IF you look at my other posts one of them certainly display my lack of understanding for geology. But I wil ask you one thing...
Given the answers on another thread I have received, those that seem to be in the know....have responded to one of my questions and saying that all layers are just a myth, and none of these layers are found through out the world in a uniform manner that they can be depend upon. IN other words mammals are found under dinos, and small ocean creatures with dinos, man is on the top layers but then the layers are convoluted and not dependable So if I understand the responses I have received they would contend that no dating can be dependable with respect to the strata and layers that science currently uses for dating because it actually is not uniform.
I have often heard this argument, and would like to see specific examples because this would confirm my theory of isolated pockets of mammals during the carboniferous. But regardless, the Carboniferous "swampy" fossils became extinct, they do not exist now, and therefore would only be found in the lowest layers. You had a hot wet world, then a cold wet world, then a flood, then a hot dry world, and at the moment sorta inbetween. Nearly universally you do actually find that the so-called carboniferous fossils (wetlands amphibians and plants, swampy) are underneath a desert layer of sparsely populated small reptiles, which lie underneath a layer of very large reptiles. Where has this ever been found inverted? I believe it can invert, but only localized, the general trend remains logically universal.
To me this does not confirm evolution, you would need transitionary fossils for that, it confirms the flood. Only insects and small reptiles could survive the flood without needing the ark, so when the wet world was flooded over and became a hot desert world, this suited reptiles (modern deserts contain small reptiles). While other animals were breeding and dispersing from Turkey, small reptiles dominated earth for a few hundred years, some of them even adapting to fill temporary niches until the ark animals arrived. Then the larger reptiles arrived and flourished in the hot dry conditions.
Having said this, what evidence do you have there is a World Wide evidence of the PT boundary that is found every where? Also if it was discarded, then maybe the grounds for that was clear to those who studied it?
The main sign of a P-T boundary existing, is the sudden disappearance of 80-90% of previous existing fauna. A huge extinction event. When you see the last of those extinct fauna, above that you mainly observe worldwide desert conditions and small reptiles. The extinct layer below the desert reptile layer is observed world wide and is the major sign of the land-based transition.
Other hints of the P-T boundary (other than radiometric dating which is faulty) are a fungal spike. A worldwide (not universal - patchy) layer of fungal fossils, both marine and land-based, revealing masses of dead vegetation and dead fauna consumed by masses of fungal organisms. Another indication is worldwide evidence of volcanic ash. The Siberian Traps (open volcanoes) were the largest volcanic activity the world has ever known, and the ash spread throughout earth, and is actually detected between the extinct wetlands fossils, and the dry small reptile fossils that followed. It is the consistency of these trends that confirms the stages that each category of fauna flourished. It goes in a consistent order, firstly trilobites (the worldwide ocean and small island of Eden), then amphibians, then small reptiles, then large reptiles, then large mammals, then small mammals. But all the time you have these exceptions among them, something that evolutionists refuse to face despite the evidence.
The only good reason I can see for discarding it was the huge amount of post flood sedimentation found , it is argued that conditions for the last 4500 years could not produce such sedimentation. The problem with this argument is that the very region they base their argument on, is the Mississippi basin which still has the largest amount of post-flood sedimentation on earth, so they have used the incorrect place to base their argument.
I asked questions about strata and different layers.... because "if" God created all the animals in the beginning ( I hold to a more younger earth view)
how can we assume that diversity once set in situ in the beginning, including dinos and rhinos, mammoths etc, why would they be found in different strata being that they all lived contemporaneously with one another? IF full on creation of all diversity happened at one time, then where ever you place it they were all living together at one time, there were not subsequent creation narratives taking place. NOw one of our famous Creation scientists who I follow quite closely has studied the fossil layers he indeed says that all diversity was contemporaneous and indeed we have many (according to him, he has determined 432 different species of mammals have been dug up with dinos?) So the fact is they are never displayed with dinos in a museum or any other "evolutionary" outpost as this would run counter to the order of gradualism they seek to purport.
Now Dr. Werner is a creationists, but his study was conducted in a totally scientific manner, including his interviews with non-creation scientists.. My point is that we do have evidence in his work and some others that all the animal diversity, including the amber encased diversity lived from the beginning, the fact that they went extinct for some is relegated to possible other environmental issues, which we have all discussed before, and if indeed you hold to a wwFlood then that certainly would play into it. But it does seem that given Dr. Werners work, and "living" fossils today, there is no basis for a uniformatarian discussion with respect to the created diversity of old and what we see now. Now even over a short period of time and some catastrophes I hold too, some of these fossils are a product of pre-flood catastrophes. I sometimes question even Creationists interpretations of these strata and fossil layers....
How do you explain for instance fossilized amber with current diversity in it as well as ancient diversity? Amber is found in many different layers in different areas. I am interested in your argument....but I also am concerned that creationist what ever our ilk are no more informed than even the uniformatarian's we argue with..... I also question flood geology--any one who spent several hours reading over creation scientists publication of how much disaster took place, and the supposed sorting of fossil that took place, one could not duplicate that in a million years the cataclysm claimed by many branches of wwFlood advocates. I think the fossil record shows the earth is young and that the random placement of fossils is of recent origin. The mix of fossils speaks to the cataclysm they were exposed to. One small study on Karoo fossil and the Canadian fossils one finds the areas exposed to salt water and close. Even a Tsunami could have caused such a disaster given what happened in our history and observation.
You see, all the evidence fits in with my theory better than Dr Werner's theory or evolution. The layers are universally observed, and so are the exceptions. By concentrating on the exceptions as in your post, you are disregarding the fact that nearly every paleontologist in the field has already observed and confirmed the standard model, that amphibians proliferated before reptiles. So your model has to include both, these exceptions found in lower layers that evolutionists deny should be there, and yet a definite sequence of flourishing types from trilobites to amphibians to reptiles to mammals. The sequence is definitely there, as are the exceptions, I've tried to explain both by a world-wide flood at the P-T boundary which does explain both.
So no I am not ready to buy into flood geology, because even though we as creationists use the bible as well, our hermeneutics should matchup with the the trail of GODs work left behind with is fact! I feel that when it is all said and done the narrative of Genesis and the observations will match-up. So I really am open to different views, but there are fundamental views the creation narrative give us, and within the pale of that their is room for discussion, and as you can see I do not follow the whole creationist buck because I don't think we have it all right. I would have you consider reading some of Dr. Werners works as his stuff is factual, clear, you can sink your teeth into it argue with anyone based on these studies and facts he has brought forth. I do think that some of the creationist stuff that is out there is an "agenda" instead trying to find the truth no matter which way the ball bounces..... While I don't believe in wwFLood currently and Dr. Werner is advocate of the wwFlood, I still believe his facts are straight and I believe applicable in other models....Also he is an advocate for "fixity" of species of which I am also.
Thanks , everyone has been referring me to Dr Werner's work, I must just read it, it sounds good!
Sp please give me mor eon the PT boundary..