Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Great Creationist Fossil Failure
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 623 of 1163 (793778)
11-06-2016 3:02 AM
Reply to: Message 612 by jar
11-05-2016 8:17 PM


Re: More amazing sorting
Well like I said in this thread, there are many OOPARTS. Out of place artifacts. So humans were not entirely confined to the Siberian region, but that is where most of the evidence of pre-flood humanity would be.
The bible refers to the fountains of the great deep bursting forth, yet most other times the word for fountains/springs in Hebrew is followed by "of water". As if to clarify the substance. Yet in the flood story there is no mention that these fountains are of water. This is the trigger for the flood, and also in history this lava event is widely acknowledged as the trigger event for the End Permian Extinction.
At the PT boundary the ice caps melted, the southern ice cap was far more extensive than anything today, and so naturally sea levels would change. The PT boundary is associated with widespread marine flooding into the continental interior. From a human perspective there is a double whammy. Death by lava, then if one escapes that , death by flooding when the ice caps melted.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 612 by jar, posted 11-05-2016 8:17 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 641 by jar, posted 11-06-2016 7:46 AM mindspawn has replied
 Message 656 by Theodoric, posted 11-06-2016 10:13 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 624 of 1163 (793779)
11-06-2016 3:08 AM
Reply to: Message 613 by Coyote
11-05-2016 8:18 PM


Haplogroups
The DNA evidence is clear that the widest variety of DNA representing most population groups is currently found in the Middle East. The interpretation of your map is probably skewed by the non-DNA based fossil assumption that the first humans existed in the Ethiopian region. I love the evidence of scientists but the interpretation is often along the lines of presumption rather than evidence. Other than a map with arrows, have you any true evidence that in fact humans did come from Africa rather than what the haplogroup spread would suggest?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 613 by Coyote, posted 11-05-2016 8:18 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 644 by Coyote, posted 11-06-2016 8:57 AM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 625 of 1163 (793780)
11-06-2016 3:29 AM
Reply to: Message 622 by PaulK
11-06-2016 2:37 AM


Re: More amazing sorting
You make good points there, but it does still remain obvious that under creation conditions the accumulation of bacteria cells would exist under the layer containing the first trilobite fossils. Its obvious too that these cells wouldn't fossilise immediately, taking time to fossilise. Yet during the fossilization process, physically they would obviously remain under the trilobite fossils. Being an accumulation of cells and sediment in a mat, they would have no reason to climb on top of the first trilobite exoskeleton. They would therefore form into Stromatolites whilst being lower in the strata.
I apologise for my lack of clarity regarding the burial of dead creatures as opposed to live creatures. I was intending to refer only to those animals with the intelligence and ability to move whilst being buried alive. Maybe my description did not express that. These animals able to avoid burial would do so, and in this manner dead cells of bacteria would most likely precede the first exoskeleton which would obviously come from a more mature trilobite after many generations of dead bacteria had accumulated on the ocean floor.
The order of fossilization is not inconsistent with creation week.
Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 622 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 2:37 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 626 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 3:40 AM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 627 of 1163 (793782)
11-06-2016 3:51 AM
Reply to: Message 626 by PaulK
11-06-2016 3:40 AM


Stromatolites
I did edit my post as I studied more on stromatolites. Yes you are correct in what you say , but the reality is that these would have existed on the bottom layer whether alive or dead. It would therefore be difficult for any exoskeleton to be buried under them. So however you express yourself, the order remains consistent that there would be the existence of bacteria under trilobite exoskeletons under creation conditions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 626 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 3:40 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 628 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 4:02 AM mindspawn has replied
 Message 658 by Theodoric, posted 11-06-2016 10:17 AM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 629 of 1163 (793785)
11-06-2016 5:04 AM
Reply to: Message 615 by petrophysics1
11-05-2016 8:25 PM


PT boundary flood
Mass extinctions and sea level changes - NASA/ADS
""The end Permian mass extinction has long been related to a severe, first order lowstand of sea level [Newell, N.D., 1967. Revolutions in the history of life. Geol. Soc. Am. Spec. Pap. 89, 63-91.] based primarily on the widespread absence of latest Permian ammonoid markers, but field evidence reveals that the interval coincides with a major transgression. Newell's hypothesis that marine extinctions are related to shelf habitat loss during severe regression remains tenable for the end Guadalupian and end Triassic extinction events but not for other crises. Rapid high amplitude regressive-transgressive couplets are the most frequently observed eustatic changes at times of mass extinction, with the majority of extinctions occurring during the transgressive pulse when anoxic bottom waters often became extensive. The ultimate cause of the sea-level changes is generally unclear.""
The bible is clear the flood had rising water levels, followed by receding water levels. Geological evidence shows both a transgression and a regression during the boundary, often leading to debate over the sequence of events at the PT boundary. The above quote shows lack of clarity about the cause of the marine transgression. The links below hopefully give some clarity regarding the source of the rising sea levels at the PT boundary:
Just a moment...
Accordingly, it can only be proposed as a plausible speculation Hallam, 1999 . that a major episode of global warming at the end of the Permian was caused by a marked increase in atmospheric CO 2 as a consequence of both subaerial and submarine volcanism on a massive scale. With the concomitant diminution in solubility of oxygen in seawater, a tendency towards marine anoxia would be a notable by-product of such volcanism. In summary, all major biotic crises coincide with rapid global sea-level changes with the exception of the late Palaeocene event and possibly the F—F crisis.
Mesozoic era: Age of the dinosaurs | Live Science
""Earth during the Mesozoic Era was much warmer than today, and the planet had no polar ice caps.""
The low topography of the Permian would obviously be highly susceptible to the melting of the massive glaciation that existed before the PT boundary.
Edited by mindspawn, : Changing the link and quote

This message is a reply to:
 Message 615 by petrophysics1, posted 11-05-2016 8:25 PM petrophysics1 has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 630 of 1163 (793786)
11-06-2016 5:15 AM
Reply to: Message 628 by PaulK
11-06-2016 4:02 AM


Re: Stromatolites
Regarding the huge gap, always the timeframes come up. There appears to be a huge gap in the time periods only in evolutionist's eyes because evolutionists believe in huge timeframes. There are many creationist websites that show anomalies in radiometric dating. This particular thread is dealing with the ordering of fossils, not the aging of fossils.
Can you tell me the actual height distance in the layers between the stromatolite and the first exoskeleton? Any reason why that difference is impossible to be laid down over a few years while the first trilobite sheds the exoskeleton? A few meters?
Edited by mindspawn, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 628 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 4:02 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 633 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 5:40 AM mindspawn has replied
 Message 645 by Coyote, posted 11-06-2016 9:00 AM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 631 of 1163 (793787)
11-06-2016 5:23 AM
Reply to: Message 621 by NoNukes
11-05-2016 11:36 PM


Re: Boundaries
I'm still learning about radiometric dating. And mutation rates. If I get enough time I will go back to that. But my main reason for leaving the site at that time was the language and abuse. Other creationist's messaged me privately and advised me not to put up with it. Obviously I have no reason to put up with the abuse, there is no reason to have a scientific discussion in an uncivilised manner.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 621 by NoNukes, posted 11-05-2016 11:36 PM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 679 by NoNukes, posted 11-06-2016 1:08 PM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 632 of 1163 (793788)
11-06-2016 5:29 AM
Reply to: Message 620 by jar
11-05-2016 10:04 PM


Re: More amazing sorting
I enjoyed that whole article and believe the facts present in the entire article favour the ark story. So the more you quote the happier I am. thanks for quoting the extra detail. I just like to keep my quotes short if possible.
The scientists in the article seem a little confused. Obviously this confusion is solved by the ark story, the origin of all post-flood terrestrial mammals should be from Turkey. The bible points to that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 620 by jar, posted 11-05-2016 10:04 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 642 by jar, posted 11-06-2016 7:52 AM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 634 of 1163 (793790)
11-06-2016 5:50 AM
Reply to: Message 618 by Dr Adequate
11-05-2016 9:49 PM


Re: More amazing sorting
Yes I believe that most dinosaurs did rapidly adapt from the archosaur. But not necessarily ark archosaurs, these would have been marine flood survivors. Archosaurs being arguably of amphibuous habits. This is why their numbers are greater in the Triassic and Jurassic, ark animals only starting to appear in number a little later.
You say: Do you have a shred of evidence for that? And they are just one instance of a general pattern, though. Are you going to make piecemeal excuses for everything that looks exactly like scientists are right?
I am not making piecemeal excuses. There is actually evidence to support that trilobites and early bacteria thrived in warm anoxic sulfuric environments. This is not very conducive to other life. So as today, there used to be prevalent environments and rare environments. To expect every modern environment to be prevalent enough in the Cambrian to show fossils is not logical.
Even evolutionists excuse the lack of transitional fossils before the Cambrian explosion. To expect creationists to come up with a rare "angiosperm/mammal" environment in a marine/swampy pre-flood world is a little ironic when evolutionists also have little evidence for transitional fossils before the Cambrian Explosion.
The early precambrian was anoxic.
http://www.sciencedirect.com/...rticle/pii/S0301926805000355
There is evidence to support that trilobites and bacteria existed in an anoxic sulfuric environment:
Just a moment...
"""Late Cambrian to early Ordovician trilobites, the family Olenidae, were tolerant of oxygen-poor, sulfur-rich sea floor conditions, and a case is made that they were chemoautotrophic symbionts. Olenids were uniquely adapted to this habitat in the Lower Paleozoic, which was widespread in the Late Cambrian over Scandinavia. This life habit explains distinctive aspects of olenid morphology: wide thoraces and large numbers of thoracic segments, thin cuticle and, in some species, degenerate hypostome, and the occasional development of brood pouches. Geochemical and field evidence is consistent with this interpretation. Olenids occupied their specialized habitat for 60 million years until their extinction at the end of the Ordovician.
Colorless sulfur bacteria, a heterogeneous category of bacteria, are able to use reduced sulfur as a source of energy for growth and reproduction; as autotrophs, many use carbon dioxide as their sole source of carbon. They employ a variety of reactions to release this energy, reflecting a comparable variety of phylogenetic origins (1, 2). The bacteria require both a source of sulfur or sulfide and also a limited quantity of oxygen to permit oxidation."""

This message is a reply to:
 Message 618 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-05-2016 9:49 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 635 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 5:59 AM mindspawn has replied
 Message 664 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-06-2016 10:43 AM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 636 of 1163 (793792)
11-06-2016 6:07 AM
Reply to: Message 633 by PaulK
11-06-2016 5:40 AM


Re: Stromatolites
You say : you have yet to offer any reason to expect a gap at all.
I have offered a reason. The bacteria collected on the surface first.
Then after a few years the first exoskeleton would have been deposited. Fossilisation does not occur every time something falls to the ground. Who knows how long the bacteria were multipying before the first exoskeleton actually got fossilised.
Here's another reason we could have bacteria existing together with trilobites from creation week, but the trilobite fossils are rarely found at the lowest layers:
http://inyo.coffeecup.com/site/latham/latham.html
The main reason there are so few complete, intact trilobite specimens to be found in the Latham--and at other early Cambrian sites, for that matter--has to do with the original fragility of the animal's exoskeleton. In actual life, trilobites possessed a thin outer covering composed of chitin--a hard, horny substance protecting the delicate soft-bodied organism within. While this material can be preserved in the rocks for millions of years, the problem is that the primitive early Cambrian trilobites--among the earliest known animals with hard parts--had loosely attached body segments. Thus, the head, thorax (middle portion) and tail tended to separate very easily upon the animal's death. Also, trilobites molted throughout their lives, periodically shedding their chitinous external covering in much the same way their modern-day relatives, insects, crabs, scorpions and pill bugs regularly shed their own exoskeletons during the molting process. The result was that the trauma of the molting often caused the already free-moving body segments of the trilobite to disassociate and break off, to be scattered by the sea currents.
These animals did all exist together with bacteria in the Pre-Cambrian:
http://inyo.coffeecup.com/site/latham/latham.html
All told, roughly 21 different species of fossils--from tracks and trails of soft-bodied organisms (who left no other evidence of their existence)--to a siliceous sponge have been identified from the Latham Shale of the Marble Mountains. In addition to trilobites, the fossil faunal list includes a coelenterate (possible jelly fish), three species of brachiopods, two kinds of mollusks, an annelid (worm), an echinoderm, anomalocaris fragments (this was the largest predator of the early Cambrian seas--olenellids likely ducked whenever they saw this monster lurking about...), and Girvanella nodules (precipitated by a species of cyanobacteria, blue-green algae).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 633 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 5:40 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 639 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 6:53 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 637 of 1163 (793793)
11-06-2016 6:13 AM
Reply to: Message 635 by PaulK
11-06-2016 5:59 AM


Re: More amazing sorting
My understanding was that pre-Cambrian oceans were largely anoxic. If you can show me evidence of vast areas of aerobic pre-Cambrian oceans then I would be more inclined to expect modern lobsters back then. If not vast areas then they would be confined to rare niche environments which would explain the lack.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 635 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 5:59 AM PaulK has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 638 of 1163 (793794)
11-06-2016 6:40 AM
Reply to: Message 635 by PaulK
11-06-2016 5:59 AM


Transitional trilobite
You say you do have evidence for early transitional fossils. Please show me any evidence for any ancestor of the trilobite. A transitional type with a form about halfway between bacteria and a trilobite would be particularly convincing.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 635 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 5:59 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 640 by PaulK, posted 11-06-2016 7:03 AM mindspawn has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 646 of 1163 (793812)
11-06-2016 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 645 by Coyote
11-06-2016 9:00 AM


Re: Stromatolites
I'm not an expert in that area, neither in this thread.
But I'm just here to show you that the fossil record does fit in with creationism.
I wouldn't say it fits evolution, just not enough transitional fossils, especially preceding the Cambrian Explosion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 645 by Coyote, posted 11-06-2016 9:00 AM Coyote has not replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 647 of 1163 (793813)
11-06-2016 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 644 by Coyote
11-06-2016 8:57 AM


Re: Haplogroups
I don't buy the arrows. I need more evidence than that.
The arrows merely reflect the earlier "out of Africa" hypothesis based on fossils , not on DNA. The actual DNA variety in the Middle east tells a different story. Please explain why they pointed the Africa arrows up, it makes more sense to point them down from the Middle East.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 644 by Coyote, posted 11-06-2016 8:57 AM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 650 by Coyote, posted 11-06-2016 9:55 AM mindspawn has replied

  
mindspawn
Member (Idle past 2660 days)
Posts: 1015
Joined: 10-22-2012


Message 648 of 1163 (793815)
11-06-2016 9:46 AM
Reply to: Message 643 by Theodoric
11-06-2016 8:47 AM


Narmer Tablets
They used to write off Troy as a myth until it was found. Are you referring to the Egyptian Narmer Tablets?
Certainly the existence of those dinosaur depictions in Egyptian artifacts is enough to make many think twice about schoolbook history. It takes a free thinker to do so, obviously most of you are emotionally invested in your side of this debate to really free your minds to alternative possibilities. But always the academic mind should consider the alternatives and truly weigh up the core evidence for a view.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 643 by Theodoric, posted 11-06-2016 8:47 AM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 660 by Theodoric, posted 11-06-2016 10:26 AM mindspawn has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024