Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 83 (8942 total)
43 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: John Sullivan
Post Volume: Total: 863,507 Year: 18,543/19,786 Month: 963/1,705 Week: 215/518 Day: 39/50 Hour: 1/6


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Do creationists try to find and study fossils?
Faith
Member
Posts: 33263
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 136 of 182 (698324)
05-05-2013 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by jar
05-05-2013 1:22 PM


Re: a great example of how creationists do not study fossils.
All the layers were produced by the SAME process and not different processes, and as for separated layers of the same sediment recurring in a given stack, why not? The Flood waters picked up whatever from wherever, limestone makings here, sandstone makings there, shale makings somewhere else, then more limestone makings from another source and so on and so forth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by jar, posted 05-05-2013 1:22 PM jar has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 137 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-05-2013 1:40 PM Faith has responded
 Message 139 by jar, posted 05-05-2013 1:41 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 8.0


(2)
Message 137 of 182 (698326)
05-05-2013 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Faith
05-05-2013 1:31 PM


Re: a great example of how creationists do not study fossils.
All the layers were produced by the SAME process and not different processes ...

Then why do they look different? For example, why did the SAME process produce fossil footprints in some formations but not others? If magic water produces dinosaur footprints in mud, why doesn't it produce similar footprints in all mud? It's the same water and the same magic, is it not?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 1:31 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 147 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 10:02 PM Dr Adequate has responded

JonF
Member
Posts: 5526
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 138 of 182 (698327)
05-05-2013 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by Faith
05-05-2013 1:29 PM


Re: Steve Austin Nautiloid Article
The fact that every size and age of nautiloid is represented is another piece of evidence

Please tell us what statistics Austin or Garner applied to establish this.

Also the huge number of them, in a limestone layer spread over thousands of square miles in the canyon and out to Nevada and California

Please supply some details of how the extent and density were established, given that the vast majority of this deposit is buried.

No evidence for catastrophic burial or a mass kill? He must be joking.

That's what he reported. It should be included in any evaluation, especially given the paucity of data.

I'll be glad to engage on the merits of the claim when and if there's some data available. Austin's claim is no better supported than Prof. Steve's. The review from which I posted a large excerpt gives some specifics but not enough.

I haven't seen the video you posted, and I'm not going to spend the time until you can establish (e.g. by answering my questions above) that it contains data and tables and calculations and direct observations good enough to see and evaluate the evidence in the ground.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 1:29 PM Faith has not yet responded

jar
Member
Posts: 31466
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 139 of 182 (698328)
05-05-2013 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by Faith
05-05-2013 1:31 PM


Re: a great example of how creationists do not study fossils.
Faith writes:

All the layers were produced by the SAME process and not different processes, and as for separated layers of the same sediment recurring in a given stack, why not? The Flood waters picked up whatever from wherever, limestone makings here, sandstone makings there, shale makings somewhere else, then more limestone makings from another source and so on and so forth.

Again, utter nonsense.

Making statements like that is just silly.

How did the flood waters do what you claim it did?

What is the mechanism for the flood to pick up just limestone making stuff and deposit just limestone making stuff, the cycle to just some other process, then return to the limestone process again.

How do it do that?

The conventional science explains such things.

You don't.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 1:31 PM Faith has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 33263
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 140 of 182 (698329)
05-05-2013 1:44 PM


Back later today to answer all my "fans." Want to watch the Garner video first too. Cheers.

  
foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 30 days)
Posts: 920
Joined: 12-26-2011


(1)
Message 141 of 182 (698330)
05-05-2013 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Faith
05-05-2013 1:14 AM


The answer to your question is that most of those fossils that don't exist are nevertheless within the same Species or Kind of those that do exist as their close cousins. Microevolution has occurred since the Flood acting on the small portion of the pre-Flood genetic picture that survived the Flood. The fossils show us the enormous variety that existed before the Flood.

Where are the descendants or cousins of T-rex? Where is the microevolution that descended from her?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 1:14 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 144 by NoNukes, posted 05-05-2013 9:15 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded
 Message 145 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 9:48 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18871
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.4


(1)
Message 142 of 182 (698331)
05-05-2013 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Faith
05-05-2013 9:02 AM


Re: Steve Austin Nautiloid Article
Faith writes:

Well, Austin is the one who did the research on the orientation of the nautiloids so who else is he going to reference?

That's just the problem. Austin is the only one who has noticed a prevailing orientation of nautiloids, so his only evidence is his own observations. Typically a researcher like Austin would be just one member of a community of researchers whose individual biases would balance out, whose mistakes would be detected and corrected, and whose findings would be replicated and validated, but Austin has isolated himself. Is Austin correct about the orientation? Is he correct in his estimates of the current flow rate? There's no way to know, because Austin has not submitted his work to peer review.

This is all covered in the video by Paul Garner.

Just to help everyone out here, this is the video you're referring to:

In a recent message you said you were planningto watch this video. When you're done hopefully you can describe for us the evidence for the nautiloid claims, and provide the time points in the video where this information is presented.

I wouldn't give much weight to an article titled Bibliolatry Revisited myself.

But Austin's book isn't available on-line, and that article summarizes a few of Austin's claims from that book. That article provides information about Austin's views that you don't have, which should help you out in your search for material supporting the view that creationists do their own fossil research. Plus it provides a scientific context and perspective.

But I think at this point we can provide at least a preliminary answer to the question of this thread: yes, there is a creationist who has done some fossil research, his name is Steve Austin, he hasn't published this work in the technical literature, and it isn't available online.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 9:02 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by jar, posted 05-05-2013 2:37 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 146 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 9:52 PM Percy has responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 31466
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 143 of 182 (698332)
05-05-2013 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Percy
05-05-2013 2:20 PM


Re: Steve Austin Nautiloid Article
Percy writes:

But I think at this point we can provide at least a preliminary answer to the question of this thread: yes, there is a creationist who has done some fossil research, his name is Steve Austin, he hasn't published this work in the technical literature, and it isn't available online.

Should that be "yes, there is a creationist who claims to have done some fossil research..."?

I've been going through Google Scholar trying to find something published by Steve Austin, the ICR geologist and haven't been able to find even one peer reviewed paper and even in the links to web pages from ICR and other similar Creation creations I've found not one references to actual data.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Percy, posted 05-05-2013 2:20 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 180 by Pressie, posted 05-06-2013 11:54 PM jar has not yet responded

NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 144 of 182 (698348)
05-05-2013 9:15 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by foreveryoung
05-05-2013 2:12 PM


Where are the descendants or cousins of T-rex? Where is the microevolution that descended from her?

All dead. I don't believe Faith's view that no post 4400 BC person lived with dinosaurs is the least bit controversial.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I would say here something that was heard from an ecclesiastic of the most eminent degree; ‘That the intention of the Holy Ghost is to teach us how one goes to heaven, not how the heaven goes.’ Galileo Galilei 1615.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by foreveryoung, posted 05-05-2013 2:12 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded

Faith
Member
Posts: 33263
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 145 of 182 (698351)
05-05-2013 9:48 PM
Reply to: Message 141 by foreveryoung
05-05-2013 2:12 PM


Where are the descendants or cousins of T-rex? Where is the microevolution that descended from her?

The usual idea is that they became extinct not long after the Flood because they couldn't survive in the changed environment.

But T Rex specifically is understood to have been a variety. There's no reason to think T Rex was on the ark, merely members of that Kind who all share the same genome. Before the Flood bottleneck there was obviously a lot more variation possible within a Kind.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 141 by foreveryoung, posted 05-05-2013 2:12 PM foreveryoung has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33263
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 146 of 182 (698352)
05-05-2013 9:52 PM
Reply to: Message 142 by Percy
05-05-2013 2:20 PM


Re: Steve Austin Nautiloid Article
Austin is well known among creationists for his study of the nautioloids. I don't know anything about why his work isn't in the regular journals, and I'm not really into defending anything about the thesis of this thread anyway. But I'll review the video and get back to the thread from there.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Percy, posted 05-05-2013 2:20 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by Percy, posted 05-06-2013 8:06 AM Faith has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33263
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 147 of 182 (698354)
05-05-2013 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 137 by Dr Adequate
05-05-2013 1:40 PM


Re: a great example of how creationists do not study fossils.
All the layers were produced by the SAME process and not different processes ...

Then why do they look different? For example, why did the SAME process produce fossil footprints in some formations but not others? If magic water produces dinosaur footprints in mud, why doesn't it produce similar footprints in all mud? It's the same water and the same magic, is it not?

They only "look different" in the sense that the alphabet blocks in the collection have different letters and there's a stain on one and the dog's tooth marks on another, but otherwise they are identical.

The sedimentary layers are all originally horizontal, remarkably flat-topped, remarkably without the sort of erosion one finds on surface land, and so on and so forth, showing their having been produced by the same processes having roughly the same history.

The usual explanation for the footprints is that there was a time gap between the laying down of the separate layers and some creatures were still alive.

Or it's a hoax.

And your ridiculous remark that the water would have produced such phenomena really is beneath you or ought to be

========================================================.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.

2Cr 10:4-5 (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 137 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-05-2013 1:40 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by foreveryoung, posted 05-05-2013 10:50 PM Faith has responded
 Message 160 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-06-2013 12:02 PM Faith has responded

  
foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 30 days)
Posts: 920
Joined: 12-26-2011


(1)
Message 148 of 182 (698355)
05-05-2013 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by Faith
05-05-2013 10:02 PM


Re: a great example of how creationists do not study fossils.
The sedimentary layers are all originally horizontal, remarkably flat-topped, remarkably without the sort of erosion one finds on surface land,

Ever heard of the Great Unconformity in the Grand Canyon? That is a huge erosional surface. There was over a billion years of erosion and non deposition that occurred over that surface.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 10:02 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 149 by Faith, posted 05-05-2013 11:22 PM foreveryoung has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 33263
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 149 of 182 (698357)
05-05-2013 11:22 PM
Reply to: Message 148 by foreveryoung
05-05-2013 10:50 PM


Re: a great example of how creationists do not study fossils.
I guess you haven't read a thing I've written on this subject. I've discussed the Great Unconformity many times and of course I disagree with the explanation you've given. It's off topic in this thread but I'll be happy to spell it out for you again on another thread.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by foreveryoung, posted 05-05-2013 10:50 PM foreveryoung has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by foreveryoung, posted 05-06-2013 5:46 PM Faith has responded

  
Pressie
Member
Posts: 2077
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010


Message 150 of 182 (698362)
05-06-2013 5:44 AM
Reply to: Message 53 by Faith
05-03-2013 1:28 AM


Re: Info on fossil collecting on gov't land
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 '****' to 'untruths' amongst others.

Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Faith, posted 05-03-2013 1:28 AM Faith 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 © 2019