The Mystery of the "Frozen Mammoths"

[bob b]

I believe that the vast majority of the water for the Flood came from the "fountains" and the "rain" came mainly from the "fountain water" that had been squirted into the upper atmosphere coming back down to Earth.

See "Fountains of the Great Deep" at http://www.creationscience.com

To me this sounds like the most reasonable solution to the enduring mystery of frozen mammoths and the amazing depth (in some spots exceeding 450 meters) of the frozen ground (permafrost) in many areas of the arctic. In other words some of the water (and mud along with it) squirted into the upper atmosphere by the fountains may have become "supercooled" and as the mixture fell back to Earth suffocated and buried many mammoths that were later found frozen in an upright position with food still in their mouths and undigested in their stomachs.

It has always been a mystery as to how one can have deep layers of permafrost when the core of the Earth is molten so that there is a constant flow of heat upward that keeps caves relatively livable even in arctic regions. I am sure that a heat flow analysis would reveal that deep layers of permafrost could not accumulate slowly even if millions of years of a deep freeze are assumed, because a "steady-state" would be reached long before the layers could reach hundreds of feet deep. In other words the layers must have been deposited quickly from already supercooled material and have been slowly decreasing in depth ever since. That they are still so deep in spots indicates to me that the deposition must have occurred no more than a few thousand years ago.

 

[bowhunter]

Merry Christmas Bob! May you (and we with your knowlege) be blessed with many more.

 

[Yorzhik]

Nope. I'm pretty sure there's water born sediment and oil under the mammoths, thus they were frozen post flood.

We (my wife is Russian) had written to some of the local universities geological schools in Siberia to confirm this, but we never received an answer. Still, I'm pretty sure I'm right based on maps of suspected oil in the area.

More likely, the ice age that came on post flood was part of what happened.

 

[bob b]

Nope. I'm pretty sure there's water born sediment and oil under the mammoths, thus they were frozen post flood.

We (my wife is Russian) had written to some of the local universities geological schools in Siberia to confirm this, but we never received an answer. Still, I'm pretty sure I'm right based on maps of suspected oil in the area.

More likely, the ice age that came on post flood was part of what happened.

An Ice Age would not come on quickly enough to account for the evidence. Mammoths were not cold climate creatures, nor were the remains of the other animals found frozen alongside the mammoths. Nor were the plants found in the stomach.

You really need to read what Walt Brown has at his website. The evidence he presents there is quite overwhelming in favor of his theory.

http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/FrozenMammoths2.html#wp1015632

For example: "... corings, 100 feet into Siberia’s permafrost, have recovered sediments mixed with ancient DNA of mammoths, bison, horses, other temperate animals, and the lush vegetation they require."

Eske Willerslev et al., “Diverse Plant and Animal Genetic Records from Holocene and Pleistocene Sediments,” Science, Vol. 300, 2 May 2003, pp. 791–795.

 

[BillyBob]

Mammoths were not cold climate creatures, nor were the remains of the other animals found frozen alongside the mammoths. Nor were the plants found in the stomach.

Why were they 'Wooly'?


WOOLY MAMMOTH mammuthus primigenius

Wooly Mammoth was a cold climate dweller equipped with a thick layer of fat for insulation, and an exterior of long black hair. The Wooly Mammoth was smaller than most mammoths, and had a hump of fat behind its domed head. It fed on low tundra vegetation in which it scraped away snow and ice from with its ivory tusks. Several well preserved remains have been found in Siberia and Alaska and cave paintings in Spain and France show depictions of the Wooly Mammoth as seen by early humans. The mammuthus primigenius went extinct only about 10,000 years ago.








It sounds like they went extinct long before the flood......

 

[BillyBob]

For example: "... corings, 100 feet into Siberia’s permafrost, have recovered sediments mixed with ancient DNA of mammoths, bison, horses, other temperate animals, and the lush vegetation they require."

I have never before heard of extracting DNA from core samples....

 

[bob b]

Why were they 'Wooly'?

Why is a sheep wooly? Seriously, it was previously thought that mammoths were cold dwellers until further analysis, particularly of the undigested plants and seeds in their stomachs indicated otherwise. A thick layer of fat and long hair are not enough to make a positive determination anymore. Science marches on.

Wooly Mammoth was a cold climate dweller equipped with a thick layer of fat for insulation, and an exterior of long black hair. The Wooly Mammoth was smaller than most mammoths, and had a hump of fat behind its domed head. It fed on low tundra vegetation in which it scraped away snow and ice from with its ivory tusks. Several well preserved remains have been found in Siberia and Alaska and cave paintings in Spain and France show depictions of the Wooly Mammoth as seen by early humans. The mammuthus primigenius went extinct only about 10,000 years ago.
It sounds like they went extinct long before the flood......

Considering the accuracy limits of such estimates I would say that their estimate fits rather well with extinction during the Flood.

 

[BillyBob]

Everything I find indicates the Wooly mammoth was a cold climate animal that lived from 2 million years ago until about 10,000 years ago, which coincides with the probable overhunting by ice age man.



The Woolly Mammoth--a Cold-Weather Model
The genus Mammuthus includes a number of distinct species, of which the best known is the woolly mammoth. “The woolly mammoth represents the end point in a series of adaptations to the Ice Age habitat,” write Adrian Lister and Paul Bahn in Mammoths. Extremely specialized to survive in the frigid Arctic, the woolly mammoth probably arose in Siberia but eventually inhabited a vast northern range extending from Ireland to the eastern North America. “Living south of the ice sheets, it inhabited a landscape of rich, grassy vegetation largely devoid of trees,” write Lister and Bahn.

 

[Yorzhik]

I've read Walt Brown's information on this. Still, with water born sediment and oil directly under the mammoths, it has to be post flood. Thus, the mammoths were probably post-flood/pre-ice age. The lush plantlife was pre-ice age, too.

 

[bob b]

For those unable to follow the link to the rather extensive material gathered by Walt Brown here is a short sample. The references should be checked, but most are from mainline journals.
-----------
Mammoth Characteristics and Environment. The common misconception that mammoths lived in areas of extreme cold comes primarily from popular drawings of mammoths living comfortably in snowy, Arctic regions. The artists, in turn, were influenced by earlier opinions based on the mammoth’s hairy coat, thick skin, and a 3.5-inch layer of fat under the skin. However, animals with these characteristics do not necessarily live in cold climates. Let’s examine these characteristics more closely.

Hair. The mammoth’s hairy coat no more implies an Arctic adaptation than a woolly coat does for a sheep. The mammoth lacked erector muscles that fluff up an animal’s fur and create insulating air pockets. Neuville, who conducted the most detailed study of mammoth skin and hair, wrote: “It appears to me impossible to find, in the anatomical examination of the skin and [hair], any argument in favor of adaptation to the cold.”30 Long hair on a mammoth’s legs hung to its toes.31 Had it walked in snow, snow and ice would have caked on its hairy “ankles.” Each step into and out of snow would have pulled or worn away the “ankle” hair. All hoofed animals living in the Arctic, including the musk ox, have fur, not hair, on their legs.32 Fur, especially oily fur, holds a thick layer of stagnant air (an excellent insulator) between the snow and skin. With the mammoth’s greaseless hair, much more snow would touch the skin, melt, and increase the heat transfer 10–100 fold. Later refreezing would seriously harm the animal.

Skin. Mammoth and elephant skin are similar in thickness and structure.33 Both lack oil glands, making them vulnerable to cold, damp climates. Arctic mammals have both oil glands and erector muscles—equipment absent in mammoths.34

Fat. Some animals living in temperate zones, such as the rhinoceros, have thick layers of fat, while many Arctic animals, such as reindeer and caribou, have little fat. Thick layers of fat under the skin simply show that food was plentiful. Abundant food implies a temperate climate.

Elephants. The elephant—a close approximation to the mammoth35—lives in tropical or temperate regions, not the Arctic. It requires “a climate that ranges from warm to very hot,” and “it gets a stomach ache if the temperature drops close to freezing.”36 Newborn elephants are susceptible to pneumonia and must be kept warm and dry.37 Hannibal, who crossed the Alps with 37 elephants, lost all but one due to cold weather.38

Water. If mammoths lived in an Arctic climate, their drinking water in the winter must have come from eating snow or ice. A wild elephant requires 30–60 gallons of water each day.39 The heat needed to melt snow or ice and warm it to body temperature would consume about half a typical elephant’s calories. Unlike other Arctic animals, the trunk would bear much of this thermal (melting) stress. Nursing elephants require about 25% more water.

Salt. How would a mammoth living in an Arctic climate satisfy its large salt appetite? Elephants dig for salt using their sharp tusks.40 In rock-hard permafrost this would be almost impossible, summer or winter, especially with curved tusks.

Nearby Plants and Animals. The easiest and most accurate way to determine an extinct animal’s or plant’s environment is to identify familiar animals and plants buried nearby. For the mammoth, this includes rhinoceroses, tigers, horses, antelope,41 bison, and temperate species of grasses. All live in warm climates. Some burrowing animals are frozen, such as voles, who would not burrow in rock-hard permafrost. Even larvae of the warble fly have been found in a frozen mammoth’s intestine—larvae identical to those found in tropical elephants today.42 No one argues that animals and plants buried near the mammoths were adapted to the Arctic. Why do so for mammoths?

Temperature. The average January temperature in northeastern Siberia is about -28°F, 60°F below freezing! During the Ice Age, it was much colder. The long, slender trunk of the mammoth was particularly vulnerable to cold weather. A six-foot-long nose could not survive even one cold night, let alone an eight-month-long Siberian winter or a sudden cold snap. For the more slender trunk of a young mammoth, the heat loss would be deadly. An elephant usually dies if its trunk is seriously injured.43

No Winter Sunlight. Cold temperatures are one problem, but six months of little sunlight during Arctic winters is quite another. While some claim that mammoths were adapted to the cold environment of Siberia and Alaska, vegetation, adapted or not, does not grow during the months-long Arctic night. In those regions today, vegetation is covered by snow and ice ten months each year. Mammoths had to eat—voraciously. Elephants in the wild spend about 16 hours a day foraging for food in relatively lush environments, summer and winter.45

-----------

And of course none but the Walt Brown theory can explain how one can get a 1000 foot layer of permafrost by a process of slow accumulation.

As I tried to explain previously a slow accumulation process of thermafrost accumulation defies explanation by heat transfer theory, since there is a continuous flow of heat upward from the hot core of the Earth which would reach steady-state long before the thermafrost would have reached such thick layers.

No, the thermafrost got there quickly by the same process that froze the mammoths in their tracks.

 

[BillyBob]

-----------
Mammoth Characteristics and Environment. The common misconception that mammoths lived in areas of extreme cold comes primarily from popular drawings of mammoths living comfortably in snowy, Arctic regions. The artists, in turn, were influenced by earlier opinions based on the mammoth’s hairy coat, thick skin, and a 3.5-inch layer of fat under the skin. However, animals with these characteristics do not necessarily live in cold climates. Let’s examine these characteristics more closely.

There are many species of Mammoth, the Wooly being only one of them, not all Mammoths lived in the arctic.

Hair. The mammoth’s hairy coat no more implies an Arctic adaptation than a woolly coat does for a sheep.

Like Mammoths, not all sheep have wool. It isn't unreasonable to assume that certain wooly sheep evolved in cold climates. It is also not unreasonable to expect that humans may have bred sheep for their wool.......

The mammoth lacked erector muscles that fluff up an animal’s fur and create insulating air pockets. Neuville, who conducted the most detailed study of mammoth skin and hair, wrote: “It appears to me impossible to find, in the anatomical examination of the skin and [hair], any argument in favor of adaptation to the cold.”30 Long hair on a mammoth’s legs hung to its toes.31 Had it walked in snow, snow and ice would have caked on its hairy “ankles.” Each step into and out of snow would have pulled or worn away the “ankle” hair. All hoofed animals living in the Arctic, including the musk ox, have fur, not hair, on their legs.32 Fur, especially oily fur, holds a thick layer of stagnant air (an excellent insulator) between the snow and skin. With the mammoth’s greaseless hair, much more snow would touch the skin, melt, and increase the heat transfer 10–100 fold. Later refreezing would seriously harm the animal.

Wolly Mammoths were smaller than other Mammoth species, a trait consistent with cold climate habitation.

So you deny that the Arctic was a frozen tundra during the time of the Wooly Mammoths?
You deny what is commonly referred to as an 'Ice Age'?

Skin. Mammoth and elephant skin are similar in thickness and structure.33 Both lack oil glands, making them vulnerable to cold, damp climates. Arctic mammals have both oil glands and erector muscles—equipment absent in mammoths.34

Do Eskimos have erector muscles that fluff up their fur?

Fat. Some animals living in temperate zones, such as the rhinoceros, have thick layers of fat, while many Arctic animals, such as reindeer and caribou, have little fat.

What do Polar Bears have? Have you ever seen a Musk Ox? I'll post some pics for ya....

Thick layers of fat under the skin simply show that food was plentiful. Abundant food implies a temperate climate.

Tell that to Polar Bears, Seals, Penguins and Whales. Wolly Mammoths being smaller than other mammoth species would require less food.

Elephants. The elephant—a close approximation to the mammoth35—lives in tropical or temperate regions, not the Arctic. It requires “a climate that ranges from warm to very hot,” and “it gets a stomach ache if the temperature drops close to freezing.”36 Newborn elephants are susceptible to pneumonia and must be kept warm and dry.37 Hannibal, who crossed the Alps with 37 elephants, lost all but one due to cold weather.38

Had he used Wooly Mammoths, he wouldn't have had that problem.

Water. If mammoths lived in an Arctic climate, their drinking water in the winter must have come from eating snow or ice. A wild elephant requires 30–60 gallons of water each day.39 The heat needed to melt snow or ice and warm it to body temperature would consume about half a typical elephant’s calories. Unlike other Arctic animals, the trunk would bear much of this thermal (melting) stress. Nursing elephants require about 25% more water.

Woolys, being smaller, would have reqired less water. Also, there are plenty of large mammals living in the arctic year round. Musk Ox, for example, live near rivers.

"The musk ox has a thick, heavy coat to help insulate it from the cold. It is sometimes hard for the musk ox to drink because of cold weather. The water may freeze and then the musk ox has to break the ice in order to get the unfrozen water to drink. Its hooves are well adapted for this."

Salt. How would a mammoth living in an Arctic climate satisfy its large salt appetite? Elephants dig for salt using their sharp tusks.40 In rock-hard permafrost this would be almost impossible, summer or winter, especially with curved tusks.

I'll remind you that Mammoths were a different species, comparing them to hot climate elephants is like comparing a penguin to a chicken or a Polar Bear to a Ground Hog.

Nearby Plants and Animals. The easiest and most accurate way to determine an extinct animal’s or plant’s environment is to identify familiar animals and plants buried nearby. For the mammoth, this includes rhinoceroses, tigers, horses, antelope,41 bison, and temperate species of grasses. All live in warm climates. Some burrowing animals are frozen, such as voles, who would not burrow in rock-hard permafrost. Even larvae of the warble fly have been found in a frozen mammoth’s intestine—larvae identical to those found in tropical elephants today.42 No one argues that animals and plants buried near the mammoths were adapted to the Arctic. Why do so for mammoths?

Here's the first clue that Wooly Mammoths lived in a cold climate:
:sozo: They lived in the ARCTIC!

Also, they are found frozen solid, often with virtually no decomposition, which verifies again that they lived and died in a very cold environment.

Temperature. The average January temperature in northeastern Siberia is about -28°F, 60°F below freezing! During the Ice Age, it was much colder. The long, slender trunk of the mammoth was particularly vulnerable to cold weather. A six-foot-long nose could not survive even one cold night, let alone an eight-month-long Siberian winter or a sudden cold snap. For the more slender trunk of a young mammoth, the heat loss would be deadly. An elephant usually dies if its trunk is seriously injured.43

Penguins and chickens.

No Winter Sunlight. Cold temperatures are one problem, but six months of little sunlight during Arctic winters is quite another. While some claim that mammoths were adapted to the cold environment of Siberia and Alaska, vegetation, adapted or not, does not grow during the months-long Arctic night. In those regions today, vegetation is covered by snow and ice ten months each year. Mammoths had to eat—voraciously. Elephants in the wild spend about 16 hours a day foraging for food in relatively lush environments, summer and winter.45

Woolys were smaller than elephants. They could have foraged for the grass that was under the snow, they had all day and it's not like that had anything else to do.

I'll remind you that there are other grazing animals which live in the arctic including musk ox, rabbits, sheep, hares and caribou. All of them find ample food and water all year round.




So Bob, what exactly is your point?

 

[bob b]

There are many species of Mammoth, the Wooly being only one of them, not all Mammoths lived in the arctic.

True, but immaterial.

Like Mammoths, not all sheep have wool. It isn't unreasonable to assume that certain wooly sheep evolved in cold climates. It is also not unreasonable to expect that humans may have bred sheep for their wool.......

True, but so what?

Wolly Mammoths were smaller than other Mammoth species, a trait consistent with cold climate habitation.

Consistent perhaps, but that's all.

So you deny that the Arctic was a frozen tundra during the time of the Wooly Mammoths?

When they were alive, yes.

You deny what is commonly referred to as an 'Ice Age'?

No, an Ice Age undoubtedly followed, not preceded.

Do Eskimos have erector muscles that fluff up their fur?

They rarely run around naked.

What do Polar Bears have? Have you ever seen a Musk Ox? I'll post some pics for ya....

I'd rather go with the journal articles Walt Brown referenced.

Tell that to Polar Bears, Seals, Penguins and Whales. Wolly Mammoths being smaller than other mammoth species would require less food.

Are you suggesting they ate fish?

Woolys, being smaller, would have reqired less water. Also, there are plenty of large mammals living in the arctic year round. Musk Ox, for example, live near rivers.

The arctic is a big region. Permafrost 1000 feet deep is not found at all locations.

"The musk ox has a thick, heavy coat to help insulate it from the cold. It is sometimes hard for the musk ox to drink because of cold weather. The water may freeze and then the musk ox has to break the ice in order to get the unfrozen water to drink. Its hooves are well adapted for this."

We were talking about how to explain frozen mammoths found upright with undigested food and temperate zone plants and seeds found in their mouths and stomachs.

I'll remind you that Mammoths were a different species, comparing them to hot climate elephants is like comparing a penguin to a chicken or a Polar Bear to a Ground Hog.

In your opinion, but not in the opinion of the experts writing in the scientific journals as referenced by Brown.

Here's the first clue that Wooly Mammoths lived in a cold climate:
:sozo: They lived in the ARCTIC! Also, they are found frozen solid, often with virtually no decomposition, which verifies again that they lived and died in a very cold environment.

No, it verifies that they died in a very cold environment, one far colder than anyone can imagine. The plant evidence, plus the tigers found there, testify that the climate was temperate and must have suddenly got extremely cold by some very unusual process not going on in the world today.

Woolys were smaller than elephants. They could have foraged for the grass that was under the snow, they had all day and it's not like that had anything else to do.

I'll remind you that there are other grazing animals which live in the arctic including musk ox, rabbits, sheep, hares and caribou. All of them find ample food and water all year round.

Only in certain regions of the arctic.

So Bob, what exactly is your point?

That your "explanations" are without merit?

BTW, how do you think a 1000 foot layer of permafrost got there in certain places in the arctic, whereas it is virtually absent in others?

And samples of mammoths were found that deep also. Seems to me that this means that the oil-bearing pockets were generated at the same time, since it was the drilling for oil that uncovered these facts.

Did you known that oil samples have been carbon-dated, indicating that they are not millions of years old?

BTW, you are much better at puns then serious stuff.

 

[BillyBob]

BTW, you are much better at puns then serious stuff.

I think not.

While I usually stick to the 'fun stuff' here at TOL, I singlehandedly dismantled your basic premise, which is, as far as I can tell, that wooly mammoths could not have lived in an arctic climate.

Here is some more info you might find irritatingly interesting:

Adaptations

Mammoths had a number of adaptations to the cold, most famously the thick layer of shaggy hair, up to 50 cm (20 in) long, for which the woolly mammoth is named. They also had far smaller ears than modern elephants; the largest mammoth ear found so far was only a foot (30 cm) long, compared to six feet (1.8 m) for an African elephant. They had a flap of hairy skin which covered the anus, keeping out the cold.

Their teeth were also adapted to their diet of coarse tundra grasses, with more plates and a higher crown than their southern relatives.

Their skin was no thicker than that of present-day elephants, but unlike elephants they had numerous sebaceous glands in their skin which secreted greasy fat into their hair, improving its insulating qualities.

They had a layer of fat up to 8 cm (3 in) thick under the skin which, like the blubber of whales, helped to keep them warm.

Mammoths had extremely long tusks - up to 16 feet (5 m) long - which were markedly curved, to a much greater extent than those of elephants. It is not clear whether the tusks were a specific adaptation to their environment, but it has been suggested that mammoths may have used their tusks as shovels to clear snow from the ground and reach the vegetation buried below.

Preserved remains, genetic evidence

Preserved frozen remains of woolly mammoths have been found in the northern parts of Siberia. This is a rare occurrence, essentially requiring the animal to have been buried rapidly in liquid or semi-solids such as silt, mud and icy water which then froze.

This may have occurred in a number of ways. Mammoths may have been trapped in bogs or quicksands and either died of starvation or exposure, or drowning if they sank under the surface. They may have fallen through frozen ice into small ponds or potholes, entombing them. Many are certainly known to have been killed in rivers, perhaps through being swept away by river floods; in one location, by the Berelekh River in Yakutia in Siberia, more than 9,000 bones from at least 156 individual mammoths have been found in a single spot, apparently having been swept there by the current.

To date, thirty-nine preserved bodies have been found, but only four of them are complete. In most cases the flesh shows signs of decay before its freezing and later desiccation. Stories abound about frozen mammoth corpses that were still edible once defrosted, but the original sources (e.g. William R. Farrand's article in Science 133 [March 17, 1961]:729-735) indicate that the corpses were in fact terribly decayed, and the stench so unbearable that only the dogs accompanying the finders showed any interest in the flesh.

 

[BillyBob]

Here's another extinct Ice Age mammal: Woolly Rhino

 

[BillyBob]

True, but immaterial.

Not at all. By demonstrating a clear distinction between different Mammoths, I am making a case for the Woolly's to have been a cold weather species.

True, but so what?

You are the person who brought sheep into this debate, I'm just showing you that your point doesn't support your premise.

Consistent perhaps, but that's all.

It's one more bit of evidence refuting your premise.

When they were alive, yes.

No, an Ice Age undoubtedly followed, not preceded.

The most recent Ice Age [one of many throughout the Earths history] started about 1 million years ago and ended about 10,000 years ago, according to the USGS. Here's a link, go learn some science. :devil:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/ice_age/ice_age.pdf

They rarely run around naked.

Neither did the Wooly Mammoths.

I'd rather go with the journal articles Walt Brown referenced.

Instead of looking at pictures of Musk Ox? Why? Could it be that a simple picture of a living arctic mammal destroys half of Brown's premise and you prefer to ignore anything that disproves your preconceived notions because you have rested your faith in God upon them?

Are you suggesting they ate fish?

No, I am suggesting that yours and Brown's premise that thick layers of fat prove a temperate climate is easily proven wrong. Please pay attention.

The arctic is a big region. Permafrost 1000 feet deep is not found at all locations.

Ah, so you admit then that Wooly Mammoths could have easily survived in a cold, arctic climate. I was wondering when you would finally concede, it really was your only option.

We were talking about how to explain frozen mammoths found upright with undigested food and temperate zone plants and seeds found in their mouths and stomachs.

No, you said that long fur would be an incumberant to arctic animals and I proved that you are wrong by showing a living species with long hair. You also said that animals could not find water in the arctic and I also demonstrated your folly. Please pay attention and stop trying to change the subject.

In your opinion, but not in the opinion of the experts writing in the scientific journals as referenced by Brown.

My opinion?????? I referenced links written by experts who demonstrate that wooly Mammoths are a different species than modern elephants. Are you saying that African elephants are no different than Wooly Mammoths?

No, it verifies that they died in a very cold environment, one far colder than anyone can imagine. The plant evidence, plus the tigers found there, testify that the climate was temperate

"The tiger's habitat stretches from India all the way up to Siberia, near the Arctic Circle. The Bengal tiger of India is slightly smaller and sleeker than its relative to the north. The Siberian tiger is larger, and has a heavier coat of fur to protect it from the winter cold.

and must have suddenly got extremely cold by some very unusual process not going on in the world today.

We are living in a more moderate climate than when the Wooly Mammoths lived and ultimately became extinct.

Only in certain regions of the arctic.

So you agree that your premise which states that animals cannot find food and water in the arctic was false? Good, you really had no other choice in the face of such overwhelming evidence which proves you were wrong.

That your "explanations" are without merit?

Dude, I just blew your entire premise clean out of the water. Now, if you wanna live in denial, that's your business but your points have been thouroughly refuted.

:cheers:

 

[fool]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i3/mammoth.asp

 

[Johnny]

Elephants. The elephant—a close approximation to the mammoth35—lives in tropical or temperate regions, not the Arctic. It requires “a climate that ranges from warm to very hot,” and “it gets a stomach ache if the temperature drops close to freezing.”36 Newborn elephants are susceptible to pneumonia and must be kept warm and dry.37 Hannibal, who crossed the Alps with 37 elephants, lost all but one due to cold weather.38

Gee Walt, that might be why the Woolly Mammoth had hair.

And why ignore the elephant in the room...what's the biggest problem Elephants face in warm climates? Overheating. They have thick skin and a large body volume. This is why elephants roll around in mud all day and flap their HUGE ears constantly. Walt tells us, "Skin. Mammoth and elephant skin are similar in thickness and structure." Now add a nice layer of wool. Definitely suited for the warm climates.

Even AiG notes, "There is abundant evidence that the woolly mammoths in Siberia, Alaska and the Yukon died after the Flood. They were truly denizens of the post-Flood ice age." (thanks fool)

 

[BillyBob]

Mammoths had ears much smaller than modern elephants which perfectly suited them for life in a fridgid climate.

 

[bob b]

I've read Walt Brown's information on this. Still, with water born sediment and oil directly under the mammoths, it has to be post flood. Thus, the mammoths were probably post-flood/pre-ice age. The lush plantlife was pre-ice age, too.

PREDICTION 19: One should not find marine fossils, layered strata, oil, coal seams, or limestone directly beneath undisturbed rock ice or frozen mammoth carcasses.146

This is a severe test for this theory, because a few crude geologic maps of Siberia imply that marine fossils lie within several miles of the frozen remains. How accurate are these geologic maps in this relatively unexplored region, and what deposits lie directly beneath frozen carcasses? (If dead mammoths floated on the flood waters, their flesh would not be preserved, but their bones might be found above marine fossils, coal, etc.)

Sedimentary layers generally extend over large areas and sometimes contain distinctive fossils. One can construct a plausible geologic map of an area (a) if many deep layers are exposed, as for example in the face of a cliff, (b) if similar vertical sequences of fossils and rock types are found in nearby exposures, and (c) if no intervening crustal movement has occurred. If all three conditions are satisfied, then it is reasonable to assume that the layers with similar distinctive fossils are connected. To my knowledge, such layers have not been found beneath any frozen mammoth.

Nor is there any known report of marine fossils, limestone deposits, or coal seams directly beneath any frozen mammoth or rhinoceros remains. Tolmachoff, in his chapter on the geology of the Berezovka site, wrote that “Marine shells or marine mammals have never been discovered in [deposits having frozen mammoths].”147 Hern von Maydell, reporting on his third frozen mammoth, wrote, “despite my thorough search, not a single shell or fossil was found.”148 Beneath the Fairbanks Creek mammoth, sediments down to bedrock contained no marine fossils, layered strata, coal seams, or limestone.149

146
. One geologist, trying to falsify this prediction, drafted an article claiming that a geologic map showed layered, fossil-bearing strata under the Colorado Creek mammoths. He misread his geologic map. Had he read it correctly, he would have seen that it supported this prediction. The article was never published and that geologist has stopped spreading the misinformation.

147
. I. P. Tolmachoff, The Carcasses of the Mammoth and Rhinoceros Found in the Frozen Ground of Siberia (Philadelphia: The American Philosophical Society, 1929), p. 51 reported, “The uppermost position of mammoth-bearing deposits [cover the] sediments of the Arctic transgression ...” This has caused some confusion in North America where “transgression” means the advance of the sea over the land. Such an advance might deposit sediments and fossils unconformably. To Europeans (and presumably the European-trained Tolmachoff) the term “transgression” simply means an unconformity—basically, dirt that is not layered. [See “transgression,” in Robert L. Bates and Julia A. Jackson, editors, Glossary of Geology, 2nd edition (Falls Church, Virginia: American Geological Institute, 1980), p. 660.] In other words, rocks under the mammoths are not stratified. Tolmachoff attributed this to glacial activity, but described nothing diagnostic of glacial activity.

148
. Basset Digby, The Mammoth (New York: D. Appleton and Company, 1926), p. 93.

149
. Troy L. Péwé, Quaternary Geology, Geological Survey Professional Paper 835 (Washington, D.C.: United States Government Printing Office, 1975), pp. 41–42.

 

[Jukia]

I have not had time to read all of this thread but: The Mammoths frozen in Siberia are thought to be from warm climates? Is that what I take from bob b's posts?
Do we find any dinosaurs similarly frozen? Should we expect to? Warm climate animals, trapped when the fountains of the deep came raining back down???

Why not frozen dinos??