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

[Gawdzilla Sama]

For example if a ray or squid, fell into a pool of water located in a mountain crevice during a flood and were later quickly covered during a volcano or earthquake. The surrounding material could be millions of years older than the actual marine life.

I saw a documentary on octopus and it's amazing how narrow a opening a they can fit through.

And the strata would tell competent paleontologists that this was not a run-of-the-mill fossil. People spend decades actually studying these kind of things, they don't just rummage through AIG for gotchaisms.

 

[Slowvehicle]

For example if a ray or squid, fell into a pool of water located in a mountain crevice during a flood and were later quickly covered during a volcano or earthquake. The surrounding material could be millions of years older than the actual marine life.

I saw a documentary on octopus and it's amazing how narrow a opening a they can fit through.

...you were saying something derogatory about "cherry-picking..."?

 

[DOC]

Noah was the one who got drunk, passed out and was sodomised by his son.

False.

 

[abaddon]

False.

Orly?

9:24 And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

If Ham just saw him naked, how would Noah know? Face it, Noah knew it due to his sore posterior.

ETA: I have seen my father naked, I have even changed out his catheter and colostomy bag when needed, and you can't get more 'intimate' than that.
I guess that makes me a bad person who should be condemned to eternal slavery, right?

He is still a game old bugger. He got the catheter first, then later the bag. His comment when he got the bag was: "Well, at least I will have a bag each side, it will sorta balance me out". He still hasn't lost his sense of humour.

Now, DOC, tell me how seeing you father naked is such a grievous sin. Tell me how I will be cursed. Tell me how there is not more to 9:24.

 

[pakeha]

For example if a ray or squid, fell into a pool of water located in a mountain crevice during a flood and were later quickly covered during a volcano, earthquake, or landslide. The surrounding material could be millions of years older than the actual marine life.

I saw a documentary on octopus and it's amazing how narrow a opening a they can fit through.

And that example explains the fossil beds of Lebanon in what way?
Millions of years, DOC?
It looks as though you are admitting the earth is far older than a literalist interpretation of the bible would imply.

...Noah was the one who got drunk, passed out and was sodomised by his son. Much, much better, right? Good family reading that bible of yours.

False.

Possibly DOC may be onto something there.
After all, the name “Japheth” is thought to mean ‘to enlarge’ or ‘to make wide.’
http://bible.org/seriespage/nakedness-noah-and-cursing-canaan-genesis-918-1032

 

[Mister Earl]

False.

Why should we take your theological arguments seriously if you don't even know your own scripture?

 

[DOC]

Are the fossils in Peru allegedly 85 million years old or the material surrounding them that estimated age. Remember the link that said carbon dating is not reliable for marine life. IF the actual fish is 85 million, true, that would not be related to a local flood in the middle East.

DOC, do you know what fossils are?

Google definition:

The remains or impression of a prehistoric organism preserved in petrified form or as a mold or cast in rock.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Google definition:

The remains or impression of a prehistoric organism preserved in petrified form or as a mold or cast in rock.

So there would be no "actual fish" to carbon date. Thanks for confirming that.

 

[Slowvehicle]

Google definition:

The remains or impression of a prehistoric organism preserved in petrified form or as a mold or cast in rock.

So, why are you conflating Cretaceous fossils at altitude in Peru with a Holocene fludde locally confined to Mesopotamia?

 

[DOC]

So there would be no "actual fish" to carbon date. Thanks for confirming that.

So the actual fish could have been millions of years younger than the rock's estimated age.

 

[Slowvehicle]

So the actual fish could have been millions of years younger than the rock's estimated age.

Explain, precisely, how you want to claim that such a thing happened.

 

[Dinwar]

For example if a ray or squid, fell into a pool of water located in a mountain crevice during a flood and were later quickly covered during a volcano, earthquake, or landslide. The surrounding material could be millions of years older than the actual marine life.

This sort of thing is actually fairly easy to detect. For one thing, the newer bedforms all are impacted by the flow regime around the edges of the water--meaning they tend to bend in funny ways, showing us where the edge of the channel was.

Google definition:

Uh.....huh.........

That's not a bad definition; it's just not very informative. Which is normal--fossils include an enormous number of different things. These include everything from unaltered material to stuff so altered that it's called "ghost fossil".

The real issue is, your definition is at the 1:5,000,000 scale, and you're trying to discuss something at the 1:25,000 scale. It's like trying to use a picture where a planet is one pixel in size to discuss one particular dog on that planet. You need to narrow your definition. How, exactly, are those fossils preserved?

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

So the actual fish could have been millions of years younger than the rock's estimated age.

Fossilization is the replacement of living tissue by rock.

 

[John Jones]

Are the fossils in Peru allegedly 85 million years old or the material surrounding them that estimated age. Remember the link that said carbon dating is not reliable for marine life. IF the actual fish is 85 million, true, that would not be related to a local flood in the middle East.

Who is it you think dates 85 million year old fossils via ¹⁴C dating?

Carbon dating is irrelevant for items that old.

 

[Dinwar]

Fossilization is the replacement of living tissue by rock.

No. You are just as wrong as DOC here. Fossilization is the informal name for a suite of processes (more formally known as taphonomy) by which something moves from the biosphere to the lithosphere--in other words, it's the pathS something can take to go from a living thing to a fossil. Sometimes, yes, this involves replacement. Other times, it's a mold--say, a footprint, or the impression of a clam as it tumbles down a river. Sometimes it's nothing at all--literally nothing, the part of the organism is preserved exactly as it was. There are even chemical trace fossils, which are evidence of past life because only metabolism can move atoms around in the way we see in the rock. I've got a fossil sitting on my desk that amounts to rat poop and twigs preserved in crystallized packrat pee. My point is, there is no one thing that fossilization is. It's a huge variety of things, and it's simply untrue to pull any one of them out and say "This is the TRUE definition!"

 

[Correa Neto]

...snip... My point is, there is no one thing that fossilization is. It's a huge variety of things, and it's simply untrue to pull any one of them out and say "This is the TRUE definition!"

WOW!
Its just like god!

So, god is a fossil.
/thread

 

[joobz]

Correct. It was Lot who did that, right after offering his two virgin daughters to be raped by a mob.

Noah was the one who got drunk, passed out and was sodomised by his son. Much, much better, right? Good family reading that bible of yours.

Yes. I confused the lot story with Noah. So much depravity amongst the "good" in the bible, it is hard to keep it straight.

 

[joobz]

So the actual fish could have been millions of years younger than the rock's estimated age.

DOC,I am really having a hard time understanding your position, as it seems to drift about aimlessly.

Was the flood real or not?
By real, I mean a world wide flood that killed all life on earth except for those on the arc.

Anything less than that, makes the story a fiction. Saying that it was based upon a regional flood doesn't make it any less fictional.

In a similar fashion, just because Abraham Lincoln was a real person, it doesn't mean he killed vampires.

 

[Lucian]

DOC,I am really having a hard time understanding your position, as it seems to drift about aimlessly.

Was the flood real or not?
By real, I mean a world wide flood that killed all life on earth except for those on the arc.

Anything less than that, makes the story a fiction. Saying that it was based upon a regional flood doesn't make it any less fictional.

In a similar fashion, just because Abraham Lincoln was a real person, it doesn't mean he killed vampires.

I grew up in Springfield, IL. It was, and continues to be, completely free of vampires. This may not be proof that Lincoln killed the vampires, but it is evidence that I'm putting out there for all to see.

That said, I also would like to know what specific point DOC is trying to make. If it was a local flood, what is the relevance of mountain fish in Peru?

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

DOC is just googlefishing for something, anything, to post. I doubt he's gone deeper than the first paragraph of anything he's found.