not only that, but genetically, amphibians according to evolution will also be found between fish and reptiles, as reptiles are those that dominate the Carboniferous and fish dominated the devonian.

Knowing this, a team of scientists from Philadelphia and Chicago used a geologic map to find middle aged devonian rock, aged between the dominance of fish and the dominance of terrestrial vertebrates. This rock was in a random area in the Canadian tundra. That's just where the rock extends. The travelled specifically to rock consistent of shallow marine deposits, things like stream deposits and alluvial fan deposits, and they found a fish with legs.

That is tiktaalik. It has scales like a fish, but it also has rotating wrists, robust shoulders, eyes on top of it's head like an alligator. But had find Ray's rather than toes, and it had gills and spiracles on it's head indicating that it could breath both air and water. Neck vertebrae are unfused like a tetrapod, but it's jaw is shaped like a fishes.

So they truly found a part fish part tetrapod animal right where evolution predicted that such a thing would exist up in a devonian outcrop in Canada.

So what is the response from evolution deniars? Do they believe the discovery of tiktaalik was pure chance? What if I named another fossil also discovered through prediction based on the theory of evolution? What if I named 10 more? Or 100?

And if anyone wants, I can talk about a another transitional."

 

[inquiring mind]

So what is the response from evolution deniars? Do they believe the discovery of tiktaalik was pure chance? What if I named another fossil also discovered through prediction based on the theory of evolution? What if I named 10 more? Or 100?

If you go back through all the posts you will see that we were able to squeeze answers in occasionally and even answered these questions I believe, not that you really responded to any of them (just presented another question).

And if anyone wants, I can talk about a another transitional."

I don't think anyone wants... getting back more in line with the OP is a better idea.

 

[Heissonear]

Youre absolutely correct in acknowledging that rocks do bend and fold...................Notice how all the rocks are folded and buckled and broken and faulted. But it doesnt mean that we somehow loose our ability to see where ordovician rock outcrops, or where it is in the subsurface.

I waited till you presented enough geology to show the most knowledge you have is still high school level.

Rocks dont bend and fold to the convolution you stated in the St Martinsville area.

They still have to have mostly pasticity and very little rigidity. One cannot take a hard shale and make tight convolutions. They will "geomechanically yield" and shatter and grind to fragments and fines.

Only moist, freash to fairly freshly deposited (and buried) sediments will show tight convolution folds under axial strain.

So many of your examples show quick folding before lithification (diagenesis).

The other items you refer to is about geophysics and structural geology to lithologies. Geotechtonic and isostatic stresses and adjustments by isostatic equilibriums during and after morea area and far region depositions.

You think you are a teacher but are still a high school pupil. So you teach inquiring mind geology? You are a googler of our times.


What you unkowingly present only strengthens The Flood - the Alleghanian Orogeny shows sediments (non-lithified) plasticity during early tectonic deformational forces and events that we do not see happening today (very tight fold convolutions).

Sound like The Flood, not uniformitarianism, geology. It was your foot placed in your mouth to promote The Flood in such Appalachian region folds and faults.

 

[Job 33:6]

If you go back through all the posts you will see that we were able to squeeze answers in occasionally and even answered these questions I believe, not that you really responded to any of them (just presented another question).


I don't think anyone wants... getting back more in line with the OP is a better idea.

Your most recent response suggested that devonian strata was "obliterated" in which case we would be unable to identify its location and thus unable to understand the fossil succession.

But indeed, this response is false.

 

[Heissonear]

In conclusion, or unless my responses are addressed,

We can determine where devonian rock is, and with an understanding of the succession,

See the figure above to understand how identification of bedding is possible despite folds and faults. The bedding is still clearly visible even with faults and folds running throughout.

And with that, we can also observe what fossils are in the martinsburg, what fossils are in the shawangunk, what fossils are in the bloomsburg etc, and we can identify a fossil succession.

And with this succession in mind, we are able to make predictions with use of the theory of evolution, in which i defer back to my original post.

Post #1260

https://www.christianforums.com/threads/evolutions-brick-wall.8075571/page-63#post-73140603

"And I always turn to the popular example. The devonian is the age of fish. Fish dominated devonian strata. Terrestrial life dominates the Carboniferous. If evolution were true. Then fish-like tetrapods should exist in the mid to late devonian, after domination of fish but before the terrestrial takeover of the Carboniferous.

Not only that, but genetically, amphibians according to evolution will also be found between fish and reptiles, as reptiles are those that dominate the Carboniferous and fish dominated the devonian.

Knowing this, a team of scientists from Philadelphia and Chicago used a geologic map to find middle aged devonian rock, aged between the dominance of fish and the dominance of terrestrial vertebrates. This rock was in a random area in the Canadian tundra. That's just where the rock extends. The travelled specifically to rock consistent of shallow marine deposits, things like stream deposits and alluvial fan deposits, and they found a fish with legs.

That is tiktaalik. It has scales like a fish, but it also has rotating wrists, robust shoulders, eyes on top of it's head like an alligator. But had find Ray's rather than toes, and it had gills and spiracles on it's head indicating that it could breath both air and water. Neck vertebrae are unfused like a tetrapod, but it's jaw is shaped like a fishes.

So they truly found a part fish part tetrapod animal right where evolution predicted that such a thing would exist up in a devonian outcrop in Canada.

So what is the response from evolution deniars? Do they believe the discovery of tiktaalik was pure chance? What if I named another fossil also discovered through prediction based on the theory of evolution? What if I named 10 more? Or 100?

And if anyone wants, I can talk about a another transitional."

You are reading and sometimes pasting as you go. You are a follower of evolution, and present bias posts.

You are in a dilemma yourself now. You already chose a side (evolution) before open evaluation. Not knowing the conjecture it is built on, and requires faith to accept.

You have been schooled.

 

[inquiring mind]

Oops...

 

[inquiring mind]

Your most recent response suggested that devonian strata was "obliterated" in which case we would be unable to identify its location and thus unable to understand the fossil succession.

What could be predicted accurately from recycled rock, whatever period is involved? And no you don't understand transitional fossil succession; if you did you would present some.

 

[Job 33:6]

What could be predicted accurately from recycled rock, whatever period is involved?

The fossil succession can be predicted accurately, hence the predictions occurance. If it could not be accurately predicted, then it wouldn't have happened.

As shown in the cross section above, despite folding of devonian rock, it is still easy to identify the rock succession and to differentiate between formations and with that, the fossils within those rocks and their succession can also be identified.

I can predict where natural gas is in the earth as well. This is how our country is leading the world in natural gas production. It's because we have the ability to predict where the bedding is across north America and canada. And with our ability to predict where rock is located, we also can predict where fossils will be located as the fossils are in said rock.

 

[inquiring mind]

Whew... how exhilarating! I don’t know if I've completed some type geological licensure exam, or have just been messed with through a series of googled info?

The fossil succession can be predicted accurately, hence the predictions occurance. If it could not be accurately predicted, then it wouldn't have happened.

As shown in the cross section above, despite folding of devonian rock, it is still easy to identify the rock succession and to differentiate between formations and with that, the fossils within those rocks and their succession can also be identified.

I can predict where natural gas is in the earth as well. This is how our country is leading the world in natural gas production. It's because we have the ability to predict where the bedding is across north America and canada. And with our ability to predict where rock is located, we also can predict where fossils will be located as the fossils are in said rock.

Yes, I'm sure you can, but let's get back to finding & producing transitional fossils between two different kinds.

 

[Job 33:6]

Whew... how exhilarating! I don’t know if I've completed some type geological licensure exam, or have just been messed with through a series of googled info?



Yes, I'm sure you can, but let's get back to finding & producing transitional fossils between two different kinds.

At your request. Now...

The transitional, tiktaalik, that was predicted to be found in strata which post dates fish domination and pre dates tetrapod domination, was found just as it was predicted to be found, in such strata.

Tiktaalik has features of both fish and tetrapod. It has scales, fins, a fish like lower jaw and gills. Which are fish features. But it also has a flat head, like a salamander or crocodile, which are suitable for looking above water from within water. It has robust pectoral and pelvic girdles for supporting the weight of a body above water, it has an unfused neck, so it could turn its head and look around. And it has wrist bones for a rotating wrist, and spiracles indicating that it could also breathe air.

So this animal which has both fish and tetrapod features, is found in strata between bedding dominated by fish and bedding dominated by tetrapods.

So, from the perspective of the fossil succession and the perspective of paleontology, what we have is a transitional form linking fish and tetrapods, which is a major evolution change, a macro change, where fish which swim and live in water, are linked to the very first terrestrial vertebrates.

And I am a geologist. Im not just some random person who googles everything. I've performed geologic logging on rigs (we direct drillers so they know where to drill in the marcellus shale, and this is done by identifying different strata as drilling occurs, and telling the drillers when theyre entering certain devonian strata and if they go beyond that strata and what they need to turn the direction of their drill bit in order to stay in the layers that we want to be in) and Ive worked as a geologist and have been performing research as a geologist and have published work in paleontology which amount to about....12 years of experience now. I've also done a lot of environmental work, working with aquifers and how water flows through different formations and how it might carry certain environmental constituents and contamination.

Ive also worked with museum collections, of course ive been on plenty of fossil digs, ive collected hundreds of rocks from...well, many places that I have gone and studied.

But these are things that geologists do. We work on rigs, we study rocks and fossils. Im not out of the ordinary by any means. I just happen to enjoy hanging around internet forums, which isnt too common id say in society at large, let alone among scientists.

 

[Job 33:6]

If a geologic succession didnt exist, then i wouldnt have natural gas fueling the heat of my house (at least during the winter).

The fossil succession only exists because of the geologic succession. Shubin and his crew would not have found tiktaalik, if devonian strata were "obliterated" or in any form that couldnt be "read". The strata is fine, and you wont find any geologist who would agree with the idea that no geologic column exists nor would any geologist agree to this idea of a rock succession being illegible due to folding or recycling of rock.

The pre-cambrian may be described as recycled and unreadable to some extent. But pretty much everything from...maybe 600 million years ago and forward is pretty well distinguishable and legible. The devonian is within that 600 million year span with tiktaalik landing around 380-385 or so million years of age.

And with the clarity of the geologic column that we have, we can also identify the fossil succession as well with clarity, which is why it was possible for shubin and his team to predict where tiktaalik was.

Its a testament to how well we know both the earth, and the order in which fossils can be found and their relative ages.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You are reading and sometimes pasting as you go. You are a follower of evolution, and present bias posts.

You are in a dilemma yourself now. You already chose a side (evolution) before open evaluation. Not knowing the conjecture it is built on, and requires faith to accept.

You have been schooled.

Hebrews 1:1 "Faith is the substance of fossils hoped for, the evidence of links unseen."

Oh, oops. Got my religions mixed up there

 

[Astrophile]

“While the rock beds that define the start and end of the Devonian period are well identified, the exact dates are uncertain.”

The quotation continues, 'According to the International Commission on Stratigraphy (Ogg, 2004), the Devonian extends from the end of the Silurian 419.2 Mya, to the beginning of the Carboniferous 358.9 Mya (in North America, the beginning of the Mississippian subperiod of the Carboniferous)' - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devonian . If the Internation Commission can give the dates of the beginning and the end of the Devonian period to 0.1 Mya, they are not seriously uncertain. Also, in the section dealing with the subdivisions of the Devonian, the article quotes uncertainties in the ages of between 2.5 and 2.8 Mya, or less than 0.8% of the age of the end of the period.