Other theorys besides Evolution

[Nathan45]

I'll have to go through all possible scenarios, I'm pretty sure that if a rabbit was found in Precambrian layer it would not falsify evolution (erosions, faults, etc...). I'm sure that FB, thaumaturgy, or baggins will tell me that there would have to be a lot of evidence for this occurrence if we were to find a rabbit in Precambrian stratum. I'll be waiting for their opinions on this. I've never taken a geology course, but I'm really interested.

If it came from faults, erosions, etc, and it just got buried in a precambrian strata layer by itself, there should be obvious signs that it happened. We're not living in an informational vacuum, if you found a rabbit, you also found evidence for in what way it was deposited.

If we found a fossilized rabbit perfectly formed yet contained inside of a demonstratably 800 million year old rock layer, it would falsify evolution. If it was crushed sideways, vertically, between two different adjacent types or layers of material, half broken and wedged inside percariously, you could plausibly say it got there from an earthquake. We don't live in an informational vacuum here, the fossil of the rabbit will also be found with information about how it got there.

Yet you have not even found one instance of this.. not ONE. You have NO evidence.


...
and i can't believe that we're talking about one rabbit.

"A" rabbit? We're talking about one rabbit here??? Yes, we are. You creationists have not found ONE rabbit, ( metaphorically speaking ) or ONE ANIMAL in a strata where it clearly does not belong.

You also have not found one instance of a true chimera ( an animal which shows common descent from more than one animal ) which would also falsify evolution.

If creationism was TRUE, these things should be abundantly common, instead you cannot find ONE, not ONE verifiable instance of either.

Did we find rabits in the precambrain? no.

Did we find them in the paleozoic or the devonian? no, instead most of what we find from this period is a bunch of trilobites, and if you look past the devonian, you don't find trilobites anymore!!

if the flood hypothesis, and the 6000 years old hypothesis is correct, we'd be JUST AS LIKELY ( or at least nearly as likely ) to find a rabbit fossil in the precambrain or the paleozoic as to find any other fossil.

You guys have not found ONE SCRAP of evidence for your theory, but you still cling to it because in your head, if one scrap actually was found, you immagine people would be skeptical. Immagine that?

 

[Naraoia]

I'll have to go through all possible scenarios, I'm pretty sure that if a rabbit was found in Precambrian layer it would not falsify evolution (erosions, faults, etc...).

It would be highly suspicious if it was found in a Precambrian layer as an inclusion (inclusions are older than the stuff they are included in because you can't include anyting in a newly forming rock that wasn't already there).

If our hypothetical rabbit got from later rocks into a Precambrian layer, then the Precambrian layer would have to have been seriously broken before poor bunny's remains could get into it. I'm certain there would be signs of that. In other words we could probably distinguish a truly Precambrian bunny from one that got there by accident.

 

[Naraoia]

"A" rabbit? We're talking about one rabbit here??? Yes, we are. You creationists have not found ONE rabbit, ( metaphorically speaking ) or ONE ANIMAL in a strata where it clearly does not belong.

Easy, man, he's trying to think, can't you see?