The Great Creationist Fossil Failure

Hi Mick, why don't you put down your book of logical fallacies and argue some facts?As you note, there are people here who are not dim, we've also read the book and have progressed from psedo-philosophical argument to real knowledge. Why not follow?Where's your beef?

Just pointing out that endless fallacy geekery is getting you nowhere - we all know them. We're interested in facts and evidence - if you started to produce some, you might make some progress.

quote:

---

"Khan...you had it your way once, are you game for a re-match?.....Khan?....I'm LAUGHING at the "superior" intellect!" - Captain Kirk - The Wrath Of Khan.
  —Mike

---

Would you like me to point out the fallacies in this post or do you want to look it up for yourself?

The average person has total and full access.School text books are available at every level of interest, there are public museums everywhere, you can walk into a university library and pick up a book, there's loads of 101 stuff on the web. But if you want to debate with professionals, you have to learn like the professionals.Your problem is that you're trying to argue from ignorance about stuff that has been studied for literally millions of man-years by professionals. You can't take on geology, molecular biology, evolutionary biology, nuclear physics, dendrochronology, palaeontology from your armchair without a single qualification to your name - then complain that you don't understand it but it's all wrong anyway.I'm lost in wonder at the hubris of it.Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Your agenda is in plain sight and is extremely easy to grasp.Your problem is that your agenda isn't science's agenda. Science is not going to bend to your personal requirements. If you want to understand it, you have to make the effort. Complaints that you can't, but that you're right anyway, are rather laughable don't you think?

Don't you think those that spend their lives working with fossils would notice if there were fossils out of order in the record? It would be the find of a lifetime, it would be evidence against one of the most established scientific theories in existence. It's Nobel prize stuff.The fact that it's never happened while millions of fossils have been found is the evidence supporting it. You bet your life you'd never be able to 'sort through it.'

Sorry Faith, that doesn't work. Organisms develop in particular orders because they have to, but the particular order is not the only relevant point here.If you imagine that cats, dogs and pigs arrived in the world one million years apart - they didn't, it's just a way of thinking about it - you'd expect them to always be found in the fossil record in that order. We say they are.But if there was a global flood you'd expect to find all those animals jumbled up together.That's not what we find so you have to explain how a flood sorted cats, dogs and pigs into seperate layers and never got a single one in the wrong layer. Not one.If you prefer make the animals marbles. We find three diferent coloured marbles in rocks that we say are of different ages. Red, blue and yellow. We never find a red marble in the same rock as a blue and so on. This is easily explained by the marbles existing at different times and laid down independantly.You need to explain how a flood organised all the marbles in their individual levels when they would have all been swirling around together.Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

It's a slow, dampish day here so I entertained myself by watching your video, then found the actual science is supposedly based on. It won't surprise others here to find that what is claimed in the video is a collection of lies, misrepresentations and misinterpretations. It's a damn shame that so called religious people have to sin like this, it can't be good for their chances in the after-life. So much because they are deliberately trying to mislead others.Anywho, here's the detailed, point by point rebuttal by the scientist who described the fossil:I'm sure that now you know the real facts ratherthan the lies you've been fed by your 'betters' you stop posting this sort of nonsense and do a little bit of your own work to establish the facts"LOL
http://plesiosaur.com/creationism/analysis.php?artiID=20Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Oh come on Faith, you very quickly and without further inquiry, accepted a youtube video from a guy that knows nothing about the subject, then plead inability to read when confronted with the facts from the guy that actually described the fossil.The translation - not that it's necessary - is that the youtube is a bloody great lie. It's very simple to read and understand.

quote:

---

That the geo column is never complete doesn't make the strata not real.
  —Faith

---

The geological column is always complete.It's just made up of different rocks in different places on earth. The geological column under my house starts with 6 feet of sediment - dirt - and then several hundred feet of chalk. The column under your house is different.There's no such thing as THE geological column except as a drawing representing a stylised composite of it.

quote:

---

Not really. There are periods of non-deposition and erosion. Local geological columns rarely even contain rock from every geological period.
  —PaulK

---

That's what I said - the column is different in different locations, but it's always complete - there is never a gap where rock should be with other rocks floating above it. That's 'cos there's no such thing as THE geological column. It's a stylised teaching aid.

I'm trying to say both!There's one composite, stylised, column that probably doesn't exist anywhere.Real geological columns vary depending which area of the world you're in.

It's an 'illusion' that you can touch with your own fingers.Hundreds of geologists and palaeontologists have researched this stuff, they find what's there and note what isn't. It's what's called a fact. There's no illusion, you can prove it for yourself if you care to do so.Saying 'I don't know' then calling the facts of what is known to be there and what is missing an illusion isn't even convincing yourself is it?

Ok, lets see them. Bollox. This is an excuse for having nothing. So you just thought it enough to spout crap and then run away? Let's have them, one at a time and we explain why you're wrong so that you won't need to keep making the same silly mistakes. Why are you wasting time talking bollox on an internet forum when you could be out there digging up this fantastic missing evidence that science in its blind conformaty has not thought to look for?So you've still got nothing....

Mindspawn, you're all over the place with your 'evidence' and argument and you're on your own against a lot of people who have heard all this before - many, many times.Why don't you pick your strongest single argument and present it fully, then we can pick it apart in detail?