Jump to content


Photo

Please Within The Context Of Young Earth Explain The Geologic Strata...


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
31 replies to this topic

#1 Reptoman

Reptoman

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 62
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 21 September 2012 - 05:42 AM

Up and until this time, I have been somewhat o.k. with the fact I don't know a lot about geology but some. So can any of you geologic guys out there explain to me the strata for the cambrian up to modern where we find dinos and extinct mammals?

I don't see science as the boogie man, but i also realize that science also has a uniformatarian gradualistic approach to the animals etc. IF GOD created the animal kingdom and the fossils are a picture of what may have existed pre-flood.
Please educate me how YE could or would accept these layers as viable in the context of the fossil record and YE?

I had a brain freeze yesterday and realized that YE and these layers do not correspond in time, so how do YE define the strata they find these animals in. Do YE accept the layers but consider their timing more recent. Whats the scoop on this, I can't believe I haven't asked this question to my other geologic finds in the past or before this?

I'm a little brain dead on geology? Example: IF there was a destructive meteor that hit northern Canada pre-flood...then the fossil bed that exists now "may" have been created by this and not necessarily a wwFlood? This fossil bed is in a certain level of the strata. So how does this event of this sort play with what we factually observe?

#2 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 939 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 21 September 2012 - 09:11 AM

Generally, YEC attribute most (but not all) of those layers to a global flood or to phases to one. The fossils do indicate rapid wet burial as well.

#3 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 21 September 2012 - 10:03 AM

Up and until this time, I have been somewhat o.k. with the fact I don't know a lot about geology but some. So can any of you geologic guys out there explain to me the strata for the cambrian up to modern where we find dinos and extinct mammals?

I don't see science as the boogie man, but i also realize that science also has a uniformatarian gradualistic approach to the animals etc. IF GOD created the animal kingdom and the fossils are a picture of what may have existed pre-flood.
Please educate me how YE could or would accept these layers as viable in the context of the fossil record and YE?

I had a brain freeze yesterday and realized that YE and these layers do not correspond in time, so how do YE define the strata they find these animals in. Do YE accept the layers but consider their timing more recent. Whats the scoop on this, I can't believe I haven't asked this question to my other geologic finds in the past or before this?

I'm a little brain dead on geology? Example: IF there was a destructive meteor that hit northern Canada pre-flood...then the fossil bed that exists now "may" have been created by this and not necessarily a wwFlood? This fossil bed is in a certain level of the strata. So how does this event of this sort play with what we factually observe?


Although I don't claim to know everything (as I doubt anyone does, certainly some know more than me), I plan on focusing my research on this in the near future. So far as I understand, various layers are formed, in large part, by catastrophic events. Some preflood layers might have been formed by landslides, washouts, volcanic activity, preflood bogs and swamps, meteors, local flooding, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc etc etc. Then of course the same thing has been occurring after the flood, with a good amount of catastrophe happening during the flood. You have caused me to being to review local flood and Old Earth arguments to see what they are saying, as I periodically do.

We have recently discovered that geographic features such as "wide sandy beaches, gravel banks, impressive cliffs, soft undulating land, faultscarps, gullies and channels and ‘boulders worn by the surf', some of which were almost round, on an abrasion platform cut into the cliff." can form within 10 years (when observing Surtsey Island near Iceland. http://creation.com/...still-surprises Some of these features, based on appearance alone, would have been said to have taken millions of years to form based on conventional knowlege. I am thinking that such rapid changes in environment coupled with extreme weather, astronomical (meteors), and geologic events could have caused layering that was relatively rapid, as well as changed the ecosystem enough in those areas as to yield fossils of different organisms.

#4 Portillo

Portillo

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Sydney

Posted 21 September 2012 - 07:50 PM

The geological column only exists in textbooks. It doesnt exist anywhere on planet earth.

#5 Reptoman

Reptoman

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 62
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 21 September 2012 - 08:48 PM

Portillo, I need to ask you...that fossils are found in certain stata or sedimentary strata? I have seen this before. I am a YE person as I stated above, but there does seem to be strata and there does seem to be dinos in certain levels and mammals in other levels? Am I Wrong? I do not imply uniformity by saying this, but only that there seems to be strata. If you look at the Toba volcano which was pre-flood, one can observe the dug away walls as harboring strata. Now none of that I am aware of is dino type, if it only exists in textbooks....what makes you make such a blanket comment?

#6 Portillo

Portillo

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 26
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Sydney

Posted 22 September 2012 - 01:23 AM

Many of the fossils were buried according to their habitat. The majority of the fossil record are marine invertebrates, 95% of the record is made up of them. These are all the bottom dwelling animals that live at the bottom of the ocean. These creatures would have not been able to escape the flood and were buried. The remaining 4% of the fossil record is fish and plants. The remaining 1% is the land animals. The fossil record is not the history of life, but mass death and catastrophe.
  • jason777 likes this

#7 MarkForbes

MarkForbes

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 939 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:South Africa
  • Age: 35
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Waverley

Posted 22 September 2012 - 06:44 AM

Portillo, I need to ask you...that fossils are found in certain stata or sedimentary strata? I have seen this before. I am a YE person as I stated above, but there does seem to be strata and there does seem to be dinos in certain levels and mammals in other levels? Am I Wrong?...

If I recall it rightly, the strata with dinos also occasionally contain mammalian fossils.

#8 jason777

jason777

    Moderator

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2670 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Machining, Engine Building, Geology, Paleontology, Fishing
  • Age: 40
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Springdale,AR.

Posted 22 September 2012 - 12:27 PM

Portillo, I need to ask you...that fossils are found in certain stata or sedimentary strata? I have seen this before. I am a YE person as I stated above, but there does seem to be strata and there does seem to be dinos in certain levels and mammals in other levels? Am I Wrong? I do not imply uniformity by saying this, but only that there seems to be strata. If you look at the Toba volcano which was pre-flood, one can observe the dug away walls as harboring strata. Now none of that I am aware of is dino type, if it only exists in textbooks....what makes you make such a blanket comment?


Yes. And mammals are also found below dinosaurs. Does this mean that elephants evolved into dinosaurs? Of course not. It means that there is no predictable pattern to a catastrophic origin of the geologic column.

http://creation.com/...ils-wrong-place

#9 Reptoman

Reptoman

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 62
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 22 September 2012 - 01:29 PM

With respect to Jason777 and Portillo, you would be implying that the fossil record shows these bones and other evidences through out the strata with no resemblance or repeated evidence in the same strata. Since I believe in fixity of species and GOD creating the animal diversity there would be none of that with me. I need to scoot but will come back and ask another further question....

#10 Bonedigger

Bonedigger

    Admin Team

  • Admin Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 835 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Creation, Vertebrate Paleontology-particularly mammals and especially Perissodactyls & Carnivores, Hunting, Shooting, Handloading, Weaving Chainmaille, Hebrew and other Biblically relevant languages, Astronomy
  • Age: 48
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Colorado

Posted 02 October 2012 - 10:05 PM

I had a brain freeze yesterday and realized that YE and these layers do not correspond in time, so how do YE define the strata they find these animals in. Do YE accept the layers but consider their timing more recent. Whats the scoop on this, I can't believe I haven't asked this question to my other geologic finds in the past or before this?


Reptoman. If you're looking for a broad coverage of the various ways flood geologists approach the geologic column, I would recommend "The Geologic Column: Perspectives within Diluvial Geology or here." It covers the whole range from Tyler and Coffin's "Accept the Column, Reject the Chronology" (what you referred to above), to Tyler's "Recolonization and the Mabbul" where he postulates that the Flood obliterated everything and the geologic column is a Post-Flood recolonization sequence (the first time I'd ever heard that theory), to Oard's "The Geological Column is a General Flood Order with Many Exceptions", to Reed, Klevberg and Froede's "Interpreting the Rock Record without the Uniformitarian Geologic Column" where they argue that Diluvial Geology needs to be completely divorced from the geologic column and develop its own nomenclature based on the progression of the Flood.

#11 Stripe

Stripe

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 252 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Taipei, Taiwan
  • Interests:Rugby, cricket, earthquakes.
  • Age: 37
  • Christian
  • Young Earth Creationist
  • Taipei, Taiwan.

Posted 02 October 2012 - 10:25 PM

can any of you geologic guys out there explain to me the strata for the cambrian up to modern where we find dinos and extinct mammals? Please educate me how YE could or would accept these layers as viable in the context of the fossil record and YE?

What, all of it? That could take some time. ;)

Here's a general overview:
1: Strata showing no erosion between layers were deposited together.
2: Strata with fossils between layers were deposited together.
3 Strata containing fossils were deposited rapidly and the event responsible also killed the animal.

I had a brain freeze yesterday and realized that YE and these layers do not correspond in time

How so?

IF there was a destructive meteor that hit northern Canada pre-flood...then the fossil bed that exists now "may" have been created by this and not necessarily a wwFlood?

No. Meteors don't generate fossil beds.

#12 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 03 October 2012 - 10:43 AM

No. Meteors don't generate fossil beds.


The death positions, back arched at an extreme angle with head thrown back, is famous among dinosaur carcasses, and indicates death in water. http://www.newscient...death-pose.html

#13 Reptoman

Reptoman

    Junior Member

  • Advanced member
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 62
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Texas

Posted 04 October 2012 - 08:06 PM

No. Meteors don't generate fossil beds.
Canada is believed to have been hit with one, this subsequent destruction would have been followed by a huge Tsunami, and there seems to be evidence for such?
Please look at the fossil beds in Canada and their relationship to the ancient lake in the center of Canada and also the huge river system close to the dino deposits. Obviously and with no arguement water caused this destruction, however the actual mass shows something that does not jive with a ww Flood. How can you say a Meteor can not make fossils in the area in Northern Canada

#14 NewPath

NewPath

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 292 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Durban, SA

Posted 09 October 2012 - 12:06 AM

Yes. And mammals are also found below dinosaurs. Does this mean that elephants evolved into dinosaurs? Of course not. It means that there is no predictable pattern to a catastrophic origin of the geologic column.

http://creation.com/...ils-wrong-place


I've heard of mammals being found concurrent with dinosaurs, but never below dinosaurs. I tried your link and this mentions plants, not mammals, have you got any links? Thanks.

#15 NewPath

NewPath

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 292 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Durban, SA

Posted 09 October 2012 - 12:11 AM

The death positions, back arched at an extreme angle with head thrown back, is famous among dinosaur carcasses, and indicates death in water. http://www.newscient...death-pose.html

Is it possible that these head positions could have been caused by a sudden jolt, a meteor impact which threw their heads backwards (whiplash) ? The fact that dinosaur extinctions have also been associated with damaged vertebrae could favor the whiplash argument over the drowning argument.

Or as Reptoman says, a post-impact tsunami is also an option.

#16 NewPath

NewPath

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 292 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Durban, SA

Posted 09 October 2012 - 12:34 AM

I don't see science as the boogie man, but i also realize that science also has a uniformatarian gradualistic approach to the animals etc. IF GOD created the animal kingdom and the fossils are a picture of what may have existed pre-flood.
Please educate me how YE could or would accept these layers as viable in the context of the fossil record and YE?


The fact that mammals are really common now, and yet amphibians and reptiles were more common in the past and many are extinct, already points to layered diversification. The bible is not against the concept of certain types surviving better, its clear that mammals are the great survivors. This is because of 3 factors , maybe more. Intelligence, temperature control, and ability to tolerate low oxygen conditions.

so when fators favour amphibians, they are common. When factors favour reptiles, they are common. When factors favour nothing , mammals cope best in an oxygen deprived and fluctuating temperature environment. This does not mean evolution is true, it just means that pre-flood and post flood conditions vary. Its pretty logical they would vary, kill off all vegetation in a flourishing world, you would end up with a dead world. Different species do well in the hot dead world. Others die off.

I agree with the layers of scientist, they do actually exist, its not a figment of evolutionists imagination, but very real. Evolutionary conclusions are a bit illogical, but the layers are there and they make sense from a biblical point of view.

#17 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 09 October 2012 - 04:56 AM

Is it possible that these head positions could have been caused by a sudden jolt, a meteor impact which threw their heads backwards (whiplash) ? The fact that dinosaur extinctions have also been associated with damaged vertebrae could favor the whiplash argument over the drowning argument.

Or as Reptoman says, a post-impact tsunami is also an option.


You guys and your meteors...lol Yes it is possible that in some specific cases it was a meteor, or other deaths involving damaged spines, but this position has been seen around the world.

#18 JayShel

JayShel

    Former Atheist

  • Moderator Team
  • PipPipPip
  • 777 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Florida
  • Age: 36
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Saved July 12, 2007

Posted 09 October 2012 - 05:04 AM

The fact that mammals are really common now, and yet amphibians and reptiles were more common in the past and many are extinct, already points to layered diversification. The bible is not against the concept of certain types surviving better, its clear that mammals are the great survivors. This is because of 3 factors , maybe more. Intelligence, temperature control, and ability to tolerate low oxygen conditions.

so when fators favour amphibians, they are common. When factors favour reptiles, they are common. When factors favour nothing , mammals cope best in an oxygen deprived and fluctuating temperature environment. This does not mean evolution is true, it just means that pre-flood and post flood conditions vary. Its pretty logical they would vary, kill off all vegetation in a flourishing world, you would end up with a dead world. Different species do well in the hot dead world. Others die off.

I agree with the layers of scientist, they do actually exist, its not a figment of evolutionists imagination, but very real. Evolutionary conclusions are a bit illogical, but the layers are there and they make sense from a biblical point of view.


I would think that dinosaurs would live in a different ecosystem, therefore they would not show up in all places around the world at the same depth. We see pockets of them. Now think about this, if there was more ecosystem suited to dinosaurs at one point, then perhaps they would thrive, whereas other organisms would dwindle down to a minimal population. They didn't necessarily go extinct, just didn't get recorded in the fossil record.

#19 NewPath

NewPath

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 292 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Durban, SA

Posted 09 October 2012 - 01:35 PM

You guys and your meteors...lol Yes it is possible that in some specific cases it was a meteor, or other deaths involving damaged spines, but this position has been seen around the world.


The meteor theory is that of a worldwide disaster. Traces and aftereffects of this meteor collision are well recorded in those layers relating to the demise of the dinosaurs. Its not that scientists make this stuff up, they debate the for and against arguments for decades, and the general conclusion is that there are extensive signs of a meteor collision at the demise of the dinosaurs, and yet no such signs at the demise of the Permian. You would have this initial impact (whiplash) folowed by tsuanmis, and then darkness , bringing on an ice age. these are all logical scientific projections of a large meteor impact. The coldness and reduced sun would cause a lack of vitamins in dinosaur vertebrae, reducing their calcium production. Reptiles are completely reliant on sunlight for calcium production. Thus they had vertebrae problems at the moment of impact, and then continuously afterwards. this would have been difficult for any large dinos to survive. Maybe a few did.

I'm assuming this occurred at the end of those old great civilizations, that I also believe co-incided with the end of the holocene Climate Optimum. This was the great ice age that ended the dominance of dinosaurs and brought in the dominance of mammals to fill in all the ecological gaps left behind by the dinosaurs. Not saying mammals evolved much, just filled the gaps. I believe this occurred about 3500-3800 years ago.

#20 NewPath

NewPath

    Member

  • Veteran Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 292 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Age: 44
  • Christian
  • Creationist
  • Durban, SA

Posted 09 October 2012 - 01:44 PM

I would think that dinosaurs would live in a different ecosystem, therefore they would not show up in all places around the world at the same depth. We see pockets of them. Now think about this, if there was more ecosystem suited to dinosaurs at one point, then perhaps they would thrive, whereas other organisms would dwindle down to a minimal population. They didn't necessarily go extinct, just didn't get recorded in the fossil record.


True! this is basically my argument. The pockets of rarer creatures in any age are misunderstood by evolutionists to belong to the layer in which that creature was common. Thus pockets of ancient mammals are always assumed to be recent. Pockets of now extinct amphibians are always assumed to be ancient. The potential for those various ecosystems to be concurrent is underestimated by evolutionists. However the reason they got their theory, is the general trend does actually exist.

I didn't really understand your point about dinosaurs going extinct, there may be some hidden somewhere, but most did go extinct, we don't see them today. Therefore we can define age of rock through extinctions to a certain extent, because although everything was there from the start 6500 years ago, some extinctions occurred in a specific order, allowing other rarer types (like mammals) to populate the earth.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users