Why are there no cows in the Devonian?

[lifepsyop]

No, the flood model predicts fruit trees, as very specifically mentioned here:

Genesis 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.

Those are supposed to be the first organisms ever created, yet they appear much later in the fossil record.

The fossil record has nothing to do with Creation week. The YEC model is based on the Genesis Flood, which explains why we have a Fossil Record to begin with.

You ever notice how evolutionists are always trying to explain the existence of large groups of fossils as being due to some kind of isolated mudslide or overflowing river?

 

[Atheos canadensis]

I will keep repeating this: if you turned even a percentage of these critical standards to Evolution, your theory would be left in shambles. You will strain at any gnat when it comes to YEC, but swallow any camel when it comes to Evolution.

You keep saying this while ignoring a critical difference between the two cases. Gaps in the fossil record or finding certain lineages in older strata than they had previously been found in (to an extent) does not cause a problem for evolutionary theory. The problems we are raising with your various mechanisms completely refute your model however. There is no way to explain why the Flood didn't deposit angiosperms until the Cretaceous, for instance. You mention some conveniently nebulous property that they must have had to explain this, but I notice you didn't even try to answer m y challenge to describe what sort of property this might be.

And you keep making the bizarre criticism that the theory of evolution conforms to the evidence. Maybe that sounds like criticism to creationists, but science actually considers that to be standard practice. It is pointless to complain that if the fossil record were different then evolutionary theory would conform to fit that. The fact is that there is an established pattern in the fossil record that, if it were violated in some major way (e.g. Cambrian cows) would destroy evolutionary theory.

 

[PsychoSarah]

The fossil record has nothing to do with Creation week. The YEC model is based on the Genesis Flood, which explains why we have a Fossil Record to begin with.

You ever notice how evolutionists are always trying to explain the existence of large groups of fossils as being due to some kind of isolated mudslide or overflowing river?

Fossils form under specific conditions, which is why not every thing that has ever lived becomes a fossil. Thus, when there are a bunch of fossils in the same place, it isn't much of a surprise, considering that, should stuff die somewhere else, it probably wouldn't have become a fossil within the time frame that the large group of fossils were made.

 

[Black Akuma]

And the population levels of those creatures that we see today could have been much lower at the time of the flood.

And if any or all of those specimens were found in the lower rocks, you would just say they "evolved" and remained in stasis for ~500 million years like you do everything else. It's not like any of this is evidence for Evolution.

There's nothing to suggest they were so low we'd never find them at all. They're obviously prolific when they show up later. And stop telling me what you think would happen if yadda yadda.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Someone is taking a long time to try to respond...

 

[PsychoSarah]

Oh look, the creationists left. I guess this was too much for them.

 

[lifepsyop]

Why is that ridiculous? We are running out of space right now, with just the currently living species. More than 99% of all species that have ever existed are extinct. To have all of these creatures exist at the same time would be worse than suddenly multiplying the human population by 100 without any warning or time to adjust. It doesn't matter how limitless heaven and hell supposedly are, last time I checked, earth was a finite size, and there are no suggestions made by the bible that the size of the earth as a whole has ever been changed. Plus, there is not enough water on earth for a flood of the level of The Great Flood to have occurred, and even if there was, there wouldn't to have been any place for that water to go, the world would still be flooded.

Sarah, I'm sorry for being rude in my last post. I sometimes get too hostile when up against so many devout anti-creationists.

The different kinds of animals on Earth today have been reproducing for over 4,000 years since the flood, and as we can see there is plenty of room left over. The animals prior to the flood had only been reproducing for around 1,000 years. So today is the most populated the Earth has ever been.

Sarah, I really wish you would honestly question what you've been told about Evolution. If even for just a week, just try it out. If you study Evolution long enough you will find it is motivated by an anti-Biblical materialist philosophy, and not hard evidence. These people are seeing whatever they want to see to try and deny God's existence.

The Bible says we know God exists by looking at the created world. So that we will have no excuse. (Romans 1:20)

Please really question why you believe in Evolution. God wants you to turn from vain imaginations and seek the truth of His creation, the fall of mankind, and the salvation through Jesus Christ. Please really think about these things.

 

[Atheos canadensis]

We find plenty of arthropod / crustacean "living fossils" in the lower rock records. Virtually unchanged for 300-500 "million years". This is expected under YEC and runs completely counter to Evolutionary predictions.

If a certain creature is missing it could just be because that species did not happen to be fossilized or that we just have not yet found that fossil. Ya know, the explanation Evolutionists invoke on a constant basis?

Really? Please quote me a source on evolution that states that organisms are required to change. Because I'm pretty sure the theory says the change is in response to differential success at transmitting their genes. I notice you threw out this criticism to sidestep the point that was made about them, i.e. that they share the same environment as trilobites but never show up in the record with trilobites.

And as has been pointed out, it isn't "certain species" that are missing, it's entire groups of organisms. Like those pesky angiosperms for which you have no explanation.

Based on what? Are you kidding me? I actually have to explain the mobility differences between mammals and reptiles to you?

In other words, you actually have no evidence to support your claim that highly derive marine reptiles like ichthyosaurs were inferior to their mammalian counterparts. You think a sea otter could outswim an ichthyosaur?

I already explained two alternate hypotheses that Evolutionists were prepared to pursue. 1) Birds could have evolved from a proto-mammal instead of dinosaurs. 2) Mammals could have evolved from amphibians instead of reptiles.

And yet neither of these theories is the accepted view. Almost as if science is a self-correcting process that strives to conform to the evidence as best it can. Yes, yes, I know you have a problem with theories conforming to the evidence. Is that why you're so sanguine about your Flood model failing utterly to explain the fossil record?

You ever notice how evolutionists are always trying to explain the existence of large groups of fossils as being due to some kind of isolated mudslide or overflowing river?

Now why would they do that? If only there was some sort of way to quickly research this sort of thing. Oh wait, there is. It's called the internet and some minor use of it has furnished me with modern analogues that align perfectly with what we see in the fossil record:

Here you can read a rather florid description of a mass death of caribou crossing a flooded river in 1984.

"At least 9,604 caribou (by official count as of Sunday) and probably more than 10,000 died at Limestone Falls"​

Note that while the scale of this disaster was unprecedented, large numbers of deaths were in fact common:

"Caribou have always died at Limestone Falls; perhaps 50 a year would perish there, maybe 100 or even 500 would drown when the summer rains had been particularly heavy."​

And similar mass deaths are common for herds of wildebeest crossing rivers in flood. Click through these images to see what happens when large numbers of otherwise competent swimmers try to cross together. When these mass death assemblages are buried by sediment, then you have the potential to get massive fossil bonebeds as seen in the fossil record.

 

[lifepsyop]

There's nothing to suggest they were so low we'd never find them at all. They're obviously prolific when they show up later. And stop telling me what you think would happen if yadda yadda.

Obviously we don't have a time machine to verify actual population levels. It is speculative.

And even evolutionists will admit that the absence of a type of animal in the fossil record even over many "millions of years" does not mean it wasn't alive at the time of deposition.

 

[Loudmouth]

Obviously we don't have a time machine to verify actual population levels. It is speculative.

And even evolutionists will admit that the absence of a type of animal in the fossil record even over many "millions of years" does not mean it wasn't alive at the time of deposition.

We are talking about the absence of entire swaths of animals, from amphibians to mammals. We aren't talking about a transitional fossil for one small twig on the Tree of Life. We are talking about entire massive branches that are completely absent from the fossil record.

 

[Black Akuma]

Obviously we don't have a time machine to verify actual population levels. It is speculative.

And even evolutionists will admit that the absence of a type of animal in the fossil record even over many "millions of years" does not mean it wasn't alive at the time of deposition.

Agreed. But, again, were not just talking about one or two specimens. We're talking about literally hundreds of different animals that are missing from where they should be if they were living in the same time.

There's no reason flying reptiles, which were excellent flyers, should be found below emus and dodos.

There's no reason marine reptiles, which are comprised of dozens of distinct species, should never appear with whales.


Th

 

[lifepsyop]

a rather florid description of a mass death of caribou crossing a flooded river in 1984.

"At least 9,604 caribou (by official count as of Sunday) and probably more than 10,000 died at Limestone Falls"​

Note that while the scale of this disaster was unprecedented, large numbers of deaths were in fact common:

"Caribou have always died at Limestone Falls; perhaps 50 a year would perish there, maybe 100 or even 500 would drown when the summer rains had been particularly heavy."​

And similar mass deaths are common for herds of wildebeest crossing rivers in flood. to see what happens when large numbers of otherwise competent swimmers try to cross together. When these mass death assemblages are buried by sediment, then you have the potential to get massive fossil bonebeds as seen in the fossil record.

Yea, guess what happens to the carcasses? They are scavenged by animals, bacteria, and decomposed by the elements.

"Three days after it started, the macabre procession of caribou carcasses swirling past the outcropping began to diminish."

Only catastrophic burials can rationally explain the massive fossil graveyards we find all over the Earth. The global flood model is an excellent explanation for this, whether you like it or not.

 

[Loudmouth]

Only catastrophic burials can rationally explain the massive fossil graveyards we find all over the Earth. The global flood model is an excellent explanation for this, whether you like it or not.

Catastrophic burials don't require the entire globe to be covered in water. Also, catastrophic burials don't sort animals by lineage.

 

[Queller]

You didn't "deal" with anything. Just hand-waving. These are YEC puzzles. The Evolution model has plenty of puzzles.

We don't find whales with plesiosaurs. So what? There may be several different factors concerning the behavior and physiology of those extinct aquatic reptiles that differentiate them from mammals.

OK, name some. Provide evidence for your conclusion?

The same goes for dinosaurs being separate from mammals in general. So what? They may have occupied significantly different habitats.

elephants, buffalo, and sheep share the same ecological zones (grasslands and woodlands) as Brachiosaurs, Anklyosaurs, and Wannanosaurs. Yet they are NEVER found together in the the same layer of sediment.

Some dinosaurs may be very fast moving but have significantly lower stamina than mammals, not to mention intelligence. Crocodiles/Alligators can movevery fast for a short distance, yet will tire easily.

And other dinosaurs don't.

Mammals are substantially different than reptiles in almost every regard. Try and grasp that.

Try not to be too obnoxious, OK? We are all supposed to be adults.

Evolution doesn't explain anything about mammals or dinosaurs. Why do the big sauropods suddenly appear all over the world in the Mesozoic? Oh they just do.

Sure, if you consider the Permian-Triassic extinction event clearing away the competition, "just doing".

Why do dinosaurs go extinct at the K/T? Oh they just do.

Because the K/T Extinction event wiped out 95% or more of the non-avian dinosaurs.

Why do most modern mammal body plans suddenly appear at the Paleocene/Eocene with virtually no record of any ancestral transitional forms? Oh they just do.

Except they don't.

Why does an 'advanced' semi-aquatic mammal, essentially a mix between a platypus and a beaver (Castorocauda) appear in the middle of the Jurassic 100 million years before evolutionists thought aquatically adapted mammals "evolved" ? Oh it just does.

Because somebody got something wrong? Why is that a problem for science.

Why is there a 15 million year gap of tetrapod/lobe-finned fish as soon 'Stega crawled up on land? And on the other side of "Romer's Gap", essentially modern reptiles are running around? Oh there just is. Why is the fossil record virtually devoid of any Evolution? Uh, Punctuated Equilibrium, yea... we predicted it all along.

The fossil record shows all kinds of evolution.

If you actually study paleontology and biogeography literature there are innumerable puzzles and enigmas with Evolutionary explanations.

Name some.

 

[Queller]

Isn't it the evolutionists that are invited here, that are the ones trying to convince someone of something or that a Christian's belief is a myth and fairy tale? That the born again Christians are the ones giving answers according to God's word?

That's all well and good to claim it is God's Word, just don't try to claim it is science. They are two different things.

 

[lifepsyop]

elephants, buffalo, and sheep share the same ecological zones (grasslands and woodlands) as Brachiosaurs, Anklyosaurs, and Wannanosaurs. Yet they are NEVER found together in the the same layer of sediment.

Already explained repeatedly. Different physiology. Different mobility. Different behavior/intelligence. In general, we don't expect mammals to react the same way as dinosaurs. They are fundamentally different types of animals.

Sure, if you consider the Permian-Triassic extinction event clearing away the competition, "just doing".

Because the K/T Extinction event wiped out 95% or more of the non-avian dinosaurs.

Ad-hoc storytelling. Assumption of Evolution as evidence for Evolution.

 

[46AND2]

The Bible is never wrong.

Matthew 5:18 New International Version (for you to understand better)

For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.

Same verse but in the King James Version:

For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

In the Hebrew language a jot is the smallest letter, just like a dot.

This verse is saying that not one little dot, not one letter, not one word will disappear UNTIL EVERYTHING IS accomplished!! And that of course is after the earth and heaven will disappear (Révélations)

Do you get the powerful thing that Jesus just said right there? That's pretty powerful if you ask me.

Really? Not one jot or tittle? Then why has Goliath's height changed?

In the dead sea scrolls and other early manuscripts, Goliath is not over 6 cubits, he is only over 4 cubits.

 

[Loudmouth]

As others have mentioned, there are simply too many animals in the fossil record for it to be a record of a single catastrophic flood 4,000 years ago. First up, crinoids;

Crinoidal limestones, such as the Mission Canyon-Livingstone unit, provide an estimate, even though it be of necessity a rough one, of their abundance in the clear shallow seas they loved. In the Canadian Rockies the Livingstone limestone was deposited to a thickness of 2,000 feet on the margin of the Cordilleran geosyncline, but it thins rapidly eastward to a thickness of about 1,000 feet in the Front Ranges and to about 500 feet in the Williston Basin. Even though its crinoidal content decreases eastward, it may be calculated to represent at least 10,000 cubic miles of broken crinoid plates. How many millions, billions, trillions of crinoids would be required to provide such a deposit? The number staggers the imagination.
Thomas H. Clark and Colin W. Stearn, The Geological Evolution of North America, (New York: The Ronald Press, 1960), p. 86-88.
​

That formation covers a large portion of North American, and it has 2,000 feet of just broken sea lily parts. No flood can do that.

Then we have the Karoo formation:

Whitcomb and Morris cite with approval a paleontologist who estimates that the Karroo Formation of southern Africa is believed to contain 800 billion fossil vertebrates with an average size of the fox.38 There are 126 billion acres on the surface of the earth. Only 30 percent of this area is land, giving a land area of 38 billion acres. If 800 billion animals were spread over the 38 billion available acres, there would be 21 animals with an average size of a fox, per acre, from this deposit alone. This does not include all the vertebrate fossil deposits throughout the rest of the world. Assuming that the Karroo beds are only 1% of the fossil vertebrates in the world (the Karroo beds occupy much less than 1% of the sedimentary column) means that 2100 animals per acre occupied the preflood world. Since an acre is 4840 square yards, each animal would have only 2 square yards, or 18 square feet, of territory. That is an area only 4.2 wide by 4.2 feet long. This can be put in a setting that most Americans can understand. The average house lot is about a quarter acre. Can you imagine every house in your neighborhood surrounded by 525 hungry animals the size of a fox? I, for one, would not venture out of doors. Obviously this is far too many animals.
http://glennmortonspages.wikispaces.com/Too+Many+Fossils+for+a+Global+Flood
​

We haven't even started with the plants, plankton, and diatoms yet. Needless to say, no recent global flood can explain these deposits.

 

[Queller]

We find plenty of arthropod / crustacean "living fossils" in the lower rock records. Virtually unchanged for 300-500 "million years". This is expected under YEC and runs completely counter to Evolutionary predictions.

If a certain creature is missing it could just be because that species did not happen to be fossilized or that we just have not yet found that fossil. Ya know, the explanation Evolutionists invoke on a constant basis?

Sorry, this makes no sense. We have hundreds of thousands of fossils of creatures that are bottom feeders in early layers but somehow not one single crab, lobster, or starfish? You could make a hurricane with all that hand-waving.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Sarah, I'm sorry for being rude in my last post. I sometimes get too hostile when up against so many devout anti-creationists.

The different kinds of animals on Earth today have been reproducing for over 4,000 years since the flood, and as we can see there is plenty of room left over. The animals prior to the flood had only been reproducing for around 1,000 years. So today is the most populated the Earth has ever been.

Sarah, I really wish you would honestly question what you've been told about Evolution. If even for just a week, just try it out. If you study Evolution long enough you will find it is motivated by an anti-Biblical materialist philosophy, and not hard evidence. These people are seeing whatever they want to see to try and deny God's existence.

The Bible says we know God exists by looking at the created world. So that we will have no excuse. (Romans 1:20)

Please really question why you believe in Evolution. God wants you to turn from vain imaginations and seek the truth of His creation, the fall of mankind, and the salvation through Jesus Christ. Please really think about these things.

You have to realize that, again, if there were only 1 of every species of plant, animal, bacteria, etc., living on earth at the same time, that it would still not be enough space, especially for the plants, considering that they all need specific kinds of environments to grow in. A cactus needs a dessert, a Venus flytrap can only occur naturally in the Carolinas of the United States without human tampering, these creatures can't just be plopped down everywhere, because it is impossible to have an environment that is suitable for every creature. All those freshwater creatures couldn't be dumped into the ocean. So in the best, most diverse kinds of ecosystems, the overcrowding would be too much. There isn't enough surface area for all the plants to grow on, much less get the sunlight they need. And we can already tell from the fossil record that more than just 1 of each species existed, trilobite fossils are so common you can get them for less than $20, ground up fossilized sea creatures is one of the (disturbing) ingredients in toothpaste. This wouldn't work with just one of everything, but we already know that there was more than just one, or even a couple, of every creature that existed. It just doesn't work.