Why are there no cows in the Devonian?

[Black Akuma]

I get the point, and I know exactly what the fossil record should look like if life was created 6,000 years ago in a span of a week, and if there was a global flood 4,000 years ago. I understand all of it. The problem is that the evidence doesn't match up to those claims.

Predicted response:

"But don't you see?! IT DOES MATCH UP, GUYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Can't you tell be my excessive use of exclamation marks? Scientists just say it doesn't, but it totally does, and I totally know this even though all my information on the subject comes from people who've probably never even been to a dig site their entire lives!

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

 

[anyathesword]

I was waiting for you to try this. Oh Anya, it's almost cute the way you present these well-worn creationist PRATTS with such naive confidence as if we hadn't seen and refuted them dozens of times before.

Your vague ideas about differential escape abilities isn't born out by the fossil record either. Let's examine a few examples.



So we should only be finding small, seafloor (benthic) animals in the lower layers like the Cambrian? What about anamolocarids? Some species were 2 metres long! Then in the Silurian (still near the bottom of the Paleozoic) you have giant scorpions like Brontoscorpio and giant 2 metre long eurypterids. In other words, there are very large, mobile animals appearing at the bottom of the fossil record and not only the small benthic creatures you say should be there.



So why do flowering plants only show up long after lycopods and ferns and conifers? Flowering plants live in the water, in the coastal lowlands and in mountains, yet they don't appear until about halfway through the fossil record. Again the pattern you claim exists doesn't actually appear in the fossil record.



So turtles, being rather slow, show up right at the bottom of the fossil record, right? Wrong. They show up about halfway through. And slow moving animals like sauropod dinosaurs also show up relatively high in section. And why do fast, agile little dinosaurs like Coelophysis appear in the record before sauropods? Would they not have been better able to escape as well? And what else do we find with sauropods? Birds and pterosaurs. These flying animals were as incapable of escaping the flood as lumbering sauropods? Unlikely.

I could go on and on and on. The differential escape hypothesis is pleasing to the uninformed, but it only works if one makes sweeping generalizations with no real knowledge of the fossil record. Even minor familiarity with the fossil record shows that the pattern you claim should have been produced by the Flood doesn't actually exist. This is a big problem for you.

What do you think I'm trying to do? I'm LEARNING as I GO!!! Just because I don't have as much knowledge in the area of paleontology and science as you do, DOES NOT MEAN CREATIONISM IS DEBUNKED. It just means that I need time to learn.

I have seen that when new fossils are found, if they do not fit into the "supposed" time period, the scientist tries to interpret or discard the find or to move the time period upward or downward. If you are familiar with the fossil record, then you should know that too. The fossil record is ever changing as new fossils are found!

Living fossils are found with dinosaurs! These fossils are found living today and thriving!

“We found fossilized examples from every major invertebrate animal phylum living today including: arthropods (insects, crustaceans etc.), shellfish, echinoderms (starfish, crinoids, brittle stars, etc.), corals, sponges, and segmented worms (earthworms, marine worms).

“The vertebrates—animals with backbones such as fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals—show this same pattern.”

“Contrary to popular belief, modern types of birds have been found, including: parrots, owls, penguins, ducks, loons, albatross, cormorants, sandpipers, avocets, etc. When scientists who support evolution disclosed this information during our TV interviews it appears that they could hardly believe what they were saying on camera.”

Also frogs, snakes, lizards, and on and on.
Werner living fossils

“It is becoming more and more difficult for the evolutionary model to stand in the face of this great number of living fossils. Adding the many other problems with evolution (fossil record, origin of first life, geological layering problems, similarities of non-related animals, etc.), you can declare with confidence that yes, the theory is finished. If a few larger mammals were found in the dinosaur layers, it should be over even for the die-hard believers of evolution, but people tend to go to their grave with the theories they learned in college. A new generation might well look at all of this and ask, ‘What were they thinking?’ ”




Where is the reliablilty of your fossil record for the evolution theory???

 

[anyathesword]

Predicted response:

"But don't you see?! IT DOES MATCH UP, GUYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Can't you tell be my excessive use of exclamation marks? Scientists just say it doesn't, but it totally does, and I totally know this even though all my information on the subject comes from people who've probably never even been to a dig site their entire lives!

LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

NO IT DOESNT!!!!! LOL!!!!

 

[anyathesword]

To you, it doesn't. You have already stated that no matter what the observation is, you will claim that it is consistent with Genesis. If this isn't the caes, then please tell us what would falsify creationism.

Nothing.

 

[Loudmouth]

I have seen that when new fossils are found, if they do not fit into the "supposed" time period, the scientist tries to interpret or discard the find or to move the time period upward or downward.

Do you have anything to back up this accusation?

Living fossils are found with dinosaurs! These fossils are found living today and thriving!

Fossils are still very much dead. I have yet to see a fossil get up from the table and start running about.

“We found fossilized examples from every major invertebrate animal phylum living today including: arthropods (insects, crustaceans etc.), shellfish, echinoderms (starfish, crinoids, brittle stars, etc.), corals, sponges, and segmented worms (earthworms, marine worms).

What you forget is that they are not the same species as we find today.

“Contrary to popular belief, modern types of birds have been found, including: parrots, owls, penguins, ducks, loons, albatross, cormorants, sandpipers, avocets, etc. When scientists who support evolution disclosed this information during our TV interviews it appears that they could hardly believe what they were saying on camera.”

Where have they been found? In the Devonian? In the Cambrian?

Also frogs, snakes, lizards, and on and on.
Werner living fossils

None of which are the same species thare are alive today.

 

[Loudmouth]

Nothing.

Then creationism is a dogma. Why are you even arguing about the evidence if the evidence does not matter?

 

[Black Akuma]

Nothing.

So it's unfalsifiable. Ergo,not science.

Thank you.

 

[bhsmte]

Nothing.

There you have it, you are all set, and you have nothing to learn.

I make it a habit of giving great distance, to those who claim; they can never ever, ever be wrong about something. From that point on, any conversation would be fruitless.

 

[anyathesword]

Did you bother to read the attachment from Cabvet? There are tons of sources which state the vast majority of scholars and historians all agree the 4 gospels were written by ANONYMOUS authors.

You rely on this book so much, but don't take the time to do your own research on the historicity of it? Then you ignore objective empirical evidence that has been tested over and over again? Hey, if that type of double standard works for you, than knock yourself out.

By the way, the fragment you spoke about, is thought to be dated around 200BC, per the attached.

Date of P64 (Magdalen Papyrus of Matthew)

What did I just say in my previous post? I LEARN as I GO!

I still disagree. Even if scholars aren't 100 percent certian who wrote the Gospel of MAtthew, it has nothing to do with WHAT is presented in this Gospel and all the others.

What is presented in the Gospel of Matthew that is used by the number SEVEN?

 

[anyathesword]

There you have it, you are all set, and you have nothing to learn.

I make it a habit of giving great distance, to those who claim; they can never ever, ever be wrong about something. From that point on, any conversation would be fruitless.

You need to understand something here.

The Bible is The TRUTH period. Whatever it says is true, no exceptions. I base my belief on this book. The Bible is never wrong.

My job is to try to inform people here about the lies, inconsistancy, and assumptions about the Theory of Evolution. All the things it stands on have problems.

I yes, may be wrong on some points, but the Bible is NEVER wrong.

 

[Black Akuma]

My job is to try to inform people here about the lies, inconsistancy, and assumptions about the Theory of Evolution.

Your job is to vomit out all the tired, threadbare arguments that apologetic liars have been feeding you. You're like the living embodiment of every creationist stereotype ever conceived. Just about everything you said in this thread and elsewhere has been demonstrably and ridiculously wrong, and you refuse to address them.

...actually, no, it's not fair to say you refuse. You can't address them, because you have no understanding of the subjects, no more than a parrot understands the words he repeats. But at least a parrot will eventually stop squawking. You just go on and on and on.

 

[ExistenceUnknown]

What did I just say in my previous post? I LEARN as I GO!

Then let me be the first to warn you Anya. What you learn may shake your faith. I know it did mine as it did for many others on this board.

What it comes down to is if you are willing to disregard facts in favor of faith. Because faith is really the only leg you have to stand on.

 

[anyathesword]

Then creationism is a dogma. Why are you even arguing about the evidence if the evidence does not matter?

I'm informing you of the flaws in your theory and how much you all have been decieved.

Is God ever wrong?

 

[lifepsyop]

According to the Bible, everything was created during creation week, from bacteria to humans, some 6,000 years ago. Some here want to squeeze the entire fossil record into this timeline (of 6,000 years). My question is simple then, why don't we find fossil cows in Devonian strata?

To elaborate further, why is are there different communities of organisms in every strata and none of them correspond to what was created on creation week, except the most recent ones? Why are there dozens of layers below the more recent ones with many groups that are missing?

Okay, I did not read the whole thread and apologize if this has already been explained, but here you go.

Your question makes it sound like you have never even attempted to investigate Young Earth Creation theories.

Here's the thing, if the Bible did not contain an account of a catastrophic global flood, then you would have a point. However it does contain this account, and the Bible also says this flood killed all life that lived on land and breathed through its nostrils.

When we look at the fossil record we can see a general pattern of lifeforms sorted by ecological zonation, in the order in which they were buried by erosion and sedimentation processes caused by the flood.

In the lower rocks we find bacteria that lived in the ocean floor, and then benthic communities that lived on the seafloor. Next swimming creatures that lived in more shallow habitats. Then we find amphibious creatures, aquatic reptiles, and other reptilian animals known for living in swampy lowlands.

No we do not necessarily expect to find whales and other aquatic mammals. If you look at these animals, they are both very fast swimmers, and comfortable in deep open waters. They are not restricted to seafloor ecosystems that would have been buried. In fact, most of these aquatic mammals would be expected to be found in the upper most layers when the floodwaters receded and left them stranded on dry land. (which is why we find whale fossil graveyards in the middle of a Chiliean desert)

For the same reason you don't find whales and seals in the lower rocks, is also why you don't find the big mackerel sharks in the fossil record till way up in the Cretaceous. Yet some little shallow-living sharks appear way down in the Silurian.

Next factor we take into account is animal mobility. (otherwise known as Differential Escape) Reptiles and Mammals are like Night and Day in terms of both speed and stamina for running long distances. If floodwaters were gradually rising, rivers overflowing, basins flooding, mammals would be expected to retreat to higher ground seeking shelter. Animals that could cling to the tops of trees (like Sloths) would also have an advantage. (of course that's not to say some reptiles would not already be at higher ground to begin with)

So, back to your original question. Why do we not find cows in the Devonian? The Devonian shows evidence of aquatic/amphibious ecosystems. A cow, like all bovids at this time would be both miles inland and probably thousands of feet higher in elevation retreating from flooding rivers. (interestingly one of the last bovids to show up in the record is the Mountain Goat) That is why, from a flood model perspective, we do not expect to find cows (or any land mammals) in the lower rock layers.

Of course the model is not perfect and has its own puzzles. But it generally holds up quite well.

Why do mammals generally only appear in the upper layers from an Evolutionist's perspective? You have no answer, except for ad-hoc storytelling. Evolution does not predict mammals will evolve ever. You simply accommodated your theory to fit the fossil record and pretend you predicted it.

 

[Atheos canadensis]

What do you think I'm trying to do? I'm LEARNING as I GO!!! Just because I don't have as much knowledge in the area of paleontology and science as you do, DOES NOT MEAN CREATIONISM IS DEBUNKED. It just means that I need time to learn.

I have seen that when new fossils are found, if they do not fit into the "supposed" time period, the scientist tries to interpret or discard the find or to move the time period upward or downward. If you are familiar with the fossil record, then you should know that too. The fossil record is ever changing as new fossils are found!

If you are really intent on learning as you go then that is laudable. But surely you can understand that until you can produce an actual counterargument to the points I made, your claim that the Bible is an accurate record of what we should see in the fossil record carries no weight in this debate. Until you can produce a real counterargument, your assertion remains an assertion rather than an argument. I don't expect you to agree that Creationism has been refuted (that almost never happens), but I do expect you to recognize that the defense you have mounted so far has failed. The pattern you claim exists and should be expected if your Flood model is true does not exist. In other words, while you may maintain the veracity of Creationism, the argument you have presented in support of it has been soundly refuted.

The majority of your post is presenting points unrelated to the discussion. It doesn't matter that we find "living fossils". Besides the fact that they are not actually the same as their earliest fossil relatives, their existence doesn't change the fact that the fossil record is not organized in the pattern your Flood model predicts. I know you are trying to learn, so here's something to remember: If your model fails to match the data, your model is wrong.

 

[bhsmte]

You need to understand something here.

The Bible is The TRUTH period. Whatever it says is true, no exceptions. I base my belief on this book. The Bible is never wrong.

My job is to try to inform people here about the lies, inconsistancy, and assumptions about the Theory of Evolution. All the things it stands on have problems.

I yes, may be wrong on some points, but the Bible is NEVER wrong.

Two questions and I am done:

-what evidence do you possess that proves the scientific world is telling lies about evolution?

-how did you come to the conclusion, that the bible IS NEVER WRONG, what evidence do you have to back this claim?

 

[FredHoyle]

You need to understand something here.

The Bible is The TRUTH period. Whatever it says is true, no exceptions. I base my belief on this book. The Bible is never wrong.

Then you are doomed to remain ignorant for the rest of your life, I feel sorry for you but good luck anyway.

 

[bhsmte]

If you are really intent on learning as you go then that is laudable. But surely you can understand that until you can produce an actual counterargument to the points I made, your claim that the Bible is an accurate record of what we should see in the fossil record carries no weight in this debate. Until you can produce a real counterargument, your assertion remains an assertion rather than an argument. I don't expect you to agree that Creationism has been refuted (that almost never happens), but I do expect you to recognize that the defense you have mounted so far has failed. The pattern you claim exists and should be expected if your Flood model is true does not exist. In other words, while you may maintain the veracity of Creationism, the argument you have presented in support of it has been soundly refuted.

The majority of your post is presenting points unrelated to the discussion. It doesn't matter that we find "living fossils". Besides the fact that they are not actually the same as their earliest fossil relatives, their existence doesn't change the fact that the fossil record is not organized in the pattern your Flood model predicts. I know you are trying to learn, so here's something to remember: If your model fails to match the data, your model is wrong.

Dont' you love it?

She is learning as she goes, but she is making definitive statements that she can't be wrong about.

Spooky, spooky stuff here. Time to move on.

 

[Loudmouth]

I'm informing you of the flaws in your theory and how much you all have been decieved.

By telling us lies, like the lie about Lucy's knee?

The theory of evolution explains why there are no cows in the Devonian. Creationism does not, as you have amply shown.

Is God ever wrong?

Is the Bible your God?

 

[anyathesword]

Then let me be the first to warn you Anya. What you learn may shake your faith. I know it did mine as it did for many others on this board.

What it comes down to is if you are willing to disregard facts in favor of faith. Because faith is really the only leg you have to stand on.

And you don't think my faith has wavered in the past because of other bigger issues that are way more important than this debate?

I'v been up and down and all around because of a whole heck of different issues such as the death of my father.

Evolution will not shake my faith, trust me!

Evolution facts are all over the place and hardly make sense. And people BELIEVE this stuff???