Problems with Genesis Creation

Let's take one very specific sequence from Genesis, chapter 1: Here we have trees, herbs, and grass on Creative Day Three, water-dwelling critters and things-with-wings on Day Five, and land-bound animals on Day Six. Let's leave aside, for now, any considerations of whether Genesis Days were 24 hours or not, whether Genesis's events were a few thousand years ago or much more ancient, or whether Moah's Flood happened or not. Let's only look at the order of events presented above and compare it to what we see in the rocks here on our planet. (Note: this argument is nearing its 200th birthday, and was settled to my satisfaction about 180 years ago by Christian clergymen who studied/originated geology as a science.)If you go dig up rocks that have abundant trilobite fossils in them, you will never, never, ever find grass pollen fossilized there. You will find strange-looking jawless fish and bizarre huge "sea-scorpions." None of these critters are found alive anywhere today. Ever. For all that, mososaurs and pleisiosaurs are never found alive today, and are also never found fossilized with trilobites!Now go find some more recent rocks where grass pollen is abundant. It's hard to find modern sediment that has no grass pollen at all - the stuff blows all over the place, and only far out in the ocean do you fail to find some on/in the seafloor. Look through those rocks for trilobite fossils. Heck, look through any rock with grass pollen fossilized in it for mososaur or pleisiosaur fossils. You won't find one. Ever.Grass hadn't evolved when these critters lived and later went extinct. Grass did not precede sea creatures, or, for that matter, birds or land creatures. The very oldest rocks in which grass-related fossils appear also contain the fossils of very last of the dinosaurs.The order given in Genesis is just plain wrong.

And don't need any to falsify Genesis 1. See post 9 in this thread, if you would, jjsemsch.

If said Floode had a way to completely exclude grasses or their pollen from every single bit of sediment that contained trilobites, eurypterids, Seymouria, placoderms, rhynchosaurs, poposurs, rauisuchids, pelycosaurs, the earlier dinosaurs, bolosaurs, pareiasaurs, and about half of everything else that ever has lived.
And to exclude whale or elephant fossils from every bit of those same rocks.What might that mechanism be, d'ya think?

Correct, wrong, and wrong. You might try a very quick Wikipedia peek before you post this sort of misinformation - you'll look better for it.Post 9, this thread?

So the big Floode was about 4500 years ago, and you're saying that each year since then has had about two sets of wet and dry spells. These Spells are very similar in Germany, Finland, and Sweden. We have tree rings from structures of known dates of construction in Roman times that show that they were only getting one pair of Spells per year for the most recent 2000 years or so. Now we need three pairs of Spells per year for Floode to Birth of Christ. And, of course, they need to be through the growing season, not in winter.And the wood cored from tree rings from Germany, Sweden, and Finland has been carbon-14 dated, too. The same method that says that the aqueduct David(?) built under Jerusalem was built in the "right" time period says that the tree rings are pretty much one per year. Why would that be?

Wasn't this Fall before Cain and Abel were born?That's what I thought.....

Are you just avoiding me? Post #9, this thread, please. Does Bermuda grass run uphill faster than a pterodactyl flies?

Hey, Nuggin! Not just toast! Tortillas and a grilled cheese sandwich, too! Be fair!

Heh! And not just that, but every single crab escaped death there in the underdeluvian trilobite bed, saving themselves up to expire later in a trilobite- and eurypterid-free spot. Clever little rascals, aren't they?

Are you getting ready to play "gotcha!" with the Hakatai Shale in the Grand Canyon? That one has been a non-starter for at least a decade: http://www.asa3.org/archive/asa/199709/0101.htmlNow, if real Precambrian grass pollen (or any pollen!) were to be found fossilized in a real Precambrian rock, my specific argument of Post #9 would suffer terribly, yes. The last century or so of scientists looking very hard at rocks has failed to show any up, but yeah, the first sample could be in the process of being removed from a rock by some underfed grad student at this very moment. If that happened, there would be great consternation among palaeontologists, and a huge scramble to find confirmation in other rocks and to find fossils of the parent plant that shed the pollen. And if these were found, the books would be rewritten, you can be sure. Precambrian Bermuda grass would be a difficult one....But that changes my overall argument not at all! It's not just pollen. The last two centuries of study of the fossil record by some very bright people has found patterns there. These patterns include things like the never-once-yet occurance of a fossil crab with a fossil trilobite, or a whale with a mososaur, or a rugose coral with a fish that had jaws. I'm just a raw amateur at this, too - a pro could likely type such pairs all night.It's not just that Genesis has the order of grasses vs. Great Sea Creatures wrong - Genesis has the whole time scale wrong! The fossils that you can go dig up yourself show it! They show that a single Big Flood could not possibly laid them down in the combinations (and lack of combinations) that you yourself could go find with just a rock hammer. Seymouria lived long, long before the first dinosaur ever breathed, and the rocks show it. Tyrannosaurus was long, long dead to the last specimen before the first mammoth or australopithecine ever was. The rocks show it.

With a navel? That's different for a critter that hatched from an egg!

"Wasn't this Fall before Cain and Abel were born?"'Yes'Doesn't that suggest that C and A might have had a few?Sheesh!

I suppose. Why would you think, then, that grasses are ONLY found in strata higher in the geological column than pterodactyls, and NEVER in the same rocks?

Which "evidence" would that be?Produce some, how 'bout? You could be the first to do so!

But it seems to omit that those limestones up on Everest are metamorphosed partway to marble, meaning they've also been buried ten or so miles deep under other rock for a while, and since unroofed by tectonism and erosion. The same tectonic motion and uplift is measurable today. No Floode involved, or even useful in explaining what real geology already explains.