Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 74 (8963 total)
344 online now:
Newest Member: Samuel567
Upcoming Birthdays: CosmicChimp
Post Volume: Total: 870,848 Year: 2,596/23,288 Month: 787/1,809 Week: 219/225 Day: 32/46 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Human Evolution (re: If evolved from apes, why still apes?)
Eclogite
Junior Member (Idle past 4258 days)
Posts: 17
Joined: 02-28-2008


Message 79 of 128 (458273)
02-28-2008 1:51 AM
Reply to: Message 50 by molbiogirl
02-01-2008 5:35 PM


The Truth is Down There
molbiogirl said:
You can't tell from a fossil that it "died in a flood". If, by some stretch of the imagination you think you can, please tell me how. And back up your "theories" with evidence from the scientific literature. Your word is not good enough for me.

Well, I am pretty rusty, but I wouldn't find this especially difficult.

Since we are talking flood sedimentation then we are speaking of deposition in a terrestrial environment: flood plain, delta, lake. So I am looking for clastic sediments and, since this is a flood deposit, sediments that display the characteristics of high energy and rapid deposition. I expect to find my fossil towards the bottom of the bed; I will not be surprised to see the lower bed boundary is erosional; I expect a wide range of particle sizes (i.e. poor sorting)that fine upwards. If my fossil is found in that situation, ideally along with a mixture of others not typically found in the same environment, and the remains are broken or disarticulated, then I shall be pretty confident I have a thanatoassemblage (I see that thanatocoenosis is now the preferred term) and that the beastie has "died in a flood".

These, by the way, are not 'theories', but a standard approach that would be known to any undergraduate geology major. However you, justifiably, ask for evidence from the scientific literature. The aspects relating to the character of flood sediments may be found in any elementary sedimentology text. I am from a vintage that used Pettijohn, or Krumbein and Sloss, but I am sure they have long joined their own thanatoassemblage.

The logic of the foregoing for identifying a beastie that "died in a flood" should be self evident and compelling. If it is not let me know and I shall try to locate a field geology textbook that addressess it.

I mention all this for a single reason: if we intend to decry scientific ignorance on the part of creationists (as has been done and defended several times in this thread) I think we should also decry it on the part of evolutionists. I hope all, especially molbiogirl, will agree with this. I look forward to a return admonition when I utter some foolishness about gel electrophoresis.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by molbiogirl, posted 02-01-2008 5:35 PM molbiogirl has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by molbiogirl, posted 02-28-2008 11:23 PM Eclogite has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020