Subject: Fossil and creation
}There are gaps in fossil record
} Oldest living things
}Man and dinosaurs coexisted.
}The suddenness with which major changes
}Many extinctions lack obvious reasons.
}"carcasses deposited in icy mucky dumps"
}evidence of rapid removal and deposition of soil, forest in arctic.
}- There are gaps in fossil record where you'd expect intermediate forms.
There are more fossils than Creationists will admit. Many intermediate forms
are known--for example, the development of the mammal skull characteristics
from the therapsida of Permian time.
What gaps remain can be explained by erosion, lack of proper conditions
for fossilization, the punctuated equilibrium model, or simply not looking in
the right places yet.
} - Oldest living things, bristlecone pines, are younger than 5000 years.
Sure. In fact, if you go for grove instead of individual tree and match
similiar growth rigns (similiar events in overlapping lifespans) it goes
well over 11,000 years.
}- Man and dinosaurs coexisted.
(Creationist Institute of California).
Refuted. Institute discredited and licence (to grant science
degrees) recently revoked.
BTW: Those "footprints" in the Paluxy river bed are NOT human. A simple
observation of the tracks reveal that while an arch is present forward of
the heel, there are only three toes. If a track is observed which is
uneroded, webbing is visible between the toes. A special on NOVA allowed
these tracks to be visible to millions.
Dr. Walter Brown, now director of the Center for Scientific Creation in Phoenix,
Brown, may fall back on a rather novel technique that he has employed in the
past -- denying having ever supported the idea. Brown first used
this tactic not long after the Paluxy River tracks were shown conclusively
to be either dinosaur tracks or erosion marks. When asked for his opinion,
Brown claimed that he had NEVER supported the Paluxy River tracks.
However, he was forced to 'fess up when shown the transcript of
a local Ontario TV program, "Speaking Out," when he stated that Paluxy
River was very good evidence for creationism.
}1) The suddenness with which major changes in pattern occurred and the
} virtual absence of any fossil remains from the period in which they
} were alleged to be evolving.
This can be explained by punctuated evolution, in this regard
it is important to note that not all suggested lineages in the fossil record
have such abrupt changes and gaps. There are several fossil sucessions
that record critical evolutionary steps and at a fine taxinomic resolution.
The development of the modern horse is a fairly complete sucession, as
is the development of mammal skull characteristics from the therapsida
of Permean time. Other examples of pretty gradual evolution?
Instantaneous changes of taxa, on a geologic time scale, between
long periods of stability does not pose insurmountable problems for
neo-evolution since it is genetic equillibrium that allows long stable
periods and stressing the gene pool into metastable states that allows
for punctuated evolution.
}- Many extinctions lack obvious reasons.
The "obvious reasons" are obvious to him, and do not necessarily have anything
to do with reality (i.e. 'cause he don't see it don't make it gone)
This may be a problem for compiling a history of life, but the
existence of extinctions at all poses problems for anyone claiming life
has teleology. If a divine creator is calling the shots then finding
extinctions casts doubt on the perfection of his plan, or even the
existance of a plan.
As for finding causes for extinctions, this is going to be
an area of some debate for years to come. The ideas that have been
advanced find some common collapse of habitat that is consistant with
evolutionary biology. The suddeness, or seeming catastrophe of proposed
events do not really threaten uniformatarianism because they are changes
of rate, but not of process.
The "Lack of Obvious Reasons", may overstate the problem, for
a series of events such as asteriod impact, continental colissions,
destruction of barriers between habitats, all have been advanced and
all point to the destruction of habitat and with it mass extinctions.
} - "carcasses deposited in icy mucky dumps"
} - evidence of rapid removal and deposition of soil, forest in arctic.
}No, the evidence plainly points to the removal of large areas of soil and
}forest along with their rapid deposition and freezing in the artic... now
}what besides a tidal surge of immense proportions would do that... and if
}such a surge wiped the face of Asia and Alaska, why is it unlikely to extend
}it to Mesopotania, where it would have depositied it's debris in the vicinity
Severe temperature changes are known to be responsible for great
catastrophic mortalities. Such mortalities are typically associated
with unusually cold spells or severe winters. Severe storms are
also responsible for catastrophic kills and quick seimentary deposition.
During hurricanes and other severe stormes, bottom sediment can be
stirred up to a considerable depth and easily bury animals.
There is absolutely no question that modern day catastrophes are
constantly occuring and that many of these can result in catastrophic
kills and rapid deposition of sediment. In short, fossils and fossil
graveyards are being formed today. You may be correct in assuming that
the evidence of rapid deposition you cite is generally evidence for
some catastrophic mode of formation, but you are incorrect in
assuming that only the Genesis Flood can account for such deposits.
Especially in the face of the great amount of other evidence in
direct conflict with the Genesis Flood hypothesis, evidence of slow
deposition, evidence in coral reef formations, evaporite deposits,
fossil lake deposits, glacial deposits, and desert deposits. When
we look at the sedimentary rock record we find some deposits that bear
evidence of having been formed by moving water and could have been formed
in flood water, but by no means are all rocks like that, in fact there
are a considerable number of formations that could not have formed in
surging flood waters at all.