ID/Creationism - How fast were extinctions?

[steenkh]

Re: Fossils

That is all for now, I look forward to hearing from you all.

Hello Nick Harman,

Welcome! As Ashles has already told you, if you are for real, you will be a darling! Do not believe that we are trying to put you off by deluding you with requests for answers. The fact is that each of us is sitting here with lots of questions that we would like to put to an in-house creationist, and you might just fit the bill!

Now, my questions go like this:
Do you accept that evolution is observed right now and within a human time-scale? Speciation has been observed on birds within a human generation, and as far as I know it has been observed within mammals, insects, plants, and of course, bacteria. If you accept these facts, do you then also embrace the concept that all species were not created at once?

I think you know where all this leads, but I will give you some breathing space, before I continue!

 

[Bikewer]

Shall we amend my statement about the Australian natives to say they have a culture of that depth. I have read but little on these peoples, but I seem to recall continuous cave paintings and other artifacts of this age.

BTW, regarding the innerrant and infallible Bible, how do such believers reconcile the numerous well-documented errors and contradictions?
There are a couple of well-researched web sites, citing chapter and verse for the more obvious of these, so the doubter can go look em' up.

 

[drkitten]

Re: Fossils

Genesis is the historical account of how God created the heavens and the earth. This account has no problem with fossils as some of your posts indicate. I believe a billions of years belief has more problems with fossils. The bible records the historical event of a world wide flood God used to judge the wicked people on the earth. If this is true, what would you expect to find? Billions of dead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth. That is exactly what we find. If the layers we find were periods of time, how could we have all these fossils? If an animal dies and is left to lay, it will be eaten or decay and there will be nothing left of it. So with out a ww flood, we would not have all the fossils that we are finding today.

Well, you're certainly correct that it's rather unlikely that any particular animal would die and produce fossils -- most animals, as you point out, are eaten and decay. But this simply addresses the vast majority of animals, and not all of them. As a simple example, even in the absence of a worldwide flood, animals sometimes die in (localized) floods and their bodies are buried in the river mud. Similarly, animals can die in landslides, get trapped in quicksand, or even simply die near rivers or oceans and be buried.

One problem that the world-wide flood actually creates is that it should have made too many fossils, more than we have been able to find. An example -- I believe that there are a total of six actual T-rex fossils that have been found, worldwide. If the entire T-rex population had been wiped out in a global flood and fossilized, then we shoud expect to see a much larger population than six. (Even the seriously endangered snow leopard still has an estimated population about a thousand times greater.)

Beyond that, the major problem with the world-wide flood is that, although it might be expected to produce lots of fossils, it wouldn't be expected to produce the same distribution of fossils that we see. For example, "billions of ead things buried in rock layers laid down by water all over the earth. That is exactly what we find." But if they were all laid down at the same time in a global flood, then why do some rock layers have different fossils than others? Why don't we find trilobites in the same rock layers that we see mammals and bird in? Why don't we find the jawless fishes in the same strata as the dinosaurs? For that matter, why don't we find Olenellina triliobites in the same rock layers as the Proetida[, when we find both kinds of trilobites all over the world?

 

[sackett]

Play it again, Sam

I posted the following paragraph some years back, in a thread addressing this business of creationism. It didn't stir much interest then, but I'll try it again.

Way back in the 1920's, Sam Knight, Sr., one of the best paleontologists in the U.S., had a prepared lecture for Geology 101 at the University of Wyoming. In it, he summarized the principal geological eras, comparing each one with a day in the Book of Genesis. With surprisingly little snipping and tucking, he showed how you could treat historical geology and Genesis together, finding parallels in the evolution of life and the biblical account. He ended the lecture (and put the topic to rest for the remainder of the course) by observing that "the Bible says God made the world, but it doesn't say how He did it." It was a neat, non-controversial lecture, and I don't see how any Christian or other believer could find fault with it.

I know about this lecture because my mother took Geol. 101 at the U. of Wyoming back then, and she enjoyed Sam Knight's cleverness. In the 1920's, the doctrine of Biblical literalism was just getting on its feet (there was a surprisingly parallel movement among Egyptian Muslims at exactly the same time), and it was still possible to soothe disputation with an application of reasonableness.

I think biblical literalism can be regarded as a disease of deficiency in Western society: The West lacks a tradition of parable and extended metaphor. The Hebrews who assembled Genesis never believed for a moment that those Bronze Age bedtime stories were literally true; they knew the difference between a folktale and a serious chronicle. (I use the word "assembled" intentionally. Genesis reads very like a bunch of scrolls rolled up together and preserved all higgeldy-piggle. This probably came out of a pious fear of destroying anything written that might possibly contain the name of God, a well-attested superstition among old-time Jews.) Unfortunately, the West borrowed the Old Testament when it adopted Christianity, and as so often happens when people borrow things from another culture, they got the emphases wrong. The creation myth and flood account in Genesis are no more satisfying than any others, but if they come wrapped up in a popular cult, people tend to buy them. Eastern exoticism didn't hurt either; heck, everybody enjoys the Arabian Nights.

None of this addresses the plain fact that the current scientific understanding of the earth's history is supported by a Himalaya of evidence, while creationism rests solely on belief - a particularly ill-informed belief that would, it's been said, embarrass a tribal shaman.

I've said this before, but it bears repeating: If scientists ever discovered even a speck of evidence in support of creationism, there'd be shoving and elbowing to see who could publish first.

 

[Nick Harman]

I certainly do not have time to answer all the questions in an everyone against 1 setting. I will respond mostly to the shortest responses. I have about 1 hour per day for this, so I am very limited. I will start with steenkh

Now, my questions go like this:
Do you accept that evolution is observed right now and within a human time-scale? Speciation has been observed on birds within a human generation, and as far as I know it has been observed within mammals, insects, plants, and of course, bacteria. If you accept these facts, do you then also embrace the concept that all species were not created at once?

Answer: I accept variation, or if you will, micro-evolution. You are implying a common misunderstanding about creationist. We do not believe everything was created in its present form. Any one can observe changes with in kinds. Your science ends and your faith begins when you start telling me about macro changes. Dogs always produce dogs, cats pro. cats, etc. The textbooks you have studied give you loads of examples of variations and then you are supposed to believe in macro evolution. Your last question: my answer is as the bible says God created everything in 6 days. I also acknowledge per observable science that animals can change but there are limits. All for now.

Serving a risen Savior,
Nick Harman

 

[Nick Harman]

To Bikewer:

you told everyone about errors in the bible but you didn't mention any. Go to your site and pick any 3 and I will refute them. Don't have much time today, so it may be another day for my response.

Serving a risen Savior,
Nick Harman

 

[Ashles]

What about my questions? I asked first.

 

[Darat]

...snip... Your last question: my answer is as the bible says God created everything in 6 days. ...snip...

Serving a risen Savior,
Nick Harman

Just a point of correction Genesis does not say that God created everything, the Bible only says that God created light.

 

[Nick Harman]

reply

Firstly I do not quite understand what you are saying. If a flood has killed millions of things why are their remains not all found in the same geological layer? Fossils are spread throughout layers.

Answer: they are not buried in the same order, ie humans and animals (more intelligent life forms) survive longer before drowning and being buried. This is not a flood from a bunch of rain. Genesis 7:11 (KJV)
In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
--the water came from in the earth (fountains of deep) we find water deep in earth still today. And it is believed that there was a canopy of water over the earth (windows of heaven). This protected the earth, i.e. uv rays, which is what allowed humans to live so long (900 years, etc.)

Question: can you explain marine fossils on top of mountains?

I am out of time for now, I will finish later.

Serving a risen Savior,
Nick Harman

__________________

 

[alfaniner]

Re: Re: Fossils

Hello Nick Harman,
...Do not believe that we are trying to put you off by deluding you with requests for answers...

I believe you meant "deluging"? A simple typo perhaps, but it changes the tone and the intent of the post.

 

[Darat]

Re: reply

...snip...

And it is believed that there was a canopy of water over the earth (windows of heaven).

...snip...

Believed - on what grounds? What Biblical passages?

 

[drkitten]

Re: reply

[H]umans and animals (more intelligent life forms) survive longer before drowning and being buried.

So is this why we don't find Olenellina trilobites in the same rock layers as the [/i]Proetida[/i]? The Proteda were more intelligent?

Similarly, the fossil tortoise genus Stylemys is typically found in "recent" (Ogliocene) strata, much more recent than the Cretaceous strata in which the fossil primate genus Purgatorius is found. I'd be extremely surprised if you could find a tortoise that was as intelligent as any mammal, let alone a primate.

But, of course, plants sort the geological column as well. Flowering plants, for example, are generally found near the top of the geological column, while ferns are found much lower -- and of course various extinct species of plants (of all sorts) appear for a limited time and then cease to exist in the record. Were pine trees that much more intelligent than ferns, but dumber than magnolias? And, for that matter, were magnolias that much dumber than sunflowers? I know you're not going to try to tell me that sunflowers were also smarter than dinosaurs.

Do you have any other basis for judging that intelligence is the primary reason different fossils appear in different strata?

Question: can you explain marine fossils on top of mountains?

Of course. Elementary geography; the land where the fossils were deposited has risen since then. In many areas of the world, the rate at which mountains are rising is actually measurable from year to year. For example, in the Hudson Bay area of Canda, we can measure about 3cm of uplift per year.

Over two hundred thousand years, this would give us mountains 6000 meters tall. Over five hundred thousand years, this would give us mountains 15000 meters tall, which would tower over Everest if mountains didn't also erode.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Re: reply

*snip*
Question: can you explain marine fossils on top of mountains?

*snip*

Answer: Yes.

Hans

 

[Mojo]

Re: Re: reply

So is this why we don't find Olenellina trilobites in the same rock layers as the [/i]Proetida[/i]? The Proteda were more intelligent?

If a marine animal isn't intelligent enough to avoid drowning it's certainly got problems.

 

[drkitten]

Re: Re: Re: reply

If a marine animal isn't intelligent enough to avoid drowning it's certainly got problems.

Well, with all that fresh water falling from the sky -- sorry, coming up from the fountains of the deep -- sorry, being defenestrated from the bay windows of Heaven -- whatever -- it might have adjusted the salt levels enough to kill all the marine animals.

Of course, it also managed to kill all the extinct freshwater species as well. So I guess there were at least two windows in heaven, one of them defenestrating salt water and one defenestrating fresh. Which suggests that God not only has problems with His plumbing, but with His water softener as well. I hope that He has good heavenowners' insurance.

 

[Ashles]

Re: reply

Firstly I do not quite understand what you are saying. If a flood has killed millions of things why are their remains not all found in the same geological layer? Fossils are spread throughout layers.

Answer: they are not buried in the same order, ie humans and animals (more intelligent life forms) survive longer before drowning and being buried. This is not a flood from a bunch of rain. Genesis 7:11 (KJV)

Oh I see. You think different geological layers happen within, like, 20 minutes of each other.
Right.

In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
--the water came from in the earth (fountains of deep) we find water deep in earth still today. And it is believed that there was a canopy of water over the earth (windows of heaven). This protected the earth, i.e. uv rays, which is what allowed humans to live so long (900 years, etc.)

Okay so you don't know why people age either. Good, good...

Question: can you explain marine fossils on top of mountains?

Uh yes. Most people can. It's called plate tectonics.
You may have heard of it - it killed a bunch of people in Asia recently.

You are joking presumably. I mean this level of argument isn't going to stand up for 2 minutes.

Are you serious Nick? If so where did you learn all this nonsense?

 

[Nick Harman]

flood

Certainly intelligence wouldn't be the only factor. Whatever is at the bottom will be buried 1st. I certainly cannot scientifically prove a flood. The flood seems so foreign to you because you reject the word of the God who created and will judge you. It is interesting to hear intellectuals scoff at a creationist when evolutionist/atheists believe in life evolving from non-life, animals in the past doing something that has never been and never will be observed. So to close for this evening I say the problem isn't the evidence, it is the interpretation. I will not have much time tomorrow, and again it is impossible for me to address hardly any of your comments, but I certainly enjoy the conversation. And would love to see you all come to faith in the God of this universe.

Serving a risen Savior,
Nick Harman

 

[Ashles]

Re: flood

Certainly intelligence wouldn't be the only factor. Whatever is at the bottom will be buried 1st. I certainly cannot scientifically prove a flood. The flood seems so foreign to you because you reject the word of the God who created and will judge you. It is interesting to hear intellectuals scoff at a creationist when evolutionist/atheists believe in life evolving from non-life, animals in the past doing something that has never been and never will be observed. So to close for this evening I say the problem isn't the evidence, it is the interpretation. I will not have much time tomorrow, and again it is impossible for me to address hardly any of your comments, but I certainly enjoy the conversation. And would love to see you all come to faith in the God of this universe.

Serving a risen Savior,
Nick Harman

Well I shall leave all your mistakes to others, I shall merely ask - have you ever heard of plate tectonics and how it works?
And if you have do you deny its existence?

 

[drkitten]

Re: flood

The flood seems so foreign to you because you reject the word of the God who created and will judge you.

The BIblical Flood also seems foreign to me because, as you describe it, it violates much of what I already know about other localized floods for which there is demonstrated evidence.

It's as if you described a particular Biblical event as being caused by the ravenous man-eating clams that would jump out of trees and scare passers-by with their nasty sharp teeth.

I mean, yeah, I wouldn't consider the event's credibility to be enhanced merely because it was Biblical. But I think that I can reject the story for other reasons than merely reflexive rejecting of the word of God.

Clams don't eat men
Clams don't live in trees
Clams don't jump
Clams don't have teeth

Similarly, floods don't leave neatly sorted sedimentary layers of different type. Floods don't leave drowned animals neatly sorted by apparent age. Floods don't put rocks with different potassium/argon ratios in different groups.

And, as Mojo pointed out, floods don't usually drown marine animals.

Except maybe for the arboreal carnivorous toothed jumping clams.

 

[Ossai]

Nick Harman

Answer: they are not buried in the same order, ie humans and animals (more intelligent life forms) survive longer before drowning and being buried. This is not a flood from a bunch of rain. Genesis 7:11 (KJV)
In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
--the water came from in the earth (fountains of deep) we find water deep in earth still today. And it is believed that there was a canopy of water over the earth (windows of heaven). This protected the earth, i.e. uv rays, which is what allowed humans to live so long (900 years, etc.)

Where did the water come from?
Where is the water now?

Work the math. Even the folks over at AIG don’t use the ‘water canopy’ excuse anymore.

Question: can you explain marine fossils on top of mountains?

Yes.
Very, very short answer. - hey it's been a while since I had bio & geo
Marine animal dies.
Sinks to bottom – usually but not always bone by this point.
Silt covers remains.
And a few thousands of years for compression, (can’t remember the name of the process where the surrounding minerals replace parts of the bone).
A few thousands more years and you have something called plate tetonics.
Mountains go up (one good example is looking at where the Indian subcontinent abuts Asia – there are other ways as well), wind, erosion, etc, some of the fossils are exposed.

Now your turn.
Explain the white Cliffs of Dover.

Certainly intelligence wouldn't be the only factor. Whatever is at the bottom will be buried 1st. I certainly cannot scientifically prove a flood.

That is exactly our point. If there were a world wide catastrophe within the past 10,000 years there would be evidence all over the place, literally. There is no evidence.

It is interesting to hear intellectuals scoff at a creationist when evolutionist/atheists believe in life evolving from non-life, animals in the past doing something that has never been and never will be observed.

You’re not up on current science there by any means. Ongoing experiments are doing exactly that – life from nonliving. BTW – Virus is it alive or dead?

So to close for this evening I say the problem isn't the evidence, it is the interpretation.

Well considering that no YEC has ever presented any evidence, hypothesis, theories, or even SWAGs, how can we be accused of miss-interpretation?

Ossai