My Creationist Fossil Record Challenge

[Split Rock]

Let's take a look at the Genesis account of life being created on earth:

1. Grass, herbs, trees, etc
2. Marine life, birds
3. Land animals
4. Homo Sapiens

I'm no expert, so I'm interesting to hear from the experts. Do plant fossils appear before animal fossils? Another issue may be birds appearing before land animals, what do the fossils show?

Thanks

If we look at your list, the actual order is:

1. marine life
2. herbs and trees
3. land animals
4. birds
5. grasses
6. man

 

[CabVet]

Thanks, how is this progression determined. Is it by carbon dating or by inspecting the fossil column?

Both (not carbon though, radiometric dating is used), one confirms the other. The fossils appear in that order, and the deeper they are in the column, the older they date.

 

[Loudmouth]

I'm no expert, so I'm interesting to hear from the experts. Do plant fossils appear before animal fossils? Another issue may be birds appearing before land animals, what do the fossils show?

Thanks

Depends on how you define "plant". We have evidence of photosynthesis in single celled organisms prior to the emergence of the animal phyla. At the same time, we find that groups such as flowering plants and grasses show up well after life evolved on land (grasses emerged around 70 million years ago, as one example). So like I said, it depends on how you classify the emergence of plants.

Another problem is that land mammals show up before aquatic mammals such as dolphins and whales. Genesis has whales showing up before land mammals.

 

[Loudmouth]

Thanks, how is this progression determined. Is it by carbon dating or by inspecting the fossil column?

Radiometric dating of igneous rocks above and below the fossil are used to date these fossils. Radiocarbon dating is only used on organic material of terrestrial orgin from the last 50,000 years.

 

[Tomk80]

Both, one confirms the other. The fossils appear in that order, and the deeper they are in the column, the older they date.

Note that the dating is not carbon dating, but rather other forms of radiometric dating. Carbon dating only dates up to about 50,000 years (at least, last I checked).

 

[CabVet]

Note that the dating is not carbon dating, but rather other forms of radiometric dating. Carbon dating only dates up to about 50,000 years (at least, last I checked).

Edited just in time

 

[Split Rock]

Thanks, how is this progression determined. Is it by carbon dating or by inspecting the fossil column?

By basic stratigraphy. Older layers are below, younger layers are above. Radioisotope dating does confirm that a layer below another is older.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Thanks, how is this progression determined. Is it by carbon dating or by inspecting the fossil column?

The relative age of fossils is shown by which ones are above them and which ones are below them. Rarely beds are overturned in mountain building events, AKA orogeny, Using sedimentology it is usually obvious to the trained eye which way was up first.

And I believe you meant radiometric dating not carbon dating. Carbon dating is good only for very young materials. Objects less than roughly 50,000 years old. All atmospheric carbon that is left in a fossil will have long since decayed.

We cannot directly date sedimentary rocks very often at all. We do it by dating volcanic events that give us a minimum date for the rocks its lies over. With many different volcanic events all over the world at different times we can narrow down the dates from the fossils very accurately.