Hello Isabella, its nice talking with you.
Evolution is about survival. There are some environments where complex multicellular animals have an advantage. But there are also environments where unicellular organisms like bacteria have an advantage, such as in a dark cave or deep in the soil. Put a complex animal or plant in an environment like this, and they won’t do very well at all. “Better” is relative to the environment you live in.
Okay, thank you.
Primitive sponge fossils are an example of a transitional, multicellular organism. We have sponge fossils.
Would you know about how many cells they have? Are there any transitional fossils between these sponges and single-celled organisms?
Fossilization is not a common event. And fossils are not a common discovery. If all the living animals were fossilized at once in a giant flood, I would expect to see fossils of nearly every animal that has ever lived. Yet considering the size of our planet and all the layers of rock we dig through, we really haven’t found all that many.
Alot of terrestrial creatures made it to the surface and weren't fossilized or were not fossilized for some other reason. That's why more than 90% of the fossils are marine organisms. How can you see every animal that is alive today in the fossil record, if you don't know all the animals that lived at the time they were covered in sediment? There may be many more species today than there were back then, but there still existed the same kinds of animals.
As for marine fossils on mountains, this would be because marine fossils were lifted up from lower ground when the mountains formed. While we’re on the subject, how does the flood theory explain the marine fossils high up in the mountains? Just last weekend I was hiking high up in the Rockies and we came to an entire cliff of fossilized coral.
In the same way. The difference would be, how fast did this happen and when did it happen. The geologic activity of the water coming out of the ground would have had all kinds of effects. Earthquakes, plates moving, mountains forming, ocean basins sinking down.
They are bent and shifted as a result of volcanic activity melting and reforming the rock.
Okay, thank you.
I have never thought of the layers as the smooth stacks you describe them as.
The point I was trying to get across is, do geologists find soil or erosion in between the rock layers and if not, why?
And I’m not familiar with deposits stretching all the way around the Earth, maybe you could elaborate on that (I’m not doubting that your claim it true, but like I said I really don’t know much about this at all).
I heard this from John Mackay
on Creation Today: Week 7/28/11
. He said:"... we went through Tennessee. Over there a few years ago I found some rocks with seashells and land plants all mixed together. Then I thought to myself, “Well, this is the Pennsylvanian rocks.” ... I thought, “Well, I have seen these rocks before,” and it was over in Wales many years ago. So, what we did was followed this rock layer all around planet earth. I got our guide in England to take me back to Wales to where we thought that quarry might be and I said, “That layer should be here somewhere,” and sure enough, halfway up there was the layer with shells and plants in.
So this layer actually covers more than 180 degrees of the earth’s surface so anybody who is looking for evidence, not only of the creation of the shells and the plants, but the evidence of God’s judgment at Noah’s flood, you can actually see it, folks. It is really out there and it is rock solid."
For more information, you can ask him yourself
According to Wikipedia (excuse the lack of a scholarly source), polystrate fossils form during times of rapid sedimentation. I can see how this would support the flood theory, but it doesn’t go against the old Earth view. There obviously have been examples of rapid sediment deposit in the past, but that’s not enough evidence for a worldwide flood in my opinion.
Right, and these are found all over the earth. I guess my question would be, whats so different about the layers the polystrate fossils are found in with the layers they aren't found in. I understand there are many kinds of layers, but if you can see that the ones surrounding the polystrate fossils were rapidly deposited, isn't it atleast possible that the one's they aren't found in could have been deposited in the same way?
Were any of the turtles, alligators, or the “many other creatures” found alongside the dinosaurs the same species as extant animals we see today?
I'm not sure about species, but an alligator skull was found with many centrosaurus fossils and had the exact same skull shape as modern alligators that we have today. It was found at Dinosaur Provincial Park in Alberta, Canada. I have a short video clip of this saved on my computer, but how would I upload it for you to see, if you are interested? I'm sure you can find an article online, because the clip is only like a minute or two long.
And I’d be curious to know what makes you think dinosaurs were swamp animals. When I think of swamp animals, I tend to think of animals that are water adapted: short limbs, often with webbed feet for swimming. Like an alligator or a beaver. I realize there are some dinosaurs which fit this description, but there are others with long legs that would be better suited for running or long distance walking, an adaptation generally associated with large open spaces. There are also flying dinosaurs, and it seems logical that even if all the dinosaurs happen to live in low-altitude swamps, at least some of the flying ones would have flown away in time.
Right, some of them were swamp animals. I can't be sure of all of them. The flying dinosaurs just show up in the fossil record with flight and no fossilized ancestors. How come atleast one of they're ancestors weren't fossilized?
It would also seem logical to me that there should be at least a few mammal fossils mixed in with the dinosaurs, or dinosaur fossils mixed in with the mammals.
In one rock strata, researchers found several types of dinosaurs and were surprised to find frog, fish, turtle, small mammal and plant fossils as well. - New Scientist, February 24, 2001 p. 13
A large mammal fossil had a dinosaur fossil in its stomach. BioEd Online articleHuman tracks and dinosaur tracks found together at Paluxy
If the sediment deposits happened as rapidly as you claim they did, there wouldn’t be a whole lot of time to intelligently reason things out. The instinct to run away from something that might kill you is just as strong in a lizard as it is in a human.
The way this catastrophe was happening wasn't uniform all over the planet. Layers laid down here and some there. Some laid down, sat in the sun for a little, devolping a skin, capturing the footprints we find in them, and then being covered by another layer. The tides would have had an effect.
So the strata layers are organized in a series from most dense to least dense, and this is what we observe today?
I meant the objects we find in the layers, but again, I am no expert on flood geology. For your serious questions, I'd visit those websites I listed, use their search function, or just email them. They will have more in-depth answers to your questions.
According to the Wikipedia article on Ica Stones, the farmer who discovered the stones later admitted they were fakes he made himself. I don’t believe everything Wikipedia tells me, but I’m having a lot of difficulty finding another source which confirms the authenticity of the stones. Perhaps you could provide me with a link if you know of one?
The farmer said some of them were fake. There are thousands of these stones. Obviously some want to fake them to sell to gullible tourists. These stones were first reported in the 1500's by the Spanish. The man who said they were fake had to say they were fake because its illegal to sell Peruvian artifacts and he was on camera. He later admitted that he lied and was then arrested. Why would he be in jail for selling fake artifacts? If he faked them before the 1990's, how did he know to put the dermal spine along the back of the dinosaurs like some of the stones have? Here are more sources which confirm their authenticity: Ica stones show dinosaurs and humans coexisted
, Dinosaurs and Man/Ica Stones
The second link has more details.
Thank you for responding to me. I hope we both get closer to the truth.