The Great Creationist Fossil Failure

After the flood, there were only 8 humans. with massive life-spans. Unless you can find Noah's grave you are unlikely to find any human fossils for a long period after the flood. So your view that creationists should be showing human fossils throughout the layers is incorrect. Before the flood humans were in a niche environment. After the flood humans were scarce. Until we find that niche environment suitable for mammals and dig down there, we will not find those human cities. After the flood there would be no graves for a long period. But one would expect to find an area in Turkey where both original mammal breeds and humans show an early dispersion. We do find this, firstly there is the early temple of Gobleki Tepi which appears to be some shrine to animals. Then there is a recent discovery of early eocene mammals in Turkey.Noah's Ark explains this find, scientists do not explain it:
Research into mammal evolution focuses on pivotal Eocene interval in Turkey | The University of Kansas
""we found an ancient community of fossil mammals that is utterly unique for two reasons. First, many of the fossil species are completely unlike any other fossil mammals we’ve ever seen. Second, even in cases where the Turkish fossils are somewhat familiar, they occur alongside other types of mammals they’ve never been found with before.""Even haplogroup evidence points to this human dispersion from the Middle East.

I clearly explained the reason. Legitimate scientists are invested in their career, and so are not open to lending credibility to views that contradict everything they believe and upon which their careers are based.

Bullshit. The reason is that there is no evidence. It has all been debunked. Present it if you have it. If not retract.

Regarding creationists finding pre-flood cities and human settlements, like I said earlier humans would not have settled in the low lying areas susceptible to marine flooding. The time before the PT boundary had a flat topography and was susceptible to marine flooding/transgressions so not a good place to live. I could be wrong, but the only vast highland I can find before the PT boundary that has signs of a modern environment is the Siberian highlands. Also one has to look for an environment where the eco-system was similar to modern times, when mammals currently dominate. The way to recognise such an eco-sytem is through the presence of angiosperms. Siberia is again the only such place before the PT boundary with a flora environment similar to that found in the modern mammal dominant world.The problem with finding human cities there, is the entire region has been covered by lava during the Siberian traps, the trigger event for the end-Permian extinction. I could be mistaken but as far as I know this is the greatest volcanic event ever recorded in the geologic record. A vast area of the Siberian highlands is covered by this end Permian rock.

Not so: DNA evidence shows something more like this:

I'm wondering what I should retract. I did admit that those OOPARTS are not accepted in scientific circles. I had that covered when I first mentioned it. The Narmer Tablets are not an OOPART though. They are accepted historical artifacts. You must admit that the Narmer Tablets are fascinating Here is a link:Narmer Palette - WikipediaWhat do you think about that?

Yet more bullshit. Too funny.Where are all the humans that were drowned in the flood and that according to YOUR fiction should be found BELOW the P/T boundary?

You didn't show the haplogroup map, which is what I am referring to.Can you give any scientific evidence why they point the arrows up from Africa, instead of down from the Middle East? Logically the area which shows the greatest variety of the world's DNA is where the roots of the world's population come from. The haplogroup maps always show the greatest variety occurring in the Turkey/Iraq areas. What is a Haplogroup? | DNAeXplained – Genetic Genealogy

I understand. Maybe you meant short generation times rather than short lifespans? In either case, it wasn't clear why "obviously" they would have been the earliest fossils after creation? If it's because they would have been the first to die, that's why I mentioned that bacteria don't really have lifespans - they don't die of old age.--Percy

Liar liar pants on fire. Sorry that is a utter nonsense based on your own assertions. Please present the evidence of human settlements below the P/T boundary. The whole purpose of the imaginary floods was to kill humans.Again, that is NOT how a thinking honest person would recognize a human occupied environment. Honest thinking people would identify a human occupied environment by the presence of ....human remains and artifacts.And guess what? When we do find early human settlements they are very often in low lying coastal regions.Sheesh. How convenient. You cannot expect anyone to take such utter bullshit seriously can you?

Siberia. Under the volcanic rock.

Too funny. Again, how silly can you get. If all the humans are buried under the Siberian Trap are you saying that God was so blind and stupid he did not notice and so sent a flood anyway but just forgot to mention it in the myths? Edited by jar, : is ----> in

The caption for the map I posted:

Genetic analyses indicate that there were three distinct waves of prehistoric migrants from Asia to North America. Y-DNA haplogroups are indicated by blue lines, while mitochondrial DNA is indicated by the yellow lines. (Note: Since this map was published in 2008, the M3 mutation has been grouped under the larger haplogroup Q. (So, Q-M3.))
Map by National Geographic Society

​

Tracing Ancient Migration through Language – National Geographic Education Blog

In other words, those lines represent haplogroups...

Yes its true that human settlements are found in low lying coastal regions today. But we do not have the marine transgressions today that occurred before the PT boundary. So the situations are different.The Carboniferous Period
"Shallow, warm, marine waters often flooded the continents"Like I said, not a good place to live

What evidence of flooding are you referring to here?Just wondering because after 40 years of exploring for oil and gas from Texas to North Dakota and Arkansas to Utah in Permian rocks along the PT boundary I have no idea what you are talking about.Is this something you looked at yourself or just some crap someone told you that you are not qualified to peer review?Why would a flood kill more marine creatures than land creatures?Don't answer that. First let's establish where you got your BS information on the PT boundary, then we can,' if we have to, look at the actual fossil distributions across this boundary.I need to find out where your wrong information came from or how you came to a wrong conclusion before we can go forward, because that needs to be fixed.