Posted on 10/22/2009 7:38:11 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Years ago, National Geographic published a remarkable photograph of a polystrate fossil, a fossilized tree that
extended stratigraphically upward through several layers of rock in Tennessee. Its roots were in a coal seam, and the
overlying deposits included bedded shale and thin carbon-rich layers. An advocate of any form of uniformitarianism
would believe that it took many, many years to deposit this sequence of layers (much longer than it takes for a tree
to grow and eventually die and decay), yet one vertical fossil extends through them all. This one fossilized tree offered
a direct contradiction to the evolutionary mantra that "the present is the key to the past"...
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
As usual, your “Astrology Today” source conflates an individual event with the milieu.
But thanks for the laugh — always fun to see people pretend to know things when they make fools of themselves.
RE “present is key to the past”
Can I use that ‘key’ to take my money out of the stock market July 2007 and put it all back in July 2009???
Nonsense. We have contemporary evidence of deposits like this laid down in minutes during floods, tsunamis, landslides, etc. The scablands of Eastern Washington are a classic example of repeated massive flooding that laid down very thick deposits every time the ice dam of Lake Missoula was breached.
Its a wonderful world out there, and I’m glad that my belief in God is not challenged by advances in human knowledge and science.
I can guarantee you need to see ICR come out with some sort of retraction like those moron evolutionist darwin worshippers with that most recent lame ‘missing link’
mark another Religion of Evolutionism moment:
FAIL
This one fossilized tree offered a direct contradiction to the evolutionary mantra that "the present is the key to the past"...It merely takes a great big dump on gradualism and uniformitarianism -- showing that no process went on in the past that doesn't go on in the present, in this case, catastrophe.
exactly, rapid deposition, that is how fossils are generally formed....
sort of like a world wide flood, hmmmmmm......
Ping!
Looks like a cylinder rock formation. The one in the background seems to stop at the rock layer above it. How do they know it is a tree, it looks like stone to me.(Molten rock forced up through a hole??) The cliff looks like it lost pieces over the ages, and like it broke off had it been risen in a land shift.
How exactly does “molton rock” grow tree roots?
An advocate of any form of uniformitarianism would believe ...
What baloney do we have here boys and girls? Why none other than..
Straw Man
Definition: Caricature, making your opponent’s argument seem ridiculous so that it is easily knocked down.
& Half Truth
Definition: Part truth and part lie; sugar-coated poison. Often more effective than the Big Lie.
Why a straw man and half truth. You see, they are deceiving you to believe that uniformitarianism only accepts slow and gradual, they are only giving you half the picture (actually less) because it also accepts that catastrophe happens, such as volcanoes, floods, etc, all that can achieve similar results as the gradual covering concept. Heck, we can see this process even today in the lakes around Mt. St. Helen's where we have trees buried, just like you see here, being preserved. They lie about the full picture of uniformitarianism then use a straw man argument to tie the belief to that lie.. Clever.. What other Baloney can we find here?
How about some:
Glittering Generalities
Definition: Broad-brush oversimplifications that gloss over exceptions or problems.
Or maybe we'll throw in a little: Reductionism (this is the big one for this article.)
Definition: Reducing a complex concept to just a subset of its components as if it represented the whole.
GGG's own Creation Safari's website provides a great guide for how they write these articles. I suggest you check it out. Play the game too.. Can you spot the Baloney?
Is there any observable phenomenon that you haven’t yet asserted disproves evolution? Polystrate fossils have been understood for over 100 years.
Get over it.
Wishing your full recovery--GGG
Both beach deposits and volcanic ash deposits are frequently layered. In the case of a volcanic eruption, successive ash falls can create numerous layers in a matter of hours or days. Similarly, thick beds of sediment can be laid down during floods and though there may be tens or even hundreds of layers, the event that creates this may only take a few days or hours.
I am not familiar with the logic of using these somewhat unremarkable fossil orientations to support or refute evolution. I would say that this is focusing on some inconsequential detail while missing the grand sweep of nature's continual flux and the changes that all life forms have undergone to survive. This arguement focuses on the trees while ignoring the forest. http://en.allexperts.com/q/Geology-1359/Stratigraphy-Upright-Fossils.htm
That is one of the main reasons why I take Genesis so seriously!
The fallacy of attacking the character or circumstances of an individual who is advancing a statement or an argument instead of trying to disprove the truth of the statement or the soundness of the argument. Often the argument is characterized simply as a personal attack.
1. The personal attack is also often termed an "ad personem argument": the statement or argument at issue is dropped from consideration or is ignored, and the locutor's character or circumstances are used to influence opinion.
2. The fallacy draws its appeal from the technique of "getting personal." The assumption is that what the locutor is saying is entirely or partially dictated by his character or special circumstances and so should be disregarded.
Having your guide for presenting articles is great fun. Have you become what you claim to hate the most?
God has taken down your link.
The Institute for Creation Research
Our website is currently unavailable.
If you would like to contact us, please email web_issue@icr.org.
I like the part with the talking snake!
Why did God have to create Adam from sand and use Adam's rib to create Eve when he created the whole universe from nothing?
When they dug out the new channel to the gulf in my hometown, they dredged out hundreds of old trees in the upright position for centuries.
Thanks for the ping!
After years of work by Paleobiodendroligists from the Puttinguon University, it was pieced together using digital reconstruction and a bit of reshaping of the parts.
Some missing parts like the majority of the trunk and roots had to be filled in by sculpters according an artist’s rendering.
Further information can be found at “Fossie, The Paradigm Tosser”.
“Why did God have to create Adam from sand and use Adam’s rib to create Eve when he created the whole universe from nothing? “
Where would you get the idea God HAD to do anything?
All of you evos on this thread are totally ignoring the other pre-suppositions with your geologic age-dating ‘science’ - namely that each layer is separated by great time periods. Eons or epics as reported by some evolutionists yet you come on here and incredibly defend your position by saying it was all formed during a great flood or other catastrophe.
Anyone with half a brain knows that all of this is open to interpretation. You wouldn’t be so offensive with your posts if your theory was not like swiss cheese.
Apparently you have somewhat less than half a brain.
Apparently you are so close-minded and sure of evolution that you’ve never even considered the scientific arguments from the creation side.
You seem to base your arguments entirely on facts not entered into evidence. Care to try again?
I wonder if that's like "The conservative side of Barry O"
Whoop dee doo. A slight on my part.
Your evolution stories are truly epic - aren’t they!?
Typical of wanting to credit everything to evolution and science found below.
“Does the bacteria strain remain consistent through prayer or through geneticists understanding resistant cultures and strain integrity?”
I think the consistency of the bacteria strain owes nothing to either - most especially the geneticists understanding.
You are mistaken. Gradualism no longer holds forth by itself. It was joined some time ago by catastrophism, largely as a result of the investigations into the scablands. Demonstrating that gradualism was not the singular mechanism for change on our planet did not did not destroy the entire body of geologic knowledge.
SO, first, he starts by laying out a bogus scenario in which a vertical fossilized tree supposedly creates a problem for evolution.......THEN, he gives a rational explanation for how it could occur naturally......THEN he finishes it up with the typical false conclusion:
Our understanding of possible events during the great Flood of Noah's day was substantially expanded, including that rapid deposition of sediments and burial of fossils could be expected during such a deluge. The more evidence that science uncovers, the more it supports the biblical account of earth's history.
No..."Dr"...as science has uncovered evidence, it has NEVER supported the biblical account of Earth's history.
Where would you get the idea God HAD to do anything?
OK. Why did God have to create Adam from sand and use Adam’s rib to create Eve when he created the whole universe from nothing? “
I prefer an educated populace that is willing to question scientific statements of fact that have little or no basis in factual evidence.
Some overly-proud ‘scientists’ of our day act like discovering a new process is tantamount to being the inventor / designer of same.
You may have an opinion or theory to how something was formed from the past, but without observation your conclusions are still at best a guess.
You expect me to answer for God? If He said that is how He did it why do you feel the need to question it? Maybe if you read the book of Job you can get a proper perspective on these matters. As well as learning to reject the most popular mis-conceptions about God that mankind has always made throughout history.
No. But there must have been some lesson that God wanted to give to us by doing it the way he did. If it was that important, why don't you know the lesson he wanted to transfer to us? Or is the book of Genesis just not really important?
“Polystrate fossils have been understood for over 100 years.”
By scientists, yes. However, only recently have creation rationalizing pied-piper frauds begun to willfully misinterpret them to secure their own standing as a false prophets among those of weak faith.
Were you standing there at the moment of creation?
God could have just poofed Adam and Eve out of nothing. He must have had a reason for creating Adam from sand and Eve from Adam's rib. When will we know what he was trying to teach us with this symbolism and why are dismissing this important lesson that God is trying to give us?
OK, I’ll bite (probably only to regret it later).
What lesson(s) did you learn from this small portion of Genesis?
You evos have you fun and keep trashing these posts with your nonsense if you want. I have better things to do.
Leading mankind to religion by deceit, omission, misstatement, exaggeration, and fantasy. What a bizarre view of God these people have.
“Why did God create Adam from sand and use Adam’s rib to create Eve when he created the whole universe from nothing? “
Because the chimpanzees were too busy thrashing Samsonite suitcases to be bothered with being participants in some evolutionary scheme.
Why don’t you ask God that question?
A partial answer to the question might be that since man is composed of matter and spirit, it was fitting that his body was formed from pre-existing matter. That Eve was generated from Adam’s rib, aka X-chromosome, was something He told us about, but it took us 6,000 years to understand what was being said.
Ya think?
and sadly, read this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2368427/posts?page=233#233
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.