Richard Dawkins dumps Fossil Record

In my research of the fossil record, it brings up more questions than it answers. As to the reason I believe Dawkins has decided to give it up as evidence for evolution.

  1. Living fossils: There are nearly 200 known living fossils of plants and animals, yet each one has the same problem. They are found in one layer of the supposed record, and alive. For some fossils that is a gap as big as 10 layers. These gaps exist for “every living fossil”. So 30 times there are 30 gaps of the record not recording the fossils surviving until present time.
  2. The layering of the Geologic Column: There is no observable or explainable mechanism to show how the layers the fossil are found in got laid over millions of years. Yet water will sort the layered sediments like this and is observable and repeatable (empirical evidence).
  3. Polystrate Fossils: Trees that run through several layers that are supposed to take millions of years to form. How does a tree not rot away while waiting to be buried in the millions of years it took to do this? It could be explained away if only a few were found but these Polystrate Fossils are found all over the world.
  4. Cross contamination of dating markers: Fossils can be cross contaminated by the layers they are buried in. Example: If you bury a bone that dates 1000 years bury it in a layer that dates 300 million years. Over a period of time the markers from the layer will cross contaminate the fossil and make it date the same as the layer even though it never was the same age. This raises several questions and answers why all fossils will “always” date the same age as the layer. There is no other option after so many years.
  5. The Geologic Column or the fossil record does not exist in one piece anywhere in the world. It is estimated that if it did it would be just under 15 miles deep. So the record is only connected together by the age each layer dates and the fossils found in that layer. So an assumption has to be made here.




Comments Box SVG iconsUsed for the like, share, comment, and reaction icons
Meet Delilah, another one of the Ararat Ridge Zoo’s new residents! She’s a seven-foot-long, 12-year-old Taiwan beauty snake, and she’s made her debut in our daily animal shows here at the Ark Encounter. 

This species is native to Taiwan, and they are also invasive on the island of Okinawa, Japan. They are known as beauty snakes because of their striking coloration, which changes pattern at the end of their bodies. 

Although she’s very long, she is harmless to people and enjoys climbing on her zookeepers while they walk around the zoo to meet guests!

Meet Delilah, another one of the Ararat Ridge Zoo’s new residents! She’s a seven-foot-long, 12-year-old Taiwan beauty snake, and she’s made her debut in our daily animal shows here at the Ark Encounter.

This species is native to Taiwan, and they are also invasive on the island of Okinawa, Japan. They are known as beauty snakes because of their striking coloration, which changes pattern at the end of their bodies.

Although she’s very long, she is harmless to people and enjoys climbing on her zookeepers while they walk around the zoo to meet guests!
... See MoreSee Less

Can you guess who is coming to the Ararat Ridge Zoo? 

Site development is hard at work finishing up our newest outdoor exhibit! Any guesses what new species will be arriving within the next few weeks?

Hint: that is netting over the top of the habitat and there is a river flowing.

Can you guess who is coming to the Ararat Ridge Zoo?

Site development is hard at work finishing up our newest outdoor exhibit! Any guesses what new species will be arriving within the next few weeks?

Hint: that is netting over the top of the habitat and there is a river flowing.
... See MoreSee Less

Genesis seems to suggest there was originally only one continent. Our seven continents are a result of the global flood.

Genesis seems to suggest there was originally only one continent. Our seven continents are a result of the global flood. ... See MoreSee Less

What about the geological column?

Originally, the geological column was conceived in the context of uniformitarianism. Not all uniformitarian assumptions are true and useful, and this is shown in the idea of the “geological column.” Uniformitarianism states that everything develops or changes gradually and slowly. In order to discredit creation, some naturalists applied this idea to geology and then Darwin applied this idea to biology.*

But not all interpretations are so straightforward. Geologists in the early-to-mid 1800s developed a sequence of changing organisms with time, reflected in the geological column. The time scale with its millions and billions of years was added later by various dating methods. The column was first developed mainly in the United Kingdom and then applied to the whole world. The geological column makes a lot of sense locally and regionally, but it must be shown to be a global sequence, including the ocean bottom sediments. We need to get away from the Grand Staircase and the Grand Canyon as the “proof area.”

Modern science has shown that the fossil changes between layers in the geological column is not an evolutionary progression, as secular scientists once hoped, assuming fossils changed from simple to complex with time. Modern science has shown that all these organisms are very complex—they are just different organisms, although a few general patterns are revealed. For instance, one of the earliest organisms in the geological column, the trilobite, had very complex eyes. Moreover, there is a lack of transitions between major kinds of organisms, as expected in the creation model (Bergman, 2017). The fossil record merely shows sudden appearances, stasis, and then disappearances.

Creation scientists view most fossils as having been buried in Noah’s Flood. Then is the geological column a useful interpretation? Creation scientists are divided on this issue. Even we are divided on the issue. That is why we attempted to resolve the issue, or at least start to resolve this issue, by publishing a forum on the subject (Reed and Oard, 2006). In this forum, advocates who believed the geological column was a precise, global burial sequence of Noah’s Flood; those who believed we should reject the geological column; and those in between, all wrote up their evidence. Then each participant read the papers of the others, and they were required to provide answers to their challenges. It was all done in charity, the way it should work, but unfortunately the question was not resolved. The project showed how to approach such problems. It will take much work and an ability to separate the wheat from the chaff in the literature. At a minimum, respecting each other’s opinions is required until more progress is made. Maybe another published forum is in order?

* Uniformitarianism was an arbitrary assumption developed to discredit and replace biblical history (Oard and Reed, 2017; in press). It seemed plausible in the 1800s, based mainly on three specific geological arguments that supposedly contradicted the Flood. These were: (1) volcanic deposits, (2) the erosion of valleys, and (3) the presence of thick sedimentary rocks. In retrospect, those arguments were simplistic, false, and better explained by the Flood (Oard and Reed, 2018).

In addition to significant logical shortcomings (Reed, 2010), uniformitarianism has run afoul of reality from its inception. Evidence of catastrophes in the rock record are indisputable, including the Ice Age, the Lake Missoula flood, and meteorite or comet impacts. After first rejecting these catastrophes, geologists now claim they are a part of the “uniform history” of earth, proving that self-contradiction is alive and well today. Despite such evidence, rocks and fossils are interpreted within a uniformitarian framework. But many characteristics of rocks and fossils demand a catastrophic interpretation. Sandstones are a good example (Reed and Oard, in press). Are there any aspects of the rock record that demand uniformitarianism? We might see a few. We must weigh possibilities using the principle laid down in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 (NASB): “But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.”

-----
This Why Geology Matters column (What Uniformitarian Interpretations Should Creation Scientists Accept?) by CRS board members Mike Oard and John Reed appeared in Creation Matters, Vol. 24, No. 4, July/August/September 2019.

Learn more about creation  www.creationresearch.org

What about the geological column?

Originally, the geological column was conceived in the context of uniformitarianism. Not all uniformitarian assumptions are true and useful, and this is shown in the idea of the “geological column.” Uniformitarianism states that everything develops or changes gradually and slowly. In order to discredit creation, some naturalists applied this idea to geology and then Darwin applied this idea to biology.*

But not all interpretations are so straightforward. Geologists in the early-to-mid 1800s developed a sequence of changing organisms with time, reflected in the geological column. The time scale with its millions and billions of years was added later by various dating methods. The column was first developed mainly in the United Kingdom and then applied to the whole world. The geological column makes a lot of sense locally and regionally, but it must be shown to be a global sequence, including the ocean bottom sediments. We need to get away from the Grand Staircase and the Grand Canyon as the “proof area.”

Modern science has shown that the fossil changes between layers in the geological column is not an evolutionary progression, as secular scientists once hoped, assuming fossils changed from simple to complex with time. Modern science has shown that all these organisms are very complex—they are just different organisms, although a few general patterns are revealed. For instance, one of the earliest organisms in the geological column, the trilobite, had very complex eyes. Moreover, there is a lack of transitions between major kinds of organisms, as expected in the creation model (Bergman, 2017). The fossil record merely shows sudden appearances, stasis, and then disappearances.

Creation scientists view most fossils as having been buried in Noah’s Flood. Then is the geological column a useful interpretation? Creation scientists are divided on this issue. Even we are divided on the issue. That is why we attempted to resolve the issue, or at least start to resolve this issue, by publishing a forum on the subject (Reed and Oard, 2006). In this forum, advocates who believed the geological column was a precise, global burial sequence of Noah’s Flood; those who believed we should reject the geological column; and those in between, all wrote up their evidence. Then each participant read the papers of the others, and they were required to provide answers to their challenges. It was all done in charity, the way it should work, but unfortunately the question was not resolved. The project showed how to approach such problems. It will take much work and an ability to separate the wheat from the chaff in the literature. At a minimum, respecting each other’s opinions is required until more progress is made. Maybe another published forum is in order?

* Uniformitarianism was an arbitrary assumption developed to discredit and replace biblical history (Oard and Reed, 2017; in press). It seemed plausible in the 1800s, based mainly on three specific geological arguments that supposedly contradicted the Flood. These were: (1) volcanic deposits, (2) the erosion of valleys, and (3) the presence of thick sedimentary rocks. In retrospect, those arguments were simplistic, false, and better explained by the Flood (Oard and Reed, 2018).

In addition to significant logical shortcomings (Reed, 2010), uniformitarianism has run afoul of reality from its inception. Evidence of catastrophes in the rock record are indisputable, including the Ice Age, the Lake Missoula flood, and meteorite or comet impacts. After first rejecting these catastrophes, geologists now claim they are a part of the “uniform history” of earth, proving that self-contradiction is alive and well today. Despite such evidence, rocks and fossils are interpreted within a uniformitarian framework. But many characteristics of rocks and fossils demand a catastrophic interpretation. Sandstones are a good example (Reed and Oard, in press). Are there any aspects of the rock record that demand uniformitarianism? We might see a few. We must weigh possibilities using the principle laid down in 1 Thessalonians 5:21 (NASB): “But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good.”

-----
This Why Geology Matters column (What Uniformitarian Interpretations Should Creation Scientists Accept?) by CRS board members Mike Oard and John Reed appeared in Creation Matters, Vol. 24, No. 4, July/August/September 2019.

Learn more about creation www.creationresearch.org
... See MoreSee Less

Early bird discount ends TOMORROW! The Bible is the most loved —and most hated—book of all time. Join us for a lineup of wonderful speakers to see how you can respond to the objections raised against it. Register today for the online conference: http://www.livingwaters.com/why-the-bible

Early bird discount ends TOMORROW! The Bible is the most loved —and most hated—book of all time. Join us for a lineup of wonderful speakers to see how you can respond to the objections raised against it. Register today for the online conference: www.livingwaters.com/why-the-bible ... See MoreSee Less

Caleb the African crested porcupine has made his debut in our animal shows! You can see he walks on a harness and leash like a dog and has been doing great on stage in front of guests.

Don’t worry—porcupines cannot shoot their quills...that’s a myth! Caleb was born right here at the Ararat Ridge Zoo and is very accustomed to people. You may get to see him in our shows during your visit to the Ark Encounter!

Caleb the African crested porcupine has made his debut in our animal shows! You can see he walks on a harness and leash like a dog and has been doing great on stage in front of guests.

Don’t worry—porcupines cannot shoot their quills...that’s a myth! Caleb was born right here at the Ararat Ridge Zoo and is very accustomed to people. You may get to see him in our shows during your visit to the Ark Encounter!
... See MoreSee Less

Todd White has repented…or has he?

Will Smith’s wife, admits to cheating, but not sinning.
... See MoreSee Less

Do you see the beautiful rainbow over our Rainbow Gardens? 🌈

Do you see the beautiful rainbow over our Rainbow Gardens? 🌈 ... See MoreSee Less