6days
New member
Boston how are you so where are you
Too funny! I just noticed this at the end of my above post. I created the post by voice and didn't realize it picked up part of a conversation I had with someone
Boston how are you so where are you
WOW! That was really convincing!Local floods don't deposit sediment and cement to form fossils.
You also clearly said that "floods do ... form fossils," while earlier you had accepted that floods don't form fossils. I can't deal with what you propose when it is contradictory.I clearly said that floods deposit sediment/minerals.
A flood results in a net loss of sediment from the landscape.Do you deny that this happens?
In a very broad sense this true.
You also clearly said that "floods do ... form fossils," while earlier you had accepted that floods don't form fossils. I can't deal with what you propose when it is contradictory.
Which is it: Can floods form fossils?[/]Since I've never said that water by itself (except by your deceitful manipulation of my sentences) can form a fossil this is yet a another straw man.
If you cannot engage the conversation rationally go find someone else.
:chuckle:A flood results in a net loss of sediment from the landscape.
You are never going to bury turtles by flooding them and then removing the water.
No, plain water devoid of sediment cannot deposit sediment. Since you should know that floods rarely occur without carrying any sediment at all, I suspect your true intentions in this conversation extend little beyond being a troll.
However, all of that eroded sediment (from the landscape) carried by the water in a flood has to go somewhere doesn't it? It's called "sediment" for a very good reason. :duh:
In this thread I am not at all interested in how fossils form and am not inclined to continue to follow you down that rabbit hole. Continued effort on your part to engage me in that line will be summarily ignored.It's actually specific and necessary. Fossilization begins with the burial of an organism in cement-rich sediment. Then you need to remove the water.
What I am interested in, and have been since my first post, is 6days' explanation of how a global flood is the ONLY explanation as to how plants and animal can be covered by sediment such that there is the opportunity for fossils to form.
Sent from my SPH-L710 using Tapatalk
Great.I've never said that water by itself can form a fossil.
I have no idea what this means.No, plain water devoid of sediment cannot deposit sediment. Since you should know that floods rarely occur without carrying any sediment at all, I suspect your true intentions in this conversation extend little beyond being a troll. However, all of that eroded sediment (from the landscape) carried by the water in a flood has to go somewhere doesn't it? It's called "sediment" for a very good reason. :duh:
You don't want to discuss the evidence. Gotcha.In this thread I am not at all interested in how fossils form and am not inclined to continue to follow you down that rabbit hole. Continued effort on your part to engage me in that line will be summarily ignored.
It isn't the only explanation.What I am interested in, and have been since my first post, is 6days' explanation of how a global flood is the ONLY explanation as to how plants and animal can be covered by sediment such that there is the opportunity for fossils to form.
Even a local flood?A flood results in a net loss of sediment from the landscape.
haa... I Also noticed he would rather be illogical than follow the evidence.You also clearly said that "floods do ... form fossils," while earlier you had accepted that floods don't form fossils. I can't deal with what you propose when it is contradictory
So, Silent Hunters remarks are wrong? Or are you avoiding the question? Hunter said a flood can create fossils.JoseFly said:None.6days said:What type of flood would preserve a pod of whales?
What type of flood would preserve copulating turtles?
What type of flood preseves a school of jellyfish?
What type of flood causes fossil graveyards?
What type of flood would preserve 2 dinosaurs who are fighting with each other?
What type of flood created fossils everywhere in the world preserving them in ocean bottom mud?
There is no agreement amongst scientists on the taphonomic conditions. The turtles are preserved in sediment. Something catastrophic seems to have killed and preserved them.JoseFly said:The turtles weren't in flood deposits.
Read the OPJoseFly said:Then describe the environment of deposition these specimens were found it and explain how it was produced by a global flood.6days said:The global flood model is the best explanation for the evidence.
Silent Hunter said:Haha..... Your arguments are becoming more desperate and illogical... its psuedoscience you believe in.6days said:What type of flood would preserve a pod of whales?
Whales live in the ocean. There are documented recent, in the news, accounts of whole pods of whales beaching themselves and dying where they lay. What prevents then from being covered in sand, silt, or whatever before they completely decayed?
Scavengers, bacteria and oxidation destroy beached whales.
I refer you back to my comments and then in bold lettets the article from a secular journal...Special conditions must exist for something to become fossilized. And we seldom if ever find something in ocean sediment that is in the process of being fossilized. Yet, throughout the world we have some areas where sea creatures have been almost perfectly preserved in fossil form, including soft tissue.
"My initial hypothesis was validated by a consistent and worldwide pattern." And this pattern included "rapid entombment of soft-bodied organisms in sediments" . .He also assumes the conditions that must have existed in a "global ocean". The author also says a cause would be "rapid entombment" by "bottom-flowing density currents."
That has been answered many times for you. Stripe is correct... evolutionists are hard of reading.... or something like that. It could be a local 'flood'... it would have to be a catastrophic event rapidly burying and killing organisms under tons of sediment preserving them from oxidation and bacteria. But as the secular Journal says, the fossil evidence is a consistent worldwide pattern which is why the fossil evidence support God's Word.Silent Hunter said:Let's assume for argument that it was indeed a flood. What prevents the turtles from being buried in sediment from a large local flood?6days said:What type of flood would preserve copulating turtles?
You avoided the question I asked you, so I answered it for you
So... your answer is a large flood... that rapidly buries and preseves them in sediment? That is the short version of the global flood model. Its the evidence we see around tbe world.Silent Hunter said:See above but insert "a school of jellyfish" instead of "the turtles".6days said:What type of flood preseves a school of jellyfish?
So not the type of flood we have ever witnessed? But you believe that magnitude of flood is possible?Silent Hunter said:See above but insert "a fossil graveyard" instead of "the turtles".6days said:What type of flood causes fossil graveyards?
It's called EVIDENCE.Silent Hunter said:How do you know they were fighting and didn't, just by coincidence, die in the same location?6days said:What type of flood would preserve 2 dinosaurs who are fighting with each other?
In 1971, scientists in the Gobi desert of Mongolia uncovered a fossil of a velociraptor, which had its claw deep into the body cavity of a protoceratops. The protoceratops appeared to biting the arm of the velociraptor. These 2 dinosaurs appeared to be in the midst of a fight to the death when they were suddenly buried by sandy sediment, preserved and fossilized. The Gobi desert has produced hundreds of other fossils of creatures who were rapidly buried, such as...oviraptors, sinornithoides, pinocosaurus, lizards, crocodiles and small mammals. What type of event could explain these animals being rapidly buried by sandy sediment? (Not a sandstorm..... Crocodiles don't live in high altitude sand dunes.)
Your question has been answered multiple times. The consistent worldwide pattern of rapid burial in ocean mud / sediment is evidence of the truth of God's Word.Silent Hunter said:What prevents fossils everywhere in the world preserving them in ocean bottom mud from being buried in sediment from large local floods?6days said:What type of flood created fossils everywhere in the world preserving them in ocean bottom mud?
The global flood model is the best explanation for the evidence.
Your favorite global flood model is not even wrong. It is a possibly explanation but it isn't the only explanation nor is it without question the best explanation.
So, Silent Hunters remarks are wrong? Or are you avoiding the question? Hunter said a flood can create fossils.
There is no agreement amongst scientists on the taphonomic conditions. The turtles are preserved in sediment. Something catastrophic seems to have killed and preserved them.
Read the OP
The evidence supports the truth of God's Word
No. Except for your deceitful manipulation of my sentences (something you are famous for) I have never said otherwise.Can a flood form a fossil?
Creationists have no reading comprehension skills.I have no idea what this means.
Really? And you know this because of your extensive experience studying floods and how much sediment they are able of carrying and depositing?A flood sees a net loss of sediment from the landscape. It doesn't deposit anything significant; certainly nothing that could see these turtles fossilized.
I don't care about the fossils. I take it as read that they formed. What I want to explore is the evidence for the mechanism as to how the turtles were buried such that enough sediment was deposited to bury the turtles such that the conditions were optimum that fossilization could occur.You don't want to discuss the evidence. Gotcha.
Exactly! Go tell 6days!It isn't the only explanation.
Please explain how the evidence for how fossils form applies to the evidence for how the organism first became buried.However, science is about eliminating explanations. For that, you have to look at evidence.
Pity you're only interested in storytelling.
No, he didn't.Hunter said a flood can create fossils.
Except when it doesn't then the creationist simply acts like that evidence doesn't exist.The evidence supports the truth of God's Word
:chuckle:So, Silent Hunters remarks are wrong?
Really? All of them without exception? No possible way for it to happen?Haha..... Your arguments are becoming more desperate and illogical... its psuedoscience you believe in.
Scavengers, bacteria and oxidation destroy beached whales.
You've got not even wrong down to a, ahem, science.I refer you back to my comments and then in bold lettets the article from a secular journal...Special conditions must exist for something to become fossilized. And we seldom if ever find something in ocean sediment that is in the process of being fossilized. Yet, throughout the world we have some areas where sea creatures have been almost perfectly preserved in fossil form, including soft tissue.
No way it could have happened except in th type of flood you favor? Right?"My initial hypothesis was validated by a consistent and worldwide pattern." And this pattern included "rapid entombment of soft-bodied organisms in sediments" . .He also assumes the conditions that must have existed in a "global ocean". The author also says a cause would be "rapid entombment" by "bottom-flowing density currents."
I find it hard to believe that a secular journal would say, "The fossil evidence is a consistent worldwide pattern which is why the fossil evidence support God's Word", or is that your embellishment?That has been answered many times for you. Stripe is correct... evolutionists are hard of reading.... or something like that. It could be a local 'flood'... it would have to be a catastrophic event rapidly burying and killing organisms under tons of sediment preserving them from oxidation and bacteria. But as the secular Journal says, the fossil evidence is a consistent worldwide pattern which is why the fossil evidence support God's Word.
What question did I avoid? You would do good to go back and answer all of the questions of mine you have avoided.You avoided the question I asked you, so I answered it for you
Yeah, except the evidence suggests the event that buried the turtles happened 500,000,000 years ago. Please reconcile that with a supposed global flood that you say happened 4,500 years ago that buried the turtles.So... your answer is a large flood... that rapidly buries and preseves them in sediment? That is the short version of the global flood model. Its the evidence we see around tbe world.
That's the argument you are going with, no one has ever seen a catastrophic flood? Who, besides the mythical Noah, saw the global flood you claim? Yet you believe that magnitude of flood is possible but not a catastrophic local flood? Really?So not the type of flood we have ever witnessed? But you believe that magnitude of flood is possible?
Coincidence is not a factor? Those blinders you wear aren't something you should wear if you want to experience reality.It's called EVIDENCE.
In 1971, scientists in the Gobi desert of Mongolia uncovered a fossil of a velociraptor, which had its claw deep into the body cavity of a protoceratops. The protoceratops appeared to biting the arm of the velociraptor. These 2 dinosaurs appeared to be in the midst of a fight to the death when they were suddenly buried by sandy sediment, preserved and fossilized.
So.The Gobi desert has produced hundreds of other fossils of creatures who were rapidly buried, such as...oviraptors, sinornithoides, pinocosaurus, lizards, crocodiles and small mammals. What type of event could explain these animals being rapidly buried by sandy sediment? (Not a sandstorm..... Crocodiles don't live in high altitude sand dunes.)
Except when it isn't. You are so afraid to shatter your carefully constructed little fantasy you can't bring yourself to look at any evidence that is contradictory.Your question has been answered multiple times. The consistent worldwide pattern of rapid burial in ocean mud / sediment is evidence of the truth of God's Word.
Your favorite global flood model is not even wrong. It is a possibly explanation but it isn't the only explanation nor is it without question the best explanation.The global flood model is the best explanation for the evidence.
... said the person who will not even be in the same room with evidence contradictory to his carefully constructed hallucination.haa... I Also noticed he would rather be illogical than follow the evidence.
The word "appeared" occurrs twice on this blurb. Are you sure it isn't coincidence that the fossils were in the position found?In 1971, scientists in the Gobi desert of Mongolia uncovered a fossil of a velociraptor, which had its claw deep into the body cavity of a protoceratops. The protoceratops appeared to biting the arm of the velociraptor. These 2 dinosaurs appeared to be in the midst of a fight to the death when they were suddenly buried by sandy sediment, preserved and fossilized.
Hunter.... Do you know what evidence is? Evidence is things like fossils..... Galaxies....DNA.....mutations, etc......the creationist simply acts like that evidence doesn't exist.
Do you understand what evidence is? Evidence can be mutation rates.....it can be historical accounts.....it can be a smoking gun. There is no such thing as contradictory evidence to God's Word. If you understand evidence....you know I am correct.... said the person who will not even be in the same room with evidence contradictory to his carefully constructed hallucination.
Perhaps in AIG.... But you can find it in many secular articles also. Ex... https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22530090-800-stunning-fossils-dinosaur-death-match/ Notice.... Rapid burial in a "landslide"The word "appeared" occurrs twice on this blurb. Are you sure it isn't coincidence that the fossils were in the position found?
Where is this citation from... let me guess... AIG?
... except when it doesn't. Creationist ALWAYS ignore evidence that conflicts with their carefully constructed fantasy.Hunter.... Do you know what evidence is? Evidence is things like fossils..... Galaxies....DNA.....mutations, etc.
Evidence always supports the Biblical account.... Always.
... except when it is. Creationist ALWAYS ignore evidence that conflicts with their carefully constructed fantasy.Do you understand what evidence is? Evidence can be mutation rates.....it can be historical accounts.....it can be a smoking gun. There is no such thing as contradictory evidence to God's Worrd.
It is because I understand the evidence that I'm convinced that you are wrong.If you understand evidence....you know I am correct.
It must be a typo then that the fossils are dated by science to be 74 MILLION years old. Isn't that a tad older than is possible for your "biblical flood model" to be a plausable explanation?Perhaps in AIG.... But you can find it in many secular articles also. Ex... https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22530090-800-stunning-fossils-dinosaur-death-match/ Notice.... Rapid burial in a "landslide"