Scientists baffled by a perfect example of Biblical kinds

[Stripe]

Darwinists hate sticking to the topic.

 

[Jonahdog]

Fossilization is not a normal process. Often it is evidence of catastrophic burial preserving an organism...protecting it from scavengers and oxidation. (A dead dino laying out on the plains, or a whale on a beach, would not be fossilized). Billions of dead things preserved in sedimentary / water borne layers everywhere on earth is great evidence of the global flood and God's Word.

Billions of dead things preserved in sedimentary layers everywhere is evidence of millions or billions of years not a global Flood.
Were the marine fossils on mountain tops created before or during the Flood?

 

[Jonahdog]

Darwinists hate sticking to the topic.

Stripe hates rational thought and intellectual curiosity.

 

[Stripe]

Stripe hates rational thought and intellectual curiosity.

Nope.

this thread was about something. You're desperate to make it about something else.

 

[6days]

Billions of dead things preserved in sedimentary layers everywhere is evidence of millions or billions of years

I have heard that interpretation of the evidence before. But... its wrong. God's Word tells us what really happened. Science helps confirm it. *Billions of dead things catastrophically buried and preserved in layers is precisely what we should expect from the global flood. *And, we don't really expect this, but since the flood was only a few thousand years ago... we might someday find find things like DNA, and/ or soft tissue in dinosaur fossils.*

 

[Jose Fly]

Yes... marine fossils on every continent...on every mountain range is one of the evidences of the global flood.

So again, which of the two scenarios is the "Biblical model"...clams swimming to the top of Everest, or Everest forming in about 1 year? Or is it both?

 

[6days]

Catch up..... stop repeating questions that have been answered. And... stop with the logical fallacies.
BTW.... The definition of 'kind' has been provided, correct?

In the beginning, God created.

 

[Jose Fly]

Catch up..... stop repeating questions that have been answered. And... stop with the logical fallacies.

You're dodging again 6days. Let's review...

In post #409 you cited "Evidence of fossized marine creatures high on mountain ranges everywhere on earth" when asked to provide evidence of a global flood.

In post #419 I depicted it as requiring either mountain-climbing clams or Everest rising in a year with clams attached.

In post #420 you tried do deflect by introducing topics that have nothing to do with a global flood.

In post #424 I noted your dodge and asked which of the two scenarios was the "Biblical model".

In post #427 you claimed that was a false dilemma.

In post #430 I asked if it was both (clams climbing Mt. Everest as it rose in one year).

In post #436 you merely repeated the claim that marine fossils on mountains were evidence of a global flood.

In post #446 I asked the question again (is it mountain-climbing clams, Mt. Everest rising in one year, or both).

And now you're claiming to have answered. But as the record shows, you haven't, which means now we have another question...were you merely mistaken, or were you deliberately lying?

BTW.... The definition of 'kind' has been provided, correct?

Yep...organisms that share a common ancestry.

 

[6days]

You're dodging again 6days. Let's review...

In post*#409*you cited "Evidence of fossized marine creatures high on mountain ranges everywhere on earth" when asked to provide evidence of a global flood.

In*post #419*I depicted it as requiring either mountain-climbing clams or Everest rising in a year with clams attached.

In*post #420*you tried do deflect by introducing topics that have nothing to do with a global flood.

In*post #424*I noted your dodge and asked which of the two scenarios was the "Biblical model".

In*post #427*you claimed that was a false dilemma.

In*post #430*I asked if it was both (clams climbing Mt. Everest as it rose in one year).

In*post #436*you merely repeated the claim that marine fossils on mountains were evidence of a global flood.

In*post #446*I asked the question again (is it mountain-climbing clams, Mt. Everest rising in one year, or both).

And now you're claiming to have answered. But as the record shows, you haven't, which means now we have another question...were you merely mistaken, or were you deliberately lying?

Ok..... So you see... you show that you were answered. You should have looked up what a false dilema was.*

As I said to Greg ...

In post #439**a FALSE DILEMA is " A fallacy of oversimplification that offers a limited number of options (usually two) when in reality more options are available.". For example, John Morris PhD Geological Engineering has said that the effects of uplifts, volcanic activity, tsunamis etc night have continued a couple hundred years. Greg..... Do your assignments. Don't just blindly follow Jose, and illogical conclusions." (And, illogucal fallacies).


BTW... you dodged the questions I asked you.

 

[Jose Fly]

Ok..... So you see... you show that you were answered. You should have looked up what a false dilema was.*

So in the interest of clarity, you're saying it's both (clams were climbing and attaching to Everest as it was forming in one year)?

BTW... you dodged the questions I asked you.

Because you posted them in a lame attempt to dodge the original question you were asked. You claimed marine fossils on mountains are evidence of a global flood, so that's what we're discussing.

 

[Stripe]

Yep...organisms that share a common ancestry.

Nope. That would make you and Jonahdog a "kind."

 

[Jose Fly]

So Jonahdog and I are two different kinds. How 'bout that? :chuckle:

 

[Stripe]

So Jonahdog and I are two different kinds. How 'bout that? :chuckle:

When you are willingly ignorant — stupid on purpose — about the things we are talking about, you're a waste of time; a troll. :troll:

 

[6days]

So in the interest of clarity, you're saying it's both (clams were climbing and attaching to Everest as it was forming in one year)

I think the conclusion could be that either you are(a) stupid or(b) dishonest. Or, are there other choices? *

Google false dilema (or, false dichotomy)..... or, go with the answer given to you in post 439.

*BTW... you dodged the questions I asked you.*

Because you posted them in a lame attempt to dodge the original question you were asked.

No... if you care to check, I posted the questions mocking your faith and your illogical conclusions in response to your "Makes total sense, right? ". Perhaps you can answer the questions better than Greg's attempt?


The original question you asked was a lame false dilema.

 

[Jose Fly]

Google false dilema (or, false dichotomy)..... or, go with the answer given to you in post 439.

You answered a question I asked in a post to someone else? Whatever. Here is what you posted...

"John Morris PhD Geological Engineering has said that the effects of uplifts, volcanic activity, tsunamis etc night have continued a couple hundred years. "

That doesn't really explain how clam fossils ended up on top of Mt. Everest. Are you saying that Mt. Everest didn't exist (i.e., was seafloor), clams got buried in the flood, and then over a period of about 200 years or so Mt. Everest rose to something approximating its current height?

Remember, you keep insisting that this "Biblical model" is a superior explanation for the data. So let's see put this to the test.

No... if you care to check, I posted the questions mocking your faith and your illogical conclusions

Exactly....you didn't ask because you were genuinely interested in the answers. So let's stick to the original topic that you introduced, i.e., marine fossils on mountains.

 

[Jonahdog]

6: I don't think you answered my question---the marine fossils on the top of high mountains, were they formed before or during the Big Flood?

 

[6days]

That doesn't really explain how clam fossils ended up on top of Mt. Everest. Are you saying that Mt. Everest didn't exist (i.e., was seafloor), clams got buried in the flood, and then over a period of about 200 years or so Mt. Everest rose to something approximating its current height?

Thats one possible answer, yes. (Some clarification may be required on wording)

Marine fossils found on all continents and all mountain ranges is one of the evidences of the global flood.*

If you wish to see detailed answers from geogists.....


Well, perhaps start with simple...http://creationscience4kids.com/the-whole-world-knows-the-mountains-were-underwater/


There are many articles from Christian scientists discussing / debating details of things such as heat 'problems'. Although they might disagree on some details, they agree that marine fossils everywhere on earth is evidence of the flood. Ex.http://creation.mobi/dealing-carefully-with-the-data

 

[Jonahdog]

6: waiting for a response to my question on when those mountain top marine fossils were formed.

 

[Greg Jennings]

Evolutionists don't know what to believe, but are almost willing to believe anything. (Greg, you should do some research)

This article talks about a feathered tyrannosaur and its iconic descendants. The article closes by suggesting they are weird birds.
http://www.wired.com/2012/04/yutyrannus-huali-feathers/


Haha..... I did not say it did, but its funny that is your response. In fact though, it does have to do with our origins.... and stellar evolution.


Greg... You really need do research and not rely on your blind faith. The Miller Urey experiment is a failure if the intention was to show life from from non life. Because many, if not the most scientists know the experiment fails, they look for origins of life outside our solar system..... aliens anyone?

To start with the Miller Urey experiment shows that extreme intelligence... far beyond our current knowledge would be required. There are so many things about the experiment that show living organisms can't possibly be the result of "atmospheric effects". And, your comment about earths primitive atmosphere is silly. That is another thing evolutionists can't decide what to believe. They NEED a reducing atmosphere, but the evidence often gets in the way.
"A recent Nature publication reports a new technique for measuring the oxygen levels in Earth's atmosphere some 4.4 billion years ago. The authors found that by studying cerium oxidation states in zircon, a compound formed from volcanic magma, they could ascertain the oxidation levels in the early earth. Their findings suggest that the early Earth's oxygen levels were very close to current levels.

"This takes the window of time available for life to have begun, by an origin-of-life scenario like the RNA-first world, and reduces it to an incredibly short amount of time. Several factors need to coincide in order for nucleotides or amino acids to form from purely naturalistic circumstances (chance and chemistry). The specific conditions required already made purely naturalist origin-of-life scenarios highly unlikely. Drastically reducing the amount of time available, adding that to the other conditions needing to be fulfilled, makes the RNA world hypothesis or a Miller-Urey-like synthesis of amino acids simply impossible." http://www.evolutionnews.org/2011/12/post_34053831.html


Likely...woulda...coulda...shoulda. I'm talking about evidence. You are talking about hypothetical beliefs that life came from non life...or that it exists elsewhere.

Fred Hoyle, astrophysicist "A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."


I had to laugh.

Including the Creator God of the Bible???

Both His Word, and the evidence from the world around ys contradict your beliefs.


I think you mean above? In the creation flood model we would expect them above, but possibly with some intermingling.

And... it has been pointed out here in TOL before that modern "species" ARE found sometimes "alongside dinosaur layers". Example.... One of these is a modern bird. The other in a secular museum display found in dino layers.
View attachment 23720

Your question was answered... What I told you was that if you have any college education, you wasted your money. If you don't have college education, its pretty obvious. IOW.... That is ad hominem fallacy attacking the person rather than their argument.

Hee hee... No my friend. You are the student and can not grade your own answers. I have a assigned you a F since you didn't complete the assignment.


If you had completed the assignment, you would have found that a FALSE DILEMA is " A fallacy of oversimplification that offers a limited number of options (usually two) when in reality more options are available.". For example, John Morris PhD Geological Engineering has said that the effects of uplifts, volcanic activity, tsunamis etc night have continued a couple hundred years. Greg..... Do your assignments. Don't just blindly follow Jose, and illogical conclusions.

I got to your first point, which you incorrectly insinuated to be Tyrannosaurus rex covered in feathers. As the article tells, the dinosaur in question is not a Tyrannosaurus Rex, but a completely different species that preceded the T-Rex. The fact that you don't know the difference between "Tyrannosaurus Rex" and "Tyrannosaurs" gives away your lack of knowledge on the topic.

If you want to shorten your post dramatically, then I'll look at it more thoroughly. But as it stands I'm not going to take 20 minutes out of my day when the NCAA tourney is on to answer you, especially when you consider your lack of willingness to look at credible sources, instead relying on your laughably fact-less ones.

I don't understand why you won't answer a simple question. It shows how shaky your supposed "science" is. You can't claim to be scientifically relevant while dodging all inquiries about your "theory" at the same time. It's very transparently dishonest.
Does the Biblical Model have Everest forming in a year or no? If you can't answer that, why would ever expect any scientist to take you seriously?


Took a look at your source's article. They predictably butchered and quote-mined as is to be expected from YECs. Dishonestly comes with the territory

 

[Greg Jennings]

Fossilization is not a normal process. Often it is evidence of catastrophic burial preserving an organism...protecting it from scavengers and oxidation. (A dead dino laying out on the plains, or a whale on a beach, would not be fossilized). Billions of dead things preserved in sedimentary / water borne layers everywhere on earth is great evidence of the global flood and God's Word.

Can you find one single non-YEC source that says fossils are only the result of "catastrophic burial." Let's see what they have to say about all those soft-bodied organisms preserved in layer upon layer in the Burgess shale. Do they think those were the result of catastrophic events?