The Great Creationist Fossil Failure

For me, it is the correlation of isotopes and fossils which make no sense in the YEC flood model. None of the mechanisms listed in opening post would explain why every dinosaur fossil is found below igneous rock with a specific K/Ar or U/Pb ratio. It doesn't explain how a flood is able to sort leaf debris and insects by their 14C content in what appears to be varved lake deposits, or even how trees and insects who are supposedly alive at the same time could have differing 14C content.

Darwin clearly stated that the geologic record was flawed, not the theory. He wrote an entire chapter in Origin of Species about it."We do not make due allowance for the enormous intervals of time, which have probably elapsed between our consecutive formations, longer perhaps in some cases than the time required for the accumulation of each formation. These intervals will have given time for the multiplication of species from some one or some few parent-forms; and in the succeeding formation such species will appear as if suddenly created. "
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/origin/chapter9.htmlThe problem is that the geologic record is not continuous. It isn't a problem with the theory.

They aren't excuses. They are facts. There are massive gaps in the geologic record. There are millions and millions of years between fossil bearing strata with no fossil bearing strata in between them.Also, when has magic ever been a better explanation than known and understood natural processes?

How were seals, whales, and dolphins confined to the land of the Middle East? How were grasses and flowering plants confined to that region? How were migrating birds kept out of terrestrial Cambrian deposits?Was there some magic air barrier keeping geese from migrating all over the place and being fossilized across the globe?

What kept birds from flying from one highland to another?How were oxygen levels toxic to flowering plants and grasses which didn't show up in the fossil record until much later? How are dolphins susceptible to flooding?Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Evidence? Evidence?

What evidence would that be?What features in a fossil lead to the conclusion that it suddenly appeared? What evidence is that? How do you determine if a fossil is "fully formed"? What features would a fossil need in order for you to accept it as transitional? Let's make this specific. What features would a fossil need in order for you to accept it as being transitional between humans and a common ancestor shared with chimps?If you can't even define what a transitional fossil would look like, how do you know they don't exist? Since all mammals form a clade, are you saying that all mammals, including humans, share a common ancestor?

That seems to create a rather large problem for you. An insistence on a literal interpretation only leads to the conclusion that the Bible is false since all of the evidence demonstrates that a literal interpretation is not true.

You are the one claiming that they are not transitional. What criteria are you using to reach that conclusion?

You should see multiple species when shown multiple transitional species. That's the whole point.Where is your explanation for your interpretation that they are not transitional? What criteria are you using?

How does the interpretation not suggest evolution? Again, how do you determine if a fossil is fully formed?

How does one "prove a transition" in your eyes? What evidence does it take?

You have already been given the evidence multiple times. You refuse to address it.

That's exactly what we have for the hominid sequence. Why couldn't evolution produce reversions to previous adaptations? What is stopping it from doing so? Why can't size increase, then decrease, and then increase again within a transitional series? What would evolution not be allowed to shrink a feature?

What features would those be? Tiktaalik roseae, a quite famous tetrapod intermediate fossil, was not found until quite recently. Where do you think it was for the last 150 years before it was found?