YECs cannot cope with the pattern of the fossil record

Creationist bloggers can be infuriating. If one has infuriated you by persisting in nonsense even when corrected, or refusing to reply to your criiticsm, you may feel driven to recording the fact. If so, you may register your disapproval here and hope a response is forthcoming.

Moderator: Moderators

YECs cannot cope with the pattern of the fossil record

Postby a_haworthroberts » Fri Jan 26, 2018 11:52 pm

https://creation.com/the-fossil-record- ... an-rabbits

YECs know that the chances of a rabbit fossil being found in pre-Cambrian rocks are extremely remote. The enquirer who contacted CMI asks: "Creationists interpret the fossil record through the lens of the Flood, do they not? How do you explain the ordering of fossils? How did they get so neatly stacked up?" Despite requesting otherwise, all Tas Walker does in reply to this point is link to past CMI articles - the main one of which certainly does NOT explain the ordering of fossils. The enquirer adds: "Why can people predict where fossils will be found if they are operating under false assumptions? Why is the fossil record so neatly organized? Why don't we find Precambrian rabbits?" All the CMI response to this does is state that "Contrary to the impression you have, people are not able to predict precisely where the fossils will be found, although there is a general order to the fossil record". And he tries to claim: "The absence of such a rabbit does not falsify biblical creation". But in a biblical scenario (biblical not the contortions of YEC 'Flood' rescuing devices) there is no reason not to expect at least one rabbit fossil in pre-Cambrian layers (or - this time in those YEC rescuing devices - a dinosaur fossil in the huge exposed sedimentary rock layers at the Grand Canyon). Real science can explain this absence. YECs cannot realistically account for it. Something that would be troubling for evolutionary theory - YECs would leap upon it - has simply never been discovered. "However, it is worth pointing out that the absence of a rabbit fossil in the Precambrian is entirely consistent with the fossil succession expected from Noah’s Flood." That's a made-up, far-fetched, hypothesis - found nowhere in the Bible but concocted to try and 'defend' Bible 'historicity' against inconvenient scientific evidence/missing evidence (according to Genesis the floodwaters came from below as well as from above so low lying continental areas could have been inundated quickly during the 'Flood' event with eg rabbits being buried early on and at least some of them fossilised).

The enquirer doesn't need to swallow all this to become a Christian of course - except that SOME Christians make a very big deal of it, and none of them has, for obvious reasons, yet persuaded him.

However, Walker avoids the insulting nonsense that Bodie Hodge of Answers in Genesis put forth concerning the pattern of the fossil record (if it wasn't insulting nonsense Walker would probably repeat it):
https://answersingenesis.org/geology/ro ... ong-place/

I suppose some Christians lap up nonsense like this because it tells them what they want to hear and reinforces their prejudices.

"Evolutionists are looking at the rock strata and the age of the earth incorrectly because humans were around long before that rock was ever laid down!” Oh no they were not. Because their fossils are NEVER found within the the earlier rock layers in question.

IMHO it is evil to churn out this kind of anti-knowledge garbage. And they KNOW they are simply wrong and promoting fake ‘facts’. As I wrote (elsewhere) when I first read this article, they KNOW that rabbits will never be found in the pre-Cambrian (or dinosaur fossils in the VERY old Grand Canyon exposed rock layers). AiG and other young earth creationists were also in a panic over Homo naledi – they could not agree a single position on what they thought the species must be (some falsely claimed a mix of ape species and human bones) and AiG, despite the evidence, claimed ‘ape’.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8299
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YECs cannot cope with the pattern of the fossil record

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sat Jan 27, 2018 12:22 am

As I have ALSO just pointed out to CMI under the article (my comments will be censored 100% for certain):

As the enquirer also stated in the (edited) comments:
"Creationists interpret the fossil record through the lens of the Flood, do they not? How do you explain the ordering of fossils? How did they get so neatly stacked up?
I have yet to find a resource that addresses this. Why can people predict where fossils will be found if they are operating under false assumptions? Why is the fossil record so neatly organized? Why don't we find Precambrian rabbits? I believe CMI is misrepresenting the data when it comes to this regard. I believe creationist models are oversimplified and cannot explain the geologic data".
Which strongly implies that he is already familiar with the articles linked to by Walker - and was unconvinced by them. I can't prove this - but it looks very plausible.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8299
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YECs cannot cope with the pattern of the fossil record

Postby a_haworthroberts » Sun Jan 28, 2018 9:37 pm

https://creation.com/the-fossil-record- ... an-rabbits
Plenty of arrogant or smug responses that successfully manage to miss the point - the vertical PATTERN of the fossil record not explainable by a violent 'recent' flood - HAVE been published. One respondent even declares: "It's easier to lie to someone than it is to convince them that they're believing a lie." It's even easier when any contrary viewpoints, however politely expressed, are CENSORED and IGNORED. YECs, with the odd exception (which does not include any staff at CMI) aren't interested in truth - just dogma.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8299
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: YECs cannot cope with the pattern of the fossil record

Postby a_haworthroberts » Mon Jan 29, 2018 4:00 pm

a_haworthroberts wrote:https://creation.com/the-fossil-record-and-precambrian-rabbits
Plenty of arrogant or smug responses that successfully manage to miss the point - the vertical PATTERN of the fossil record not explainable by a violent 'recent' flood - HAVE been published. One respondent even declares: "It's easier to lie to someone than it is to convince them that they're believing a lie." It's even easier when any contrary viewpoints, however politely expressed, are CENSORED and IGNORED. YECs, with the odd exception (which does not include any staff at CMI) aren't interested in truth - just dogma.



And the latest comment about YEC 'peer review', just seen, is beyond belief. Another example of how YECs are bigots.
a_haworthroberts
 
Posts: 8299
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 1:49 am
Location: United Kingdom


Return to Conversations with Creationists

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests