Another HUGE nail in the coffin for creationism: [Spirituality & Religion]
[b]If Noah's flood really happened, why do we never find a dinosaur in the same geological layer as a human or a dog?[/b] Why no whales in the same layer as mosasaurs? Why no Apatosaurs in the same layer as elephants?
If all the animals were overcome by the flood at around the same time, why do we NEVER see these animals in the same fossil layers [i]anywhere [/i]on earth?
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
[quote][quote]There's lot's of fossils missing from your scientific explanations.[/quote][/quote]
Oh? Well then i hope you won't forget that next time you think you're not seeing enough examples of transitional fossils.
Sorry man, in this case that's just not a sufficient excuse. We have found fossil beds containing all sorts of animals AND we've found those animals in the same layers all over the world: North America, South America, China, Africa, the Antarctic, you name it. But NOWHERE in ANY of the places we find fossils has there been even One SINGLE Example of dinosaur remains being mixed in with the remains of animals that lived after the Mesozoic period and that can't be hand-waved away so easily🤷♀️
As i pointed out to godspeed: Even Young Earth Creationist [i]bastion [/i]Answers in Genesis acknowledges that the fossil record is as i have described it.
[quote]It doesn't meet the standards of Peek-a-boo![/quote]
Woof. Come on bud, don't be childish. It's not my standard, it's the same standard you'd recognize in a court of law: You NEED evidence. It's simply an insufficient rescue tactic.
We have been collecting dinosaur fossils since the 1800s (officially) on every continent on the planet. We have found amazing fossils and have an increasingly comprehensive picture of what life on this planet looked like.
If the noachian flood really happened then an intermingling of dinosaurs and other animals should be THE NORM. Not a rarity which would allow you to grasp at the straw that we haven't found [i]all [/i]fossils.
If you don't have a credible argument which accounts for this then just excuse yourself in a dignified manner and educate yourself on the subject.
Let me put this very simply for you so that you can respond directly to the point:
If the noachian flood occurred and the dinosaurs and other animals were all drowned at the same time then the circumstance of their remains being mixed together would be the RULE and NOT the exception.
Contrary to this necessary circumstance, we find NO examples of dinosaur remains being mingled with those of other animals. Not anywhere on the planet. Not in any of the fossil beds that show the same paleo-ecology spread across the planet. No where.
How do you explain that? Is the whole of your rebuttal simply that you think the COMMON circumstance of intermingled remains has somehow been hidden everywhere on the planet? Is that a reasonable argument? Would you buy that from a defendant in a court of law? Would you accept that level of argument from me?
@Pikachu For protozoa-to-person evolution to have worked over time, purely natural factors must have conceived, constructed, integrated, and implemented new proteins into old organisms. Brave researchers—already convinced that this somehow occurred—have been investigating this core issue, but their recent discovery refutes their own perspective.
Excuse me, but that's a bit of a non-sequitur, yes? I've asked you how what must necessarily be the common circumstance is absent at every fossil known fossil bed in the world and you've responded with a totaally separate objection.
Please stay on topic. I'll be happy to discuss this tangential subject after you give me a direct answer to what is a very simple question.
Imagine for the moment that we are face to face. You could not reasonable expect to completely change the topic of discussion in mid conversation. I'm only asking that we take this discussion one subject at a time.
@Pikachu Nope, totally sequitur. If you can't demonstrate how new proteins found their way into old organisms - evolution is simply wasted semesters in biology classes.
lol come on bud. You know as well as i do that you're trying to redirect the conversation because i've got you up against a wall.
I've asked you how what must necessarily be the common circumstance is absent at [i]every [/i]known fossil bed [b][i]in the world.[/i][/b]
Meet that question head on like a man and then i promise we'll discuss your question about proteins.
Try not to take the coward's refuge behind your screen. Imagine that you have no choice but to meet me toe to intellectual toe:
[i]We're on the debate stage. I've challenged you to account for this utter lack of what should (under your view) be the common circumstance. The spotlight opens on your podium and the audience turns their attention to you, listening in eager silence for your astute explanation for this apparently confounding data. You can't try to change the subject now without losing face in front of the crowd and damaging the legitimacy of the flood! Even if you did, the moderator would only prompt you to answer the question directly. You realize that for good or ill, it's time to take your best shot.
@Pikachu You're unwilling to share your vast knowledge? Or, maybe you just don't know. That's what I'm thinking. I strayed off the path of your narrative, and you are stymied. Have a great weekend.
Yeah, run away bud. I knew you would. You stepped in over your head. Simple as that.
[quote]and you are stymied.[/quote]
Unlike you, i'm willing to admit when i don't know something. I actually have no idea to what you are referring with these proteins but i have repeatedly expressed my good-faith intention to discuss that matter with you...after you show the integrity of answering the challenge you foolishly thought yourself equal to.
[quote]And you can not answer a simple question.[/quote]
*sigh*
Ok. At this stage i have no idea of what you're referring to so i'd need specifics. If i agree to discuss this question about proteins, will you show that you're engaging with me in good faith by [i]promising [/i]to then answer the question i have put to you regarding the fossil record? So...are you up for a good-faith discussion? Your move.
[i]P.S. If the answer to my question is "I don't know" then you can admit that right now and we'll still go on to discuss your protein question. [/i]
Pa[i]thetic[/i]. I see you've made your character clear for [i]all [/i]to see: Dishonest [i]coward[/i].
Despite your childish attempts to deflect, i [i]indulged you[/i]. I acceded to your little kiddy foot stamping and agreed to talk about your question first and [i]only [/i]asked in return that you show a [i]basic [/i]level of integrity. I offered you an olive branch and you slapped it away.
Remember your humiliation here, bud. Remember it and don't you [i]dare [/i]enter one of my threads again until you're prepared to meet me toe to toe. Until then...
[i]P.S. I've screen capped that interaction so that the next time you try to paint me as the mean, unreasonable bad guy, i can trot out this absurd demonstration of your intellectual dishonesty.[/i]
