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

[svenax]

Yeah, but we still don't know who the "actual person" was who estimated the fossils to be 95 million years old. There must be a name, but we don't have one. And it's already been mentioned about the problems with carbon dating marine life and very old material.

Actual person? Come on now, how hard can it be ... I clicked on the link provided, continued to the journal reference, et voilà!

NEW OCTOPODS (CEPHALOPODA: COLEOIDEA) FROM THE LATE CRETACEOUS (UPPER CENOMANIAN) OF HÂKEL AND HÂDJOULA, LEBANON

DIRK FUCHS, GIACOMO BRACCHI, ROBERT WEIS
Article first published online: 31 DEC 2008

DOI: 10.1111/j.1475-4983.2008.00828.x

ETA: I see this has already been mentioned.

 

[Akhenaten]

Was Dr. Fuchs actually in Lebanon and why aren't these people named?

Dr Fuch's needed to be where the fossil was, and whether that was in Lebanon or not is irrelevant.

And he most definitely was where the fossil was.

And his two chief collaborators were Giacomo Bracchi and Robert Weis.

Why don't you just read the bloody article instead of wasting your precious time asking stupid questions?

 

[Akhenaten]

Why do you need time? If there's an explanation, post it now.

The apologetics website he needs to mine for copy pasta is probably down.

​

 

[Akhenaten]

Actual person? Come on now, how hard can it be ... I clicked on the link provided, continued to the journal reference, et voilà!

ETA: I see this has already been mentioned.

Everything that DOC attempts to argue about has already been mentioned - in some cases, hundreds of times.

 

[SlackerBabbath]

We don't know who the "actual person" was who wrote the story of Noah's ark.

Therefore, according to your very own logic, the story is invalid.

The story is of course a part of the Book of Genesis which is traditionaly credited to God, via Moses who wrote it down for him, although that said, it's writing is dated by Biblical scholars to around 500 BC, which is over 500 years after Moses' is said to have died, so yeah, we don't know who wrote the Biblical version of the flood story, or indeed who wrote the original versions that it was based upon but in which the name of the deity was changed, (possibly to protect the innocent??? )

 

[SlackerBabbath]

Was Dr. Fuchs actually in Lebanon and why aren't these people named?

Would it make a difference if he was? You do realise that dating material can be sent to laboritories anywhere in the world for dating don't you?
Infact, they often are sent to various different places, that way they get a 'concensus', in turn making the dating more reliable.

 

[Akhenaten]

The story is of course a part of the Book of Genesis which is traditionaly credited to God via Moses, although that said, it's writing is dated by Biblical scholars to around 500 BC, which is over 500 years after Moses' death, so yeah, we don't know who wrote the Biblical version of the flood story, or indeed who wrote the original versions that it was based upon but in which the name of the deity was changed, (possibly to protect the innocent??? )

We still haven't been able to convince DOC that Genesis 1 and 2 were quite obviously written by different people.

His argument against the mountain of knowledge presented in support of this proposition amounts almost entirely to "Was not!"

 

[DOC]

Dr Fuch's needed to be where the fossil was, and whether that was in Lebanon or not is irrelevant.

And he most definitely was where the fossil was.

And his two chief collaborators were Giacomo Bracchi and Robert Weis.

Why don't you just read the bloody article instead of wasting your precious time asking stupid questions?

Why doesn't it say somewhere Dr. So and So did these series of tests and estimated the age to be? It seems there should be some data somewhere. I don't see that data concerning age anywhere.

 

[SlackerBabbath]

We still haven't been able to convince DOC that Genesis 1 and 2 were quite obviously written by different people.

Well as Craig B just said, there are two obviously contradicting accounts of the creation of man in Genesis, so either it was written by one unreliable source or it was written by at least two conflicting sources. Biblical scholars are in pretty much universal agreement that it was written by several sources.

 

[Akhenaten]

Why doesn't it say somewhere Dr. So and So did these series of tests and estimated the age to be? It seems there should be some data somewhere. I don't see that data concerning age anywhere.

In what way would this information lend support to your as-yet-unexplained belief that this fossil has something to do with the Noachian flood?

Your intimation that Pangea was one continent as recently as 6K years ago seems to indicate otherwise.

Suppose you lay out a chronology:

In your opinion, when did 'god' create the world?

In your opinion, when was Pangea last a single continent?

In your opinion, when did the "global flood" happen?

In your opinion, when did the orogeny of the Himalayas happen?

Please to put those 4 events in the order you want to be able to claim that they happened, with the dates you want to wish for them.

 

[Akhenaten]

Well as Craig B just said, there are two obviously contradicting accounts of the creation of man in Genesis, so either it was written by one unreliable source or it was written by at least two conflicting sources. Biblical scholars are in pretty much universal agreement that it was written by several sources.

Yes, I know mate.

I contributed a significant portion of a thread that DOC has recently abandoned that is devoted to trying to explain this to him.

Evidence that substantiates ANYTHING that happened in the Bible​

 

[SlackerBabbath]

Why doesn't it say somewhere Dr. So and So did these series of tests and estimated the age to be? It seems there should be some data somewhere. I don't see that data concerning age anywhere.

Essentially, it says that Dr Fuchs is the spokesperson for a group or organisation who'se employees carried out the tests.

If you had a particularly good brand of wristwatch, would you need to know the name of the guy in the factory who put it together to trust that it would tell you the time accurately or would you simply trust the brand name as a well known brand for accurate wristwatches?

Two such 'well trusted' organisations are mentioned in association with the report, the 'Freie University' in Berlin and 'The Palaeontological Association'.

 

[SlackerBabbath]

Yes, I know mate.

I contributed a significant portion of a thread that DOC has recently abandoned that is devoted to trying to explain this to him.

Evidence that substantiates ANYTHING that happened in the Bible​

Ahh, looks fun, I shall have to read it.

 

[svenax]

Why doesn't it say somewhere Dr. So and So did these series of tests and estimated the age to be? It seems there should be some data somewhere. I don't see that data concerning age anywhere.

Actually looking to the article text provides some clues. To start with, the researchers did not go to Lebanon at this time, since the fossils where already in museums:

Four of the studied specimens are housed in the palaeontological collection of the Museo Civico di Storia Naturale di Milano: those from Hâqel are labelled MSNM i26321 and MSNM i26323, those from Hâdjoula MSNM i26320 and MSNM i26742. The fifth specimen belongs to the Musée national d’histoire naturelle de Luxembourg and is labelled MnhnL-CRE045.

The fossils were not radiometrically dated, instead the age was assumed from similarity to other specimens, and from the fact that the strata where they were found had been thoroughly dated previously.

The debate about a precise stratigraphical age of the exposed limestones in the Hâqel and Hâdjoula quarries is long. Geological studies on the Cretaceous outcrops in Lebanon started with Botta (1833), who investigated the lithology of the sediments in the Hâqel area. Lewis (1878) and Fraas (1878) postulated a Turonian age for both Hâqel and Hâdjoula. Patterson (1967) and Hückel (1970) later recognized a Cenomanian age of these localities. Patterson (1967) estimated a Mid-Cenomanian age for both Hâqel and Hâdjoula on the basis of fish fauna, whereas Hückel (1970) placed the beds at Hâqel as Early Cenomanian based on the record of the foraminifer Orbitolina concava concava and the index ammonite Mantelliceras mantelli already reported by Zumoffen (1926).

Biostratigraphical studies of Dubertret (1959, 1966) and Saint-Marc (1974) determined the sequences at Hâqel and Hâdjoula to be Early Cenomanian. Hemleben (1977), on the other hand, again dated them as Late Cenomanian in view of the assemblage of the planktonic foraminifera Praeglobotruncana stephani, Rotalipora cushmani and Rotalipora greenhornensis. More recently, Wippich and Lehmann (2004) confirmed a Late Cenomanian age for both Hâqel and Hâdjoula owing to the presence of the ammonite Allocrioceras cf. annulatum, which is a member of the lower Upper Cenomanian Sciponoceras gracile Zone in the Western Interior of USA and the Metoicoceras geslinianum Zone of the international standard.

For reference, the Cenomanian^WP age spans the time between 99.6 ± 0.9 Ma and 93.5 ± 0.8 Ma.

Sorry if this is too much information. I just found it interesting myself.

 

[welshdean]

... And it's already been mentioned about the problems with carbon dating marine life and very old material.

DOC, you are the only person to mention 'carbon' dating and yet you still wriggle and squirm whilst building your strawman.

Was Dr. Fuchs actually in Lebanon and why aren't these people named?

Why doesn't it say somewhere Dr. So and So did these series of tests and estimated the age to be? It seems there should be some data somewhere. I don't see that data concerning age anywhere.

It has been pointed out to you that Dr. Fuchs lead a team of three, Fuchs, Bracchi and Weis.
Why are you pursuing this line so doggedly? Why should it matter which of the three conducted the test? For Dr. Fuchs sake stop nit picking and answer one of the multitude of questions waiting for you in this thread.

Dr Fuch's needed to be where the fossil was, and whether that was in Lebanon or not is irrelevant.

And he most definitely was where the fossil was.

And his two chief collaborators were Giacomo Bracchi and Robert Weis.

Why don't you just read the bloody article instead of wasting your precious time asking stupid questions?

FTFY mate.

 

[smartcooky]

well as craig b just said, there are two obviously contradicting accounts of the creation of man in genesis, so either it was written by one unreliable source or it was written by at least two conflicting unreliable sources. Biblical scholars are in pretty much universal agreement that it was written by several sources.

ftfy

 

[DOC]

Essentially, it says that Dr Fuchs is the spokesperson for a group or organisation who'se employees carried out the tests

Can you give the quote where it says anything about the "testing" of the age of the fossil?

 

[SlackerBabbath]

Can you give the quote where it says anything about the "testing" of the age of the fossil?

Read svenax's post above.

Now, can you give the quote from the Book of Genesis where it states the name of it's author? Please don't ignore this question, an honest reply is required for the sake of my opinion of your credibility.

 

[Akhenaten]

Can you give the quote where it says anything about the "testing" of the age of the fossil?

Are you unable to read either the article itself or Post #794?

 

[welshdean]

Ahh, looks fun, I shall have to read it.

While your at it, you may want to check the thread: Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.







Does anyone have a 'gulping' smiley?