So given the timing of the formation and rifting of Pangea, we expect South America and Africa to have similar reptilian fauna from the Permian to the end of the age of dinosaurs (as dated by the usual methods) but different mammalian megafauna.
Guess what. They do. They have the same sorts of theropods: Abelisauridea, Spinosauridae, Carcharodontosauridae; the same sorts of sauropods: Rebbachisauridae, Titanosauria Dicraeosauridae; the same sorts of Cretaceous turtles: Araripemyidae, Pelomedusidae; the same sorts of Cretaceous crocodiles e.g. the Araripesuchidae ...
...So, this all makes perfect sense in the light of geology. But not in the light of "flood geology". Because of course to a "flood geologist" everything in the fossil record lived at the same time and subject to the same arrangement of continents: the glyptodons lived alongside the abelisaurids, and the terror birds rubbed shoulders with Sarchosuchus ...
I'm not sure I'm following you, and given your strange mental glitches on former subjects (such as where the Atlantic Ridge would have been in relation to the UK at the moment when the continents broke apart), I have to wonder if there's anything logical to follow...
But insofar as I think I get what you are saying it's the usual straw man version of Flood arguments. The Flood idea is that all the fossilized creatures would have been living at the same TIME, but there is no claim they were all living in the same PLACE, meaning as we understand the timing of the continental break-up, the same place on the supercontinent of Pangaea. Where they were buried is often explained in terms of their location of origin. Creatures living now have their own habitats, live in their own ecological environments, there's no reason that would have been different just before the FLood.
But doesn't this contradict your previous explanations, such as how sediments are deposited without relation to their origin? Don't you have all the land being stripped off in the very early stages of the flood and all the sediment being carried around in the flood currents being deposited according to some naturalistic mechanism?
Yes that was the scenario I thought most likely, but Walther's Law got me rethinking the scenario -- obviously a lot of the deposits came from the oceans originally, though I'd expect much from the land as well. We can't know these things exactly, how could we? There are plenty of sources for the sediments from both land and sea. Since the fossils are all encased in a matrix of some kind of sediment or other they seem to have arrived there together. Short of some kind of experiment to see what's possible that's just a good guess.
As Dr. A pointed out in the OP, this would require that the organisms and the sediments had similar mechanical properties. That is, in order for a batch of sediment and a batch of organisms to be swept around in the flood currents and then deposited in the same location and at the same geological level, they would need to all have the same mechanical properties.
Sounds logical I guess, but I doubt it, or at least it would be hard to calculate such a thing. Think of the nautiloid layer in the Redwall Limestone in the Grand Canyon -- millions of nautiloids encased in limestone, which by all the measurements Steve Austin did were all washed there in moving water.
and given your strange mental glitches on former subjects (such as where the Atlantic Ridge would have been in relation to the UK at the moment when the continents broke apart ...
I can't resist pointing out that the present continents were, when they were regions of Pangea, joined together at what are now the continental margins, not at their present coastlines. What are now the British Isles were therefore quite a ways away from the rift.
That's close enough. That would have jostled things at the coastlines too.
I have looked many times for clear information about where all the various fossils are located, also how many of what kind are exactly where, and found the information unavailable or so scanty and scattered as to be useless to me. If you have a good source kindly pass it on.
Are you talking about online sources? I'm physically unable to go to outside sources. But why shouldn't anyone at EvC who has a good source be unwilling to pass on the information?
An honest Christian Creationist knows the Bible is God's own inspired word. Nothing can change that. What CAN change is the various theories we come up with to reconcile geological and biological facts with the Biblical revelation. It turns out that there are many ways to do that for many questions, even if a lot remains unanswered. It is not "honest" to give up on the Bible if you are a believer. It may never be possible to answer all the questions, of course, and some hypotheses will have to be modified or given up, but there are plenty that have been answered, and the only hitch is that evothink is so entrenched most of our opponents can't even understand the answers, and can't see the absurdities of their own theories.
I would really like to find a comprehensive listing of all the fossils found everywhere, at what location and in what layer and how the layer was dated etc. Shouldn't there be such a reference easily accessible?
There is another ruinous part to the Stuart Nevins story. Steve Austin has claimed that the aftermath of the Mount Saint Helens eruption is what converted him to Young Earth Creationism. However, the fact is that he had published creationist articles as Stuart Nevins long prior to the eruption. Draw you own conclusion...
PLEASE POST PROOF. This is highly unlikely and I suspect slander.
Here's a video of him discussing Mt. St. Helens. In the first few minutes he is asked to tell how his own thinking was affected by the event, and what he says is that it confirmed his dissertation. NOT that it made a YEC out of him. If he said that somewhere else you need to show that. If it was about his dissertation then he was already a geologist, sent to study geology AS A CREATIONIST.
It's probably a good thing I don't have a clue what you are trying to say. But that's my usual experience with your posts. That was a perfectly reasonable post of mine, about how creationists can't and don't expect to answer all questions. What you turned it into is a mystery.
And, people aren't honest who come to the conclusion that the Bible is wrong, even if they think they are being honest. Perhaps the thought is a tad too complex for you.
Since Faith wants to talk about the fossils of the Redwall Limestone, let's connect them to the topic. Let's have a little look at the Redwall fauna.
There are crinoids such as Teleiocrinus, Agaricocrinus, Platycrinites --- but no modern crinoid genera.
There are foraminifera such as Endothyra and Eomillerella --- but no modern foram genera.
There are corals such as Michelinia, Ekvasophyllum, Lithostrotion, Dorlodotia, Zaphrenites --- but no modern coral genera. So tabulate and rugose corals are found in the Redwall but not in the present, whereas stony corals, which are found in the present, are entirely absent from the Redwall.
There are gastropods such as Straparollus, Rhineoderma, Baylea, and Loxonema --- but no modern gastropod genera.
There are cephalopods such as Poterioceras and Triboloceras --- but no modern cephalopod genera.
There are blastoids --- an extinct type of stemmed echinoderm. These include Cryptoblastus, Orophocrinus, Lophoblastus, Globoblastus, and Pentremites. But there are no more modern types of echinoderm such as sand dollars.
There are trilobites --- extinct crustaceans. But no crustacean types of more modern origin, such as lobsters.
You obviously think all this proves something against the Flood but it's exactly what we'd expect of the antediluvian world -- creatures galore of a different form from those that came later. Some pretty odd ones in comparison with those we are familiar with, though recognizably the same species. Most species change, you know, they microevolve all the time, few are going to stay the same. Those that got preserved as fossils are simply the forms that were thriving in the antediluvian world. Those we have now either evolved from those that survived, or happened to be the type that did survive-- that's all that makes them "modern," that they are living today.
So the raging waters of the Flood managed to somehow sort into one place a bunch of species which weren't going to make it to the present day, putting them together despite their disparities in size and shape, while carefully abjuring those in the same classes which would --- carefully picking out just those corals, those crinoids, those crustaceans which weren't going to make the cut.
Of course, again, there were early forms of all creatures before the Flood, that died in the Flood. Those that survived went on microevolving of into today's forms, or as I also surmise above, perhaps it was simply those that seem more "modern" to us that DID survive.
The Flood was not only clever enough to do that, it managed to avoid depositing any land animals in the Redwall Limestone. Or, indeed, any sea creatures later than the Paleozoic: no ichthyosaurs, or plesiosaurs, or whales, or teleost fish ...
Probably because the redwall limestone isn't high enough in the geo column to have collected land animals, or the larger sea creatures.
In short, it produced exactly what Those Evil Godless Paleontologists expect to see in an in situ assemblage of marine Carboniferous fauna.
Equally expected by Floodists, however, as antediluvian creatures.
Which is strange, because, as we all know, there was no such thing as the Carboniferous Period --- was there?
If they were buried by one of the Biblical Floods then they were alive at the time the flood happened as were all the mammals and fish and sea mammals.
There was only one Biblical Flood.
And yes they were alive.
How did the flood manage to bury only those critters without burying all the fish, sea mammals and other animals that were alive at the same time?
All land animals were represented on the ark, those left out were killed in the Flood.
Sea creatures died in huge numbers though some had to survive because they are living today. I can only guess at how some managed to live while most died. I would guess that most died because of all the sediment in the water that suffocated them. Those that lived happened to be where the water was cleaner.
Why are fossils of those critters NEVER found in the same layer as fossils of mammals, fish, sea mammals?
According to Genesis 7 everything living gets wiped out except what is on the ark and that would include anything in the sea.
No, it doesn't:
For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.
"Face of the earth" is taken to refer to the LAND.
By the Carboniferous, all the other major groups of crustaceans are present except for the Eucarida. Most of these fossils are found within shallow marine sediments because these offered good potential for preservation. The Eucarida appeared in the Mesozoic, but they had their origins in the Devonian/Carboniferous. The Eucarida, especially the Decapoda, underwent an adaptive radiation during the Jurassic, with the appearence of crabs and modern shrimps. The crabs and lobsters carried on diversifing to become one of the major groups of marine organisms.
™ Version 4.2
