Geological Layers do not represent fewer years than we conclude

[Shemjaza]

Before I accidentally derailed the thread "Creationist thoughts on dinosaurs?" a concept was brought up about the age and time represented by geological layers.

I made a statement of facts about dinosaurs:

Dinosaurs were structured differently to modern animals.
Dinosaurs came in sizes from tiny to titanic.
Not a single modern species is ever found in the same layers as a dinosaur.
Dinosaurs bones have fossilised and turned to stone.

And while @AV1611VET did not seem to disagree with any of my statements, he disagrees that the different layers represent significantly different times:

Those layers aren't as chronologically deep as you think they are.

If you squish 3.7 billion years down to 6 thousand, your layers become flatter than a pancake.

I'm sure Adam was contemporary with trilobites.

-----------

There is a problem with this idea in that the layers represent significantly different biospheres that are present in the same land masses and if all lived and died simultaneously and there should have been mixing and sorting based merely on size.

The other issue is that the radiometric dating of layers is consistent with other forms of dating that leaves evidence of seasonal change.

The issue is that while there is nothing to prevent something powerful enough from wiping out 90% of all species then removing evidence of the method of destruction... there isn't any explanation for why they would then decide to plant a false narrative of millions of years of radiometric decay and annual water behavior.

 

[muichimotsu]

I mean, there is an "explanation", it's just on the level of massive self delusion, cognitive distortions or otherwise indications of early onset schizophrenia, potentially

 

[lismore]

Polystrate Trees

 

[AV1611VET]

The issue is that while there is nothing to prevent something powerful enough from wiping out 90% of all species then removing evidence of the method of destruction... there isn't any explanation for why they would then decide to plant a false narrative of millions of years of radiometric decay and annual water behavior.

That's a radiometric issue, not a layering issue.

 

[dqhall]

Through an interest in rock collecting, I learned about the geology of varves. These are sediments such as were deposited where a river flows into a lake or the sea. In the summer the sediment is darker with carbon from plant blooms. In the winter the sediment is lighter as plants do not grow in cold winter temperatures. Geologists found records of tens of thousands of years of deposition of the varve sediments in river deltas.

This is one article. There may be others.
A 60,000 Year Varve Record from Japan Refutes the Young-Earth Interpretation of Earth’s History

 

[Bungle_Bear]

Polystrate Trees

Would you care to present, in your own words, what polystrate trees are and why you consider them germane to this thread?

 

[Shemjaza]

That's a radiometric issue, not a layering issue.

It is both.

If we ignore the radiometric dating aspect to the geological layers they still represent separate groupings of fossils.

In the ~6000 year history creationist narrative we have about 1500 years of antediluvian time with tyrannosauruses, giant jaguars, brontosaurus, buffaloes and giant sloths in North America alone.

 

[Mr Laurier]

That's a radiometric issue, not a layering issue.

Please do explain

 

[Astrophile]

It is both.

If we ignore the radiometric dating aspect to the geological layers they still represent separate groupings of fossils.

In the ~6000 year history creationist narrative we have about 1500 years of antediluvian time with tyrannosauruses, giant jaguars, brontosaurus, buffaloes and giant sloths in North America alone.

And don't forget the marine fossils, invertebrates like trilobites and ammonites, marine reptiles such as ichthyosaurs, plesiosaurs, pliosaurs and mosasaurs, and early whales such as Basilosaurus.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Polystrate Trees

This page link, and the three following pages, explain the formation of polystrate fossils: Polystrate fossils.

 

[Astrid]

This page link, and the three following pages, explain the formation of polystrate fossils: Polystrate fossils.

You can see them forming in cook inlet alaska

 

[AV1611VET]

It is both.

Okay.

If we ignore the radiometric dating aspect to the geological layers they still represent separate groupings of fossils.

And why would they be mixed and matched?

Surely you don't expect to find mans' bones with dinosaur bones, do you?

If a man even got close to a T. Rex, he wouldn't be around to fossilize, would he?

Do you expect to find elephant bones in the cemetery closest to you?

In the ~6000 year history creationist narrative we have about 1500 years of antediluvian time with tyrannosauruses, giant jaguars, brontosaurus, buffaloes and giant sloths in North America alone.

Nice.

What's your point?

There are no antediluvian bones on the earth, in my opinion.

Any bones we find came after the Flood.

All the ones before the Flood were removed from the earth for sanitary and safety reasons.

 

[Shemjaza]

Okay.And why would they be mixed and matched?

Surely you don't expect to find mans' bones with dinosaur bones, do you?

If a man even got close to a T. Rex, he wouldn't be around to fossilize, would he?

Do you expect to find elephant bones in the cemetery closest to you?Nice.

What's your point?

There are no antediluvian bones on the earth, in my opinion.

Any bones we find came after the Flood.

All the ones before the Flood were removed from the earth for sanitary and safety reasons.

This means that all those dinosaurs of different sizes and shapes were found in the same layers and were affected by the same minralisation... and none of the humans, giant sloths and other more normal looking animals went through the same changes.

Miracles render literally everything possible... but this scenario has in my opinion gone past mysterious ways into barely coherent weirdness.

 

[Astrid]

This means that all those dinosaurs of different sizes and shapes were found in the same layers and were affected by the same minralisation... and none of the humans, giant sloths and other more normal looking animals went through the same changes.

Miracles render literally everything possible... but this scenario has in my opinion gone past mysterious ways into barely coherent weirdness.

" Same mineralization" isn't really it.
Very different fossilization environments can be near each other.
You can for example have Permian fossils from marine, fresh water, salt water, and plenty of subdivisions from there. All over the world.

What you wont ever find is any mammal.
Or dinosaur.
At the end of the Permian most species vanish. You never see them again.
Ammonites, for example, wre hugely abundant, but then gone.

Point is that mixing of organisms from
different aeons would be the norm if " flood" wre true. But it never is seen.

 

[Shemjaza]

" Same mineralization" isn't really it.
Very different fossilization environments can be near each other.
You can for example have Permian fossils from marine, fresh water, salt water, and plenty of subdivisions from there. All over the world.

What you wont ever find is any mammal.
Or dinosaur.
At the end of the Permian most species vanish. You never see them again.
Ammonites, for example, wre hugely abundant, but then gone.

Point is that mixing of organisms from
different aeons would be the norm if " flood" wre true. But it never is seen.

But it's AV's version, so it's all post flood.

It means that at the time the indigenous Australians were building their settlements and fish traps... there were dinosaurs and giant salamanders living in the same region.

 

[AV1611VET]

This means that all those dinosaurs of different sizes and shapes were found in the same layers and were affected by the same minralisation... and none of the humans, giant sloths and other more normal looking animals went through the same changes.

Miracles render literally everything possible... but this scenario has in my opinion gone past mysterious ways into barely coherent weirdness.

That's because you're content to "accordion out" the timeline, and can't see anything.

It's like trying to read the newspaper with a telescope.

Science sees the skeleton of a man in the ground then, twenty feet deeper, a dinosaur, and assumes that twenty feet represents 30 million years of layering between them.

 

[AV1611VET]

Point is that mixing of organisms from different aeons would be the norm if " flood" were true.

Eons aside,* it stands to reason that they would have been mixed and matched all over the place.

Like putting clothes in a washing machine and watching the agitator mix them all around.

* I don't subscribe to all these eons. Cambrian-this and Proterozoic-that are jokes.

But it never is seen.

Any idea why?

Do you leave your clothes in the washing machine after they've been washed?

 

[Astrid]

But it's AV's version, so it's all post flood.

It means that at the time the indigenous Australians were building their settlements and fish traps... there were dinosaurs and giant salamanders living in the same region.

There is no point in such dialogue other than to run up post count. My response was to you, not ton something I would not waste my time reading.
I was filling in a bit for you, things you might not be familiar with.

 

[AV1611VET]

There is no point in such dialogue other than to run up post count. My response was to you, not to something I would not waste my time reading.

I guess, with some, after you reach a certain quota, you're off their Christmas list?

 

[Mr Laurier]

That's because you're content to "accordion out" the timeline, and can't see anything.

It's like trying to read the newspaper with a telescope.

Science sees the skeleton of a man in the ground then, twenty feet deeper, a dinosaur, and assumes that twenty feet represents 30 million years of layering between them.

Nope.
Try again.