Do creationists try to find and study fossils?

I would like to start a discussion topic on a few sentences a poster called Just being real wrote in Message 101.To me the whole post was just one big Gish Gallop, with virtually everything stated there being untrue. I’ll start with the first few sentences. My experience is the opposite. For example, I can look at the Bernard Price Institute (BPI) of the University of the Witwatersrand (Wits for short).In case a legitimate researcher or researchers ever wanted to study a fossil in the Wits collection, all they have to do would be to fill out a questionnaire on- line. Just a few steps to it. The researchers are asked to fill in their names, the normal institutional address, the date they want to start and expect to finish the studies on the fossil, the purpose of the work/studies (which degree, for example). Apart from that, they have to undertake to abide by the rules all set out in the website and by the University (e.g. do not damage the fossil in any way). Then all they have to do is to turn up at Wits to start the study on the date specified by the BPI.One example. To study the first original Australopithecus sediba fossil at BPI, a legitimate researcher can fill out the application form, wait for a while as lots of people have applied to study the original fossil, themselves, then start their own study of the original at Wits. The researcher will have to wait in line behind hundreds of specialists.Here the online application form to study the fossil:
http://www.wits.ac.za/.../bpi/fossils_/6587/application.htmlThe alternative for creationists would be to go and find your own Australopithecus sediba fossil. That’s hard work. Would they even know where to look for it?Creationists, when you find your own fossils, you’re welcome to do to it whatever you want to. All you have to do is to:
1. Report that you found a fossil.
2. You’re not allowed to export the fossil without permission.You can even go and destroy the fossil if you wanted to. Just don’t think that other people will believe whatever you write when you claim to have found one without providing the empirical, verifiable evidence for it.My argument is that Just being real did not tell the truth about the fact that those fossils are beyond all access by the very the scientists who publish paleontological articles about hominid fossils.My questions are:1. Why do some creationists claim that fossils are ‘guarded that they are virtually beyond all access by the very scientists who study human evolution and bring us most of the literature about it’?2. Why don’t modern creationists ever find their own fossils? Accompanying that is: When was the last time an anti-evolutionist found a legitimate new fossil?3. Do modern creationists do any any reseach on legitamate newly discovered fossils, they discovered themselves, at all?I’m not too sure on the topic to place this, but the Biological Evolution Forum seems appropriate.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : Changed the sentence as recommended for promotion as well as othersEdited by Pressie, : No reason given.

I did look into into it a bit more.Say, for example, for a Mechanical Engineer asking to have a look at those original fossils would be far more diificult than a paleontologist trying to have a look, studying them and publish their findings.After all, would that engineer know more about fossils than a vertebrate paleontologist? Would an engineer even know what a foramen magnum is supposed to look like when determining whether an organism walked on all fours or not?And, yes, humanid fossils are invaluable; that's why people so many paleontogists line up to study those that have been found.My concern is that lay persons think that they know it all without ever seeing a fossil, ever. Some people don't know that paleontologists actually study fossils for many. many years.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

AdminI agree that JBR does not really dignify a response. He (or she) is just another one who saw a Dr Dino video and thinks that they know everything about all the sciences.On the other side, lots of people do read this forum. If there's no response, they will think that their untruths prevail. And they will repeat it for ever and ever.

Thanks AdminI changed that sentence as well as a few other sentences.

Thanks for that.In my country fossils and fossil sites are regarded as part of the National Estate.http://www.palaeontologicalsociety.co.za/...ogy-and-law.html

quote:

---

Permits to collect fossils are normally issued only to professionally qualified palaeontologists working at museums, universities or research institutions. In some cases in the past individuals, collecting on behalf of museums, have been also given permits. All fossils that are collected in terms of a permit are curated by institutions on behalf of the nation. The fossils may not be sold or given away. Even a farmer who owns land on which fossils occur must have a permit to remove them from their original position and may not sell or give them to anyone other than a museum or research institution.

---

Doing geological work on farms in all over the Karoo, I've seen many farm houses with formidable collections of fossils. Wonder to what extent those farmers actually abide by the law.Not many people know about the following part:

quote:

---

The Act states that no person may destroy, damage, alter, deface, disturb, excavate, remove from its original position, collect or own, trade in or sell, export or attempt to export from South Africa, any fossil without a permit from the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA).

---

He-he-he, I've across a farmer with beautiful mammal-like reptiles fossils in his house, but still strongly believed in a 6000 year old earth and that evolution was directly sent to us by the devil, in the guise of Darwin. Figure that.Luckily we don't find too many of them in our country anymore.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : Changed sentence

What's wrong with it?I'm not going to air my personal opinion about people with those believes here. Needless to say, my opinion on them is not very high. But you do know that, don't you?No sign of a flood covering the area which is now covered by the Karoo Supergroup a few thousand years ago. Those formations which those fossils are found don't show any sign of a global flood. And guess what, the lower formations contain fossils of reptiles, but as one goes higher and higher in the stratigraphy, the more and more mammal features are displayed by those fossils.A nice article to explain it to you can be found here athttp://cambrian.tripod.com/Reptile-Mammal

quote:

---

The following is not a direct lineage, but representatives of successful, related groups which exhibit a gradual aquisition of mammalian characters during the Permian-Triassic.

---

Faith, have you ever in your life even been to the Karoo? Ever done any geology on it?Do you think that those thousands of geologists who actually have studied those rocks intensively and publishing their studies for all to see are all wrong, only you are right?Which YEC has ever found, studied and published a fossil from the Karoo?

Seen some pictures and diagrams of fossils? Is that it? Ever done any geology in the Karoo? There’s absolutely no evidence for a worldwide flood. So, you think that all those people who have intensively studied every little member of the Karoo Sequence are quite silly? Every single one of them? Not even one piece of evidence for a global flood in the Karoo Supergroup. Nope. Specialists have studied those members and formations and also the fossils. No signs of a global flood. Nope. The distinguishing factors between reptiles and mammals are very distinct. Read the link I provided. In the Karoo Supergroup it’s very, very easy to determine which formation is above or below. The logs of 60 000 boreholes in the Karoo are available for you to study. Very easy to determine from which member the fossils are obtained. It seems as if the specialists on the Karoo don’t agree with you. You know, those people who actually study the subject. Those who don’t just look at fossils in pictures. Also do hope that you realize that the overwhelming majority of scientists who do take the Bible seriously accept that the earth is very, very old , that no global flood occurred and life as we know it today came about via the theory of evolution. You mean those people who actually do the studies, the relevant scientists, have taken over science. That’s why creationism is the opposite of science. Nope. It’s because YEC’s don’t do science at all. They read holy books.

Please explain exactly how 'prodigious numbers of fossils' in the Karoo are evidence for a global flood?Do take in consideration that there is no evidence for a 'flood layer' in the Karoo at all, but that those fossils occur in different members and formations in the Supergroup.Also explain why only reptilian fossils occur in lower members, while, as one goes up in the stratigraphy, fossils become more mammal-like till we get mammals (together with reptiles) higher up in the stratigraphy. How does a global flood explain that?Oh, and by the way, it's very easy to find out which formations are above or below which formations. 60 000 borehole logs are available. You mean a few (not more than 20 worldwide) who trained as geologists, but stopped being scientists the moment they stopped doing science? Then joined religious organisations and write tracts for them? That lot?Nope, sorry, people who don't do science are not scientists. They were just trained as scientists.And again, it doesn't seem as if any YEC has ever done any work in discovering, studying and publishing anything about those Karoo fossils. Yet, people like you try to tell all those thousands of specialists, who have actually done the hard yards, that they all are wrong. That sounds quite silly to me.And, Faith, whether you like it or not, the overwhelming majority of specialists who take the Bible seriously and are Christians accept an old earth, deny a global flood and accept the theory of evolution.

Dead things are not evidence for a global flood. Lots of things die without even a small flood involved. Nope. In the Karoo Sequence those ‘dead things’ were certainly not all suddenly killed en masse. We have fossils of ‘dead things’ that were killed when glaciers were still covering much of the area, other in sand dunes collapsing; others in ox bows in rivers, others in sink-holes, others covered by volcanic ash, etc. Absolutely no evidence of them all killed suddenly en mass at all. Apart from that, we have not found one single fossil of elephants, zebras, lions, humans, springboks or anything like that in the Karoo Sequence. So, no, your ‘explanation’ is just wishful thinking, contradicted by the evidence. Nope. A flood will produce a flood layer. One flood layer. That’s what will be expected during floods. We do know what deposits look like when floods occur. Just have a quick look at what happens when the Mississippi overflows it’s banks. One big mess with heaver, courser material at the bottom grading to fine-grained material at the top. Everything creationists think is foolish. If you can even accuse them of 'thinking' at all. Nope. Sorry for you. Floods do deposit very distinctive layers. Usually one big mess, but when the energy subsides, the course grained at material settle at the bottom and it grades to fine-grained material at the top. A flood does not deposit ‘separated layers' on top of each other . You hand-waving it away won’t change the facts. Unfortunately for you, floods deposit one big messed up layer. When the energy subsides the course material will deposit at the bottom and the ‘layer’ will be grading to finer grained-material to the top. That’s not seen in the Karoo Sequence at all. Nope. The Karoo Supergroup doesn’t show what you described at all. You repeating things not seen in reality won’t change it into reality. Not in the Karoo at all. Nope. The opposite is seen in the Karoo Supergroup. No indication of a global flood at all.What's your take on the Whitehill Shale and it's relationship with the Prince Albert and Collingham below and above? Why do you think it was deposited in a flood? (For in case you don't know the Whitehill is very important because of the dinosaur fossils found in it). What do you think is the importance of the mammal like reptile fossils found in that formation? Nope. No evidence for a global flood at all. They just do word salads trying to hand-wave it away. Like you do. Steve Austin is not a practicing geologist. He writes for a religious organization. Oh, and Steve Austin wrote things about the Coconino under the name Stuart Nevins. One and the same person. Pretending that their's many of them.Again, people trained as scientists, who stopped doing science, are not scientists anymore.Only a few of them in the world who trained as geologists (not more than twenty) who are YEC’s. They don’t do science anymore. They write religious tracts. Nothing to do with science. So, not True Christians, I guess. Only you are.

I see that Just being real has not even tried to defend the first accusation he made in his word salad in Message 101.From there. My deduction is that Just being real was twisting and turning the truth in order for the truth to become unrecognisable.I showed the example of how 'the very scientists who study human evolution and bring us most of the literature about it' ' can and do have access to at least some of those original fossils.Counting this and the untruth he wrote about '500 doctoral dissertations' about Piltdown Man, one has no choice but to accept and come to the conclusion that Just being real tends to tell lots of untruths.Just being real can't be trusted to tell anything close to the truth at all and his posts can be ignored as just more Gish Gallops.

You must have seen a creationist drawing. There's lots and lots of different formations (actually members) with 'dead things' in the Karoo. Different dead things. In different formations. Nope. It's called science. Some didn't die in floods. No hair-splitting involved. Just facts. Nope. A flood involves water. Hence the name. And deserts. And rivers. and deltas. So, you're not describing a flood at all. They're not buried in the same location. Hope you do realise that the Karoo Supergroup covers a huge area? Not one location at all. Apart from that, lots and lots of different formations. The Karoo Sequence has no fossils of elephants, lions, springboks, humans, leopards, aardvarks, etc. The worst is: no Rhinos! Hope you do realise that the Karoo Sequence is found in Southern Africa....the flood must have missed them. Sorry to burst your bubble, but gravity is gravity, doesn't matter where you go in the world. The coarse grained, heavy things sink first...everywhere on earth. You think that gravity is a straw man? Sorry, it isn't. The coarse, heavy material sink to the bottom first. No straw-man involved. And also did not abide by gravity, I guess....magic. Nope. Your're welcome do do the experiments yourself. Yor description involves magic. I have. We would find a 'flood layer', completely messed up, and as the energy goes down, the course material will settle at the bottom and it will grained into fine-grained material at the top. A Flood certainly won't deposit a 'layer' of course grained material above a 'layer' of fine-grained material. I thought you are referring to science? Ah, the threat. Sorry, I don't believe in spooks who will turn me into a toad after death. Your threats are the same as a hippy threatening to punch me in my aura. Doesn't mean much to me. I just laugh. It seems as if those Christian specialists don't believe the same way as you. And millions and millions of Christians disagree with you. Especially those specialists on the subject of geology.Any luck on those creationist specialists who have studied those Karoo fossils yet? Or the geology, for that matter?Edited by Pressie, : SpellingEdited by Pressie, : No reason given.

You seem to be wrong about everything, Faith.That series of reptiles to mammal-like reptiles to mammals were land animals. You know, the fossils of those land reptiles are found in the lower beds and as you go up higher in the stratigraphy you find that series of mammal-like land reptiles which become more mammal- like the higher you go in the stratigraphy then to land mammals in the higher parts of the stratigraphy.Also bear in mind that the stratigraphy of the Karoo Sequence is relatively easy to figure out; those outcrops have been extensively mapped (most areas on a 1:50 000 scale) and there's very little (southern areas) to no (central to northern areas) folding involved. And 60 000 cores of boreholes. We know exactly which bed is above and below which bed.....Again, why do you find those fossils, but no fossils of rhinos or elephants or rats or cattle or sheep or horsies or puppy dogs or house cats or humans in the Karoo Supergroup? Did the fantacy Fluddy miss all those modern animals?Keep in mind that the Karoo Supergroup is in Southern Africa....Again, do creationists ever find, study or publish about their fossils?

Please point out exactly where I lied. Everything I said can be backed up by evidence.

Faith, you accused me of telling untruths.Please point out exactly where I told untruths in this thread.This is the second time I asked you to do it.Please point out exactly where I told untruths in this thread.Edited by Pressie, : Changed words from 'lies' to 'untruths' amongst others.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Also, nobody has ever explained exactly how Naulitoids somewhere in North America would indicate a global flood.Maybe Faith could enlighten us about it.