The Great Creationist Fossil Failure

My question is 'where were squirrels living for 200 million years, not detected in the fossil record'.I'm assuming that, in your scenario, humans also lived in some isolated region for half a billion years before they actually appeared in the fossil record.This seems rather dubious to me.

Actually, the land mass was relatively more emergent 6 times in the last half billion years. We are currently in a periods of low sea levels. Why would the two be incompatible. Periods of flourishing diversity are often called 'radiations'.There have always been 'dry places' in geological history. So, you are spinning a tale of a very special dry place that is different from any was know and isolated from the rest of the planet. Again, not likely, particularly in the cases of plants and humans.What would really help you out here is having an actual sanctuary for humans since the beginning of life, that has remained undiscovered. I commend your imagination, but the facts do not support it. If you want to live in an imaginary world, that is fine with me. Lots of people do that.

Actually, we are still susceptible to marine transgression. But I don't see why that would force humans to abandon living at low elevations. In fact, that goes against all history. People have always lived on sea shores. Once again, you make an unsupported assertion. Just saying that something was so will not cut it around here. This is standard evolutionary theory. It is logical that an isolated population can evolve away from its ancestral population. Again, make good on your evidence. People say a lot of things, but YECs seldom back them up.

So say YECs. The point being? But you don't even know what the facts are. You talk about species surviving for a billion years in an isolated state only to be released at some environmental change that has happened many times in the past. You have no example of such a sanctuary and you have no explanation of how multiple species could be released at several different times in the history of the earth.Now you are talking about humans only living in high mountains until the P/T boundary.This just isn't passing the giggle test. Terms are assumptions?Sorry, but this was going on long before you came along. It's up to you to learn the science, not for it to adapt to you. As usual, it's a little more complex than that. If you are only looking at a pond, perhaps your scenario might make sense. But in this case there is no data suggesting terrestrial animals anywhere prior to the Devonian. And there were plenty of land masses back then. Base on your reasoning?I suppose that you have some kind of qualifications or experience to be able to say such a thing? You have studied somewhere perhaps?

Good, then show us your research. Are there human fossils or artifacts beneath the basalts?

How convenient for you. With that kind of thing going for you, we can safely say that ignorance of facts can be the basis of an explanation. But we have hundreds.How many do you need? Denial is not a substitute for facts. What 'rapid appearance'?How does DNA support your position?Saying that fossils do not exist is not the same as saying that some are missing. It would seem to me that only one transitional fossil would be suggestive of evolution. But we have hundreds, and more almost every day.

That notion exists in a vacuum. First of all there have always been dry lands. When you lack the facts to support your position, yes. Certainly, if you ignore all of the surrounding data. Your ad hoc explanation does not take into account the effect of multiple marine transgressions for instance, and you contention that the first humans live exclusively in mountainous regions is utterly ridiculous thinking.

Yes, I'm sure.Nevertheless, my main point was that there have been parts or all of the Absaroka, Zuni and Tejas (major) cratonic cycles since the Permo-Triassic boundary. There have probably been dozens of minor ones.There were also several such inundations prior to the P/Tr boundary.To break down the boundary of these 'exclaves' in such an order that we see is pretty unbelievable, regardless of logic.

So, they were not very high highlands ...Nevertheless, it is a pretty common observation that people lived near the sea since the earliest humans existed. Climate is moderated and food is more dependable. Actually, they were not more common. There was just a longer time period prior to the P/Tr boundary. It is a supported opinion. I have explained why.Your explanation falls flat, especially when there were numerous opportunities for emigration prior to and long after the P/Tr events, but it didn't happen until just a couple of million years ago.So, all you have is "I choose highlands".

So, you admit that you ignore old earth evidence as well.Do you realize that all you have told us is that you base your explanation on a lack of evidence?

So, there is another mass migration not in evidence.Or in the Bible ...ETA: So it appears that Noah lived in Siberia? Edited by edge, : No reason given.

Well, that's easy. You simply deny them. The basis for your explanation is denial. But no ones says that a trilobite evolved form a bacterium.Except YECs, of course. That would be called strawman argument.

If you want to bring up examples that would be good. We could have an actual discussion rather than you just asserting supposed facts.

Well, you ideas are certainly loony.What do you think of the theory that Noah launched the ark from New Jersey?I mean, it really makes sense because of the pine barrens, where Noah could have gotten the pitch to seal the ark. Doesn't that make sense to you?ETA: Hey, there are lots of pine trees in Siberia. And they aren't even angiosperms...Edited by edge, : No reason given.

Well, we've been asking for evidence. Does this mean that you have no intention of providing it? Are you a conspiracy theorist also?ETA: By the way, I have no problem with people using stories and imagination to contrive and idea that they will resolve by testing. That can easily be a part of science. The problem I have is when they accept those stories without question. Edited by edge, : No reason given.