The Fossil Record

Advertisements

2 Responses to “The Fossil Record”

  1. First of all science isn’t a matter of interpreting evidence, science is based on tests and predictions, something creationists never engage in, ever. Darwin predicted what must be in the fossil record if evolution is true and those predictions were proven true in his lifetime. Einstein predicted the angle light would bend around the sun from a star behind the sun during an upcoming eclipse if his theory of relativity is correct. Galileo predicted that a large and small ball of different weights would fall at the same speed when he dropped them off of the leaning tower of pisa. This is how science works, what must be true and can’t be true if my theory is correct and how can we test that? Paleontology isn’t just digging up fossils and speculating about them, it’s about figuring out what’s in the fossil record before we find it. That is what makes it compelling. This “science is just a matter of opinion” nonsense is just propaganda.

    Second, the bible is not written by god, it’s written by people who did not observe the beginning of life or the universe and who felt “inspired” when writing fantastical accounts and attributed this feeling to their deity, just as thousands of other writers of so-called holy books did before them and after them and as evangelists continue to do as we speak.

    Third, the word “kind” has no biblical or scientific definition and creationists insistance that it means “species” and therefore means living things cannot change beyond the species level is 100% arbitrary and 100% false empirically, as speciation (the splitting of one species into two distinct species) has been observed many, many times in nature and been made to happen in the laboratory. So either their arbitrary interpretation is wrong or the bible is. Furthermore an elephant and a dog (their examples of separate “kinds”) are both the same “kind”, since they are both mammals. And mammals and reptiles are both the same “kind” because they are animals, and animals and plants are both the same “kind” because they are both eukaryotes (look it up). And so on and so forth. Every “kind” of life is a subset of another kind, this has been understood for centuries, going back before darwin published his theory.

    Fourth, open any book about geology and you will find within a chapter or two a wealth of evidence to contradict any claims of a young earth. Mountains grow out of the ocean, they are like massive pimples in the earth being pushed up by magma and some of them actually burst, we call them volcanoes. The growth of mountains and even their sudden appearance in the ocean has been observed and is a known fact of geology. The reason we find marine fossils on the tops of mountains is that the mountain and the continents themselves are literally the land at the bottom of the ocean pushed up out of the water. This also poses many problems for creationists since mountains don’t just grow up, they also erode away and new layers form on top of them. So for instance if you look at a cross-section of the grand canyon you will find this:

    You have volcanic activity at the bottom which pushed up flat layers into a mountain, which later eroded away at the top and new flat layers formed on top of the diagonal layers. Something that could not possibly have happened rapidly or in a single catastropic event. There is a reason even christian geologists widely reject catastrophism, it is contradicted by basically everything about geology. The geological column contains the record of not just fossils but meteor impacts and volcanic activity and glacial activity, weather and a whole host of other things. No one who seriously studies it would conclude it was the result of a single event.

    Not to mention if the whole world flooded relatively recently and only one family were saved where did the native americans come from? Or asian peoples? Or africans? Or australian aborigines? And if the fossil record was laid down when humans lived all over the world why do we never find human remains in any but the most recent layers? It’s hogwash.

  2. *First of all science isn’t a matter of interpreting evidence, science is based on tests and predictions, something creationists never engage in, ever.*

    All evidence must be interpreted. Also, http://www.answersingenesis.org/get-answers/features/successful-predictions

    *Second, the bible is not written by god, it’s written by people who did not observe the beginning of life or the universe and who felt “inspired” when writing fantastical accounts and attributed this feeling to their deity, just as thousands of other writers of so-called holy books did before them and after them and as evangelists continue to do as we speak.*

    Though you intended the statement as an indictment, I really have no disagreement with it, except for the implied assumption that God did not really inspire people to write the Holy Scriptures.

    *Third, the word “kind” has no biblical or scientific definition and creationists insistance that it means “species”… Furthermore an elephant and a dog (their examples of separate “kinds”) are both the same “kind”, since they are both mammals. etc. *

    “Kinds” is roughly equivalent to “family” with a few exceptions, not “species” or “phylum”. All such categorizations are manmade, and thus subject to revision.

    *Fourth, open any book about geology and you will find within a chapter or two a wealth of evidence to contradict any claims of a young earth.*

    “Just so” stories and bald assertion based on a naturalistic, materialistic worldview hardly constitutes actual evidence. As mentioned above, all evidence must be interpreted.

    *There is a reason even christian geologists widely reject catastrophism, it is contradicted by basically everything about geology.*

    Well, it’s certainly contradicted by the assertions of materialistic, naturalistic geologists. “Geology” itself neither confirms nor denies any theory.

    *Not to mention if the whole world flooded relatively recently and only one family were saved where did the native americans come from?*

    From Noah’s sons, of course. Theories about the presence of Native Americans in the New World all posit that they traversed a now non-existent land bridge in the area of the Bering Strait. YEC’s would just say that the crossing occurred quite a bit more recently than conventional theory asserts.

    *And if the fossil record was laid down when humans lived all over the world why do we never find human remains in any but the most recent layers?*

    The same reason we find dinosaur tracks in lower layers, but only find their bones in higher ones; they kept moving to higher ground as the the flood waters rose. Duh.

    I realize that you have wrapped your mind in a protective blanket of rhetoric, and that you have (or will soon find) arguments against each of the points I’ve made. Very likely, you think the same of me.

    *shrug*

    I really don’t care if you wish to continue to accept molecules-to-man evolutionary theory. I would recommend that you consider accepting Christ as your Lord and Savior, and escape the penalty of sin.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: