Jump to content


Photo

An Observation


  • Please log in to reply
2 replies to this topic

#1 wibble

wibble

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 631 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 45
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Dorset

Posted 19 July 2017 - 03:53 PM

The other day I took a walk down to a local fossil hunting spot here in Dorset that I’d not been to before (it’s called Chapmans Pool – not sure why, because it’s a sea cove).

Attached File  IMAG0517-min.jpg   67.25KB   0 downloads

 

Within the dark grey shale cliff there were lots of white, flattened ammonites seen in vertical section. Notice how they all lie flat along the bedding plane (they were all like this within the strata, I haven’t just selected a favourable spot).

Attached File  IMAG0523-min.jpg   129.17KB   0 downloads

 

Where blocks of harder shale had fallen out on to the beach the horizontal surface of the shale bed was exposed with the ammonites again lying flat.

 

Attached File  IMAG0524-min.jpg   143.37KB   0 downloads
 

The mainstream interpretation is that the shale was laid down as mud in an offshore environment during the Upper Jurassic. When ammonites died they were most likely to fall flat on the sea floor, just as you would expect. The calcareous shells persisted and were buried in sediment over time as generations of ammonites lived and died over the millennia.

I try to think about this from a flood geology perspective and it doesn’t work because why would they all be lying flat ? If the ammonites all got deposited within a mud flow they should all lie at random angles. In the unlikely event during this global catastrophe there was a local area of water still enough for sediment particles to fall out of suspension then the heavier ammonites would fall to the bottom first in a dense layer to be deeply buried above by pure mud.

This is just one small but simple observation that I think strongly favours a mainstream interpretation. I imagine there will be some here who would disagree ? If so, why ?
 



#2 Fjuri

Fjuri

    Veteran Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,873 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 31
  • no affiliation
  • Atheist
  • Belgium

Posted 20 July 2017 - 01:20 AM

...

I try to think about this from a flood geology perspective and it doesn’t work because why would they all be lying flat ? If the ammonites all got deposited within a mud flow they should all lie at random angles. In the unlikely event during this global catastrophe there was a local area of water still enough for sediment particles to fall out of suspension then the heavier ammonites would fall to the bottom first in a dense layer to be deeply buried above by pure mud.
 

..

Would you kindly provide evidence/support for the assessment in bold. All too often people state "if this would happen, we expect that", without actually providing support.


  • Bonedigger and mike the wiz like this

#3 mike the wiz

mike the wiz

    Veteran member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3,042 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:mikey mischief.
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • England

Posted 20 July 2017 - 05:49 AM

 

 

Wibble: The mainstream interpretation is that the shale was laid down as mud in an offshore environment during the Upper Jurassic. When ammonites died they were most likely to fall flat on the sea floor, just as you would expect. The calcareous shells persisted and were buried in sediment over time as generations of ammonites lived and died over the millennia.

 

 

 

Perhaps what is more amazing is the evolutionary, millions–of–years mindset that blinds hard–nosed, rational scientists from seeing what should otherwise be obvious—such pristine ammonite fossils still with shimmering mother–of–pearl iridescence on their shells, and bivalves still with their original organic ligaments, can’t possibly be 165 million years old. Upon burial, organic materials are relentlessly attacked by bacteria, and even in seemingly sterile environments will automatically, of themselves, decompose to simpler substances in a very short time

http://creation.com/...n-year-surprise

 

 

 

Wibble: I try to think about this from a flood geology perspective and it doesn’t work because why would they all be lying flat ? If the ammonites all got deposited within a mud flow they should all lie at random angles

 

This seems like argumentum ad ignorantiam to me. "I can't think of a way of this happening with a flood, therefore it didn't happen."

 

In fact I can think of a way.

 

This is the problem with your reasoning Wibble - it doesn't change. You suggest there isn't any possible way something can happen. Do you realise if someone comes up with a possible way then it shows that it isn't impossible?

 

For example I remember you claimed something similar with rock you thought was a desert, and yet many of the facts favoured a watery creation of that sandstone.

 

Just because you can't think of a way something could happen doesn't mean it didn't happen. A flood is catastrophic. If for example, these ammonites were somehow killed or died before a flow, then they could be preserved. Or there it could be inexplicable because we can't think of all of the factors and complicatons. Just because humans don't have all of the answers for specific things, doesn't mean this thwarts a flood. The explanation may not be knowable to us in this present time because we can only think in terms of uniformity "the present causes we see are the key to the past." But if there are catastrophic forces we can't calculate the effects of, then the problem is our limited ability to find out why a flood created this scenario.

 

So?

 

As for your claim they all, "lie flat" have you examined and measured the angles for each fossil? They appear to look generally flat I would say, or at least the ones we can see exposed on the top of the rock.






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users