Fossil Record Observation

[FutureAndAHope]

How could there be ash in the air if the world was subjected to a global flood?! How? What mechanism would project ash, a byproduct of a volcanic eruption or catastrophic impact, if the world was covered in water?

Creationist model do expect volcanic activity leading up to the flood. How would God push up or break up the sea beds as the bible said he did without volcanic activity.

Also if you read up the fossil record you will see evidence of volcanic activity in many places.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Creationist model do expect volcanic activity leading up to the flood. How would God push up or break up the sea beds as the bible said he did without volcanic activity.

Also if you read up the fossil record you will see evidence of volcanic activity in many places.

But a global flood would not show give any clear indication of volcanic ash covering dead animals, creating fossils.
The exact opposite of what we see!

 

[FutureAndAHope]

But a global flood would not show give any clear indication of volcanic ash covering dead animals, creating fossils.
The exact opposite of what we see!

A creationist model would expect traces of volcanic material in slowly rising flood waters. Why would you say there would be none.

A slow rising flood would be filled with sediment the volcanic debris would find its way into these layers.

 

[essentialsaltes]

A slow rising flood would be filled with sediment the volcanic debris would find its way into these layers.

Perhaps, but they would look like flood deposits, not volcanic deposits.

Any ideas about the plants?

 

[Subduction Zone]

A creationist model would expect traces of volcanic material in slowly rising flood waters. Why would you say there would be none.

A slow rising flood would be filled with sediment the volcanic debris would find its way into these layers.

But we do not see that sort of deposition nor erosion. Did you forget your failure with the embedded meanders at Goosenecks State Park? We barely got into that and you lost.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Creationist model do expect volcanic activity leading up to the flood. How would God push up or break up the sea beds as the bible said he did without volcanic activity.

Also if you read up the fossil record you will see evidence of volcanic activity in many places.

And we can date this activity. Over 99% of it happened to long ago to be caused by your flood.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

A creationist model would expect traces of volcanic material in slowly rising flood waters. Why would you say there would be none.

A slow rising flood would be filled with sediment the volcanic debris would find its way into these layers.

@essentialsaltes said it: if there was volcanic ash mixed in with a slow rising flood, it would look like regular flood deposits, not volcanic deposits.

 

[[serious]]

I was on another thread and we were discussing the fossil record, and I could see that there was a pattern to the depositing of fossils. That less well developed animals were found at the bottom of the strata, and that as time progressed the animals became better developed. Now for an evolutionary perspective, this would be said to be the gradual evolutionary change between species. However being a strong believer in creation I could not accept blindly that this was evidence for evolution. So I had a bit of a think about it. And this is what I feel can explain this, but I have put it here so we can talk about it.

I believe in a global flood, I believe God as the bible said flooded the whole earth. Now what would we expect to see if this happened?

We would see water slowly rising over the earth and drowning animals and man as it went. I would imagine as flood waters generally are they would be filled with sediment. So what as a Creationist (but not a scientist) would I expect to see. I believe the following:

At the lower levels you would have a lot of marine life and sediment from the oceans as they begin to spew out from the seas. Then this is where the strata come into it. As the waters rise and become deeper the following would occur. At the very bottom you would expect to find large animals that either could not swim, or had trouble supporting their weight (such as dinosaurs), which we do see. Now we know that all modern animals can swim. So we would expect to see the swimmers at the top of the strata, which we do see. Humans are more capable climbers that most animals so would be able to scale cliffs, and other out crops, accounting for their late arrival in the strata. Back to the animals however, which could still swim. We would see the young, babies, and youth, cease to swim before the adults, so be deposited first before the adults, we do see this small primates are even found with dinosaurs. This would give the impression to an evolutionary observer of the gradual increase in size of primates, and other animals. Why the younger smaller ones are found lower down (earlier in the drowning process), than the youth, or adults.

The obvious question is if fossils are sorted by ability to escape flood waters. That raises problems as modern trees seem to be better climbers than raptors under that explanation.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The obvious question is if fossils are sorted by ability to escape flood waters. That raises problems as modern trees seem to be better climbers than raptors under that explanation.

You have heard of "ents" haven't you?

 

[lasthero]

This is a joke ... I used to live on a farm ... Mud even half a meter deep stops you from moving ... Almost makes you immobile I am happy to see you test that theory out.

Firstly, since I safely assume that you're not a pterosaur, I don't much see the relevance of your personal experience with mud.

Secondly, I've been in mud. Seeing as I didn't die of hunger because I was indefinitely stuck in it, you can tell that i moved through it.

But you know what? Fine. I'll accept your completely unverified assertion that all pterosaurs died out before other organism because they all just so happened to be standing in muddy water, if you can answer one question for me:

Why did all the pterosaurs die out before the blind mole rats did? And why are pterosaurs found below human artifacts?

If you have a look at what animals were there you see large leopards and other big game hunters.

Which are far from the only carnivores.

As for some one who mentioned crocodiles their diet consists of mainly fish. Snakes like lizards could survive off insects I would imagine.

You can imagine it, but you need to do a little more than that. Do you have any evidence that animals like, say, anancondas can survive off insects? Or that they're even known to eat them?

 

[homohabilis117]

I was on another thread and we were discussing the fossil record, and I could see that there was a pattern to the depositing of fossils. That less well developed animals were found at the bottom of the strata, and that as time progressed the animals became better developed. Now for an evolutionary perspective, this would be said to be the gradual evolutionary change between species. However being a strong believer in creation I could not accept blindly that this was evidence for evolution. So I had a bit of a think about it. And this is what I feel can explain this, but I have put it here so we can talk about it.

I believe in a global flood, I believe God as the bible said flooded the whole earth. Now what would we expect to see if this happened?

We would see water slowly rising over the earth and drowning animals and man as it went. I would imagine as flood waters generally are they would be filled with sediment. So what as a Creationist (but not a scientist) would I expect to see. I believe the following:

At the lower levels you would have a lot of marine life and sediment from the oceans as they begin to spew out from the seas. Then this is where the strata come into it. As the waters rise and become deeper the following would occur. At the very bottom you would expect to find large animals that either could not swim, or had trouble supporting their weight (such as dinosaurs), which we do see. Now we know that all modern animals can swim. So we would expect to see the swimmers at the top of the strata, which we do see. Humans are more capable climbers that most animals so would be able to scale cliffs, and other out crops, accounting for their late arrival in the strata. Back to the animals however, which could still swim. We would see the young, babies, and youth, cease to swim before the adults, so be deposited first before the adults, we do see this small primates are even found with dinosaurs. This would give the impression to an evolutionary observer of the gradual increase in size of primates, and other animals. Why the younger smaller ones are found lower down (earlier in the drowning process), than the youth, or adults.

Habilis respects views, but thinks flood geology wrong. Above meme raises valid point. But problem bigger than elephant vs pterodactyl. Why no grass in lower fossil record? Or flowering plants? Why no pollen alongside older strata that have pre-flowering plants and big ferns? If flowers alive before flood, lower strata should at least have pollen, if not blossoms. But all over world, invariably, no pollen or flowers have ever found in lower strata. Habilis sees this as big problem for worldwide flood. But again, respects views and thanks for post.
*chews manioc*

 

[juvenissun]

It's not just guessing.

If dating methods are inaccurate, please, explain this graph.

What you're looking at here is a measurement of plate movement by two independent sources. One is by satelitte data, the other is by simply measuring the age of rocks and doing some calculations. If dating techniques don't work, there's no reason. these two methods should agree with each other and come to the same conclusion - but they do. The dating doesn't just show that the rocks are old, but they're as old as they should be if the plates were moving at a steady rate, and have been doing so thousand and thousands of years.

How do you explain that?

This should be a fabricated correlation.
Geologic slip rate is an average value over a long time. The GPS measured rate is an instant value. At the moment of slip, the GPS could measure 30000 mm/yr slip rate over a place where the geologic slip may be averaged as 6 mm/yr.

 

[juvenissun]

What can I say but all of it. There are no openings for flood water in the ocean. There is no place that three times the current volume of the ocean could fit. There is no place that three times the current volume of the ocean could have gone to. To believe in a flood you have to believe in a god that hid all evidence of this flood, a flood that would have left massive marks. There is not one mark from the alleged flood. That means you are in effect saying that your version of god lied.

There is no ... . Of course not.
But there was.

 

[Astrophile]

Humans are more capable climbers that most animals so would be able to scale cliffs, and other out crops, accounting for their late arrival in the strata.

In fact human beings are very vulnerable to floods, partly because human settlements tend to be built near to rivers (we need a supply of water), and because we tend to stay in our homes until it is too late to leave.

Also, if you imagine trying to escape from a flood at night, in torrential rain and complete darkness, particularly if you were pregnant or hampered by young children, you may have have second thoughts about our ancestors' ability to keep their heads above water longer than other animals.

 

[juvenissun]

You mean a stream table. Usually a bit more than that. So what? How would you scale it up? Remember, on the stream table if you put in too much water it will flood and the meanders will disappear. In the real world floods of that sort don't happen very often, but it does mean for a meander to form the rate of flow must be slow.

"but it does mean for a meander to form the rate of flow must be slow."

That is not right.
If you like to know why, ask.

 

[Astrophile]

At the very bottom you would expect to find large animals that either could not swim, or had trouble supporting their weight (such as dinosaurs), which we do see.

Crocodiles can swim, and their fossils occur in Mesozoic rocks, along with the dinosaurs.

 

[Astrophile]

but not the Dino birds (avian's) [why? they can fly, for a while, or move quicker to higher ground].

Have you ever lived near the sea? I have, and I have seen a beach strewn with the skeletons of birds after quite an ordinary storm.

 

[Astrophile]

But like I said a sperm whale had no reason to be in a tropical zone,

Have you ever read Moby Dick?

 

[TheBear]

The reason I am here is to have my ideas challenged and put to the test.

What's your reasoning behind that? I mean, are you willing to have your ideas refuted, to learn something new, to change your mind in the light of new evidence, or, are you hold tight to your ideas no matter what, and you'll be mental gymnastics on steroids, trying to justify your ideas?

We get chest beaters here on a regular basis. They think they got something to prove. They're the ones who, no matter how much evidence and reasoning to the contrary, they will not budge. They are myopically focused and will not change, regardless of all the rest.

We also get sincere and rational people here, who honestly want to get a better understanding of things. They're the ones who learn, who's questions are sincere, and who learn from their mistakes. Science works the same way. If a hypothesis fails the reviews and tests, it's back to the drawing board with new knowledge.


So, which one are you?

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is no ... . Of course not.
But there was.

What are you nattering on now juve?