Biblical Flood? Fish, squid, and shrimp fossils in the mountains of Lebanon and Peru

[Akhenaten]

Because fossils being of the same age -or even older (as it may actually happen)- than the sediments would be something against the Bible.
Unthinkable, unlikely, impossible, outrageous, heresy!

BTW, god stopped the Sun in the sky?

God is the Sun, you blasphemous geologist!

 

[Correa Neto]

I can't wait to see whether DOC tries for "6,000-year-old fossils in 65,000,000-year-old rocks" or "65,000,000-year-old fossils in 6,000-year-old rocks"

I anticipate hilarity, either way.

Well, the last case is not impossible.
Weather a 65My-old fosssiliferous rock, get the fossils loose.
Erode, transport the fossils, redeposit them somewhere else 6Ky later with more sediments and let lithification happen.

Still, no global flood.

 

[Akhenaten]

I would pay money to hear Christopher Walken, or Neil Patrick Harris, read the Nash poems as incidental narration for Le Carnaval des Animaux performed on Ukelele by Jake Shimabokuro...

That would be outstanding.

The best I can come up with as a poor substitute is Roger Moore.

​

 

[Correa Neto]

God is the Sun, you blasphemous geologist!

1. Loved the title. Thank you. Ashamed for not having thought of it before.
2. Everloving omni god, source of all morality and ethics, has stopped itself in the sky so some folks could have more time to kill themselves?

 

[tsig]

1. Loved the title. Thank you. Ashamed for not having thought of it before.
2. Everloving omni god, source of all morality and ethics, has stopped itself in the sky so some folks could have more time to kill themselves?

So that his chosen ones could kill the unchosen ones. Seems like it'd be simpler just to slay them out of hand rather than go to all the trouble of abrogating the laws of physics.

 

[Slowvehicle]

1. Loved the title. Thank you. Ashamed for not having thought of it before.
2. Everloving omni god, source of all morality and ethics, has stopped itself in the sky so some folks could have more time to kill themselves?

...NOW yer talkin'...

 

[Correa Neto]

http://www.layevangelism.com/advtxbk/sections/sect-10/sec10-5.htm[/url]

talk about evidence for a flood and give a possible explanation for the above rarity:

"Thousands and millions of fish fossils which retain all the body parts indicating very rapid burial. Under normal conditions, fish do not fossilize. Dead fish are torn apart by scavengers and disintegrated by bacteria. There are the existence of fossils with soft tissue like jellyfish and sponges. There are the preservation of animal tracts, fish odors..."

"Fossilization requires rapid burial. Yet such burial is exceedingly rare today, and fossilization is almost non-existent in modern times. The existence of massive numbers of fossils worldwide is clear evidence of quick, deep, mass burial. A global flood catastrophe would offer conditions most ideal to the location of great numbers of fossils. The fossils give evidence that the animals were killed suddenly."

As I wrote before, creationsim is a scam, scientists who try to use their knowledge attempting to back it are prostituting their trade. And I don't give a **** if it offends someone, since this is truth. And yes I would wear a t-shirt with this printed and would not give a **** to those who would feel offended by it and decline to debate. No dialogue is possible with such people, for they are either part of the scam or just too deluded by it.

The text quoted by DOC left behind LOTS of things about the fossilization processes. So many things that it must be seen as a piece of a scam, something written with the specific intent to fool, to deceive. It completely ignores, for example, what happens at the bottom of oxygen-depleted water bodies and fossilization at certain sites such as inside caves, which can be very fast due to mineral precipitation.

Want me to post a picture of a fossilized tennis (I wrote tennis, you dirty mind) to prove my point?

 

[Correa Neto]

So that his chosen ones could kill the unchosen ones. Seems like it'd be simpler just to slay them out of hand rather than go to all the trouble of abrogating the laws of physics.

Everloving omni god, source of all morality and ethics stays with its hands clean.

 

[Elizabeth I]

That would be outstanding.

The best I can come up with as a poor substitute is Roger Moore.

​

I beg your pardon, Roger Moore is not a poor substitute for anything.

 

[Akhenaten]

I beg your pardon, Roger Moore is not a poor substitute for anything.

Apologies, Majesty.

Too hastily were my words chosen and I beg thy mercy.

 

[Tolls]

I beg your pardon, Roger Moore is not a poor substitute for anything.

Some might say he's a poor substitute for Sean Connery...
I couldn't possibly comment, myself.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Is there anything we can't learn from Red Dwarf?

How to do convincing CGI?

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I can't wait to see whether DOC tries for "6,000-year-old fossils in 65,000,000-year-old rocks" or "65,000,000-year-old fossils in 6,000-year-old rocks"

I anticipate hilarity, either way.

Just wait until he gets to the bunny.

 

[Dinwar]

"Fossilization requires rapid burial. Yet such burial is exceedingly rare today, and fossilization is almost non-existent in modern times. The existence of massive numbers of fossils worldwide is clear evidence of quick, deep, mass burial. A global flood catastrophe would offer conditions most ideal to the location of great numbers of fossils. The fossils give evidence that the animals were killed suddenly."

My least-favorite myth about fossils. "Fossilization" does not exist. It is as much a myth as fire-breathing dragons and hydra. At best, it is short-hand for a suite of processes, some of which require rapid burial, others of which do not. For example, there's bog preservation (oxygen-poor water depositing iron; lots of stuff survives).

As for rapid burial, it's not actually that rare. The entire concept of turbidites came from people on a boat in a Swedish lake who saw an underwater landslide, then demonstrated that they happen essentially all the time and everywhere under water. That is rapid burial. Huricane Sandy moved several barier islands several feet. That's rapid burial. So is the movement of such islands due to every other huricane that hits them (barier islands are a great way to test hypotheses about shoreline migration for that reason). I have a paper somewhere describing the Colorado River delta, which before daming deposited shells and sediment in a continuous and rapid fashion. In fact, once you get out of your house and explore geologic settings, you find that rapid burial is extremely common.

Also, the reason fossilization doesn't occur today is that the term "fossil" means "some evidence of some living thing 10,000 years old or more". By definition, nothing less than 10,000 years old is a fossil, and everything older is. That was because it's actually impossible to visually identify fossils in many phyla--for example, I've seen gastrapod shells that were identical, despite one being over sixty million years older than the other.

Finally, you've completely and unconscionably ignored the fact that fossiliferous deposits are not uniform in lithology. You need to explain why, for example, the Silica Shale is deposited in layers of silt and carbonate, while the La Brea Tar Pits samples are deposited in sands. You also need to explain the order we find fossils in, which cannot be reproduced using a flood model.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

[derail] Anybody know if the compostion of limestone would be different if it were actually laid down in a few weeks? I am thinking this would be turn, but I'm no rock hounds.

 

[Dinwar]

Anybody know if the compostion of limestone would be different if it were actually laid down in a few weeks?

It's exactly the same as regular limestone. We know this because we can date some coral growths by the production date on the beer cans they've grown around.

 

[Mojo]

I've seen gastrapod shells that were identical, despite one being over sixty million years older than the other.

"See? Evolution doesn't happen!"

 

[Correa Neto]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22355515

So, Toba supervolcano may not have been the cause of one of human genetic bottlenecks. OK. Check its age. How's that possible? The devil? Decay constants changed with time?

Can YEC scammers find any genetic bottleneck associated with the flood?
No? Why?
Genetics is a thing from the devil too? God messed with the genes after the flood to allow diversity?

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

It's exactly the same as regular limestone. We know this because we can date some coral growths by the production date on the beer cans they've grown around.

And what's the maximum rate of accretion noted?

 

[Dinwar]

And what's the maximum rate of accretion noted?

Couple of inches per year is the best I can say for those environments. Enough that if you leave a beer can on the coral it'll be significantly encased next year.

Though Correa Neto reminded me of anotherr setting where carbonate is deposited quite rapidly. There are carbonate volcanoes in Africa. What happes is carbonate deposits get subducted and melted, just like any other rock. When it comes up, it's lava--but carbonate lava. They apparently glow brown instead of red. We know this isn't how carbonate throughout the world is deposited (many reef deposits preserve the coral forms), but it's a neat quirk of geology that Creationists never bother to address. The accumulation rate there would be in the feet/year range, where the lava was flowing.