Why all the well preserved fossils?

Question

Have you noticed that when archeologists find really well preserved fossils it's because they said they were quickly covered with sand or sediments that kept the bones covered and intact until fossilized? Considering that fossils are found in all parts of the world and in arid areas in particular, the only way I see it of them being covered so quickly by sediments to preserve them so well would have been by a global flood that would have stirred up all that sediment while at the same time, exstinquishing the life of the animals, and it explains why they sometimes find mass fossils at one time and also where they still had food in their mouths as well. Don't you think?

!!SevenLights!! Let here you explain one.

Sasha Because their dating is flawed.

What about the mass fossils they have found in the midwest of the United States as well as in Mongolian desert? With some having fossilized eggs in their nests.

As far as the dating of the fossils goes, you claim that the Scriptures of fullfilled prophesy were written after the fact and aren't accurately dated and they're only a few thousand years old but you want us to believe the fossils are accurately dated and they're hundreds of millions of years old? Yea right! Tell me another one?

Answer 1

Proof of the Deluge

Answer 2

You can't say that. It's politically incorrect. Shame on you. You're not worshipping at the altar of Darwin.
Back in the 70's when they first discovered the great canyons on Mars, they said that the only thing that could have carved out those canyons was some kind of a world wide flood. One of the scientists even called it a 'Noachin flood'. This was all because they had found great canyons on Mars. But we have comparable canyons here on earth. The reason they don't look as big is because they're half filled with water(the oceans and the seas and even some lakes). Take all the water off the earth and you'll find some great canyons that go from 9 miles deep(the Mariana trench) to 6 miles high (everest and kilomenjara and K-2).
So, in essense, what they were saying is that there must have been a world wide flood on a planet(mars) that we have never found one ounce of water on but there could not have been world wide flood on another planet(earth) that is presently 72% covered by water. Try and figure that out.
One leading geologist said that he wished he could postulate a world wide flood on the earth. He said it would explain a lot of things like finding fossils of fish and sea shells and clams and salt deposits on top of every high mountain on earth including kilomenjara, everest and K-2. But he said "I can't say that because it sounds too much like the bible and in this secular culture we cannot postulate anything that makes the bible look good".
You need to stop all this anti-darwinistic rebellious activity and get with the program. Take that brain of yours and put it on the shelf. You don't need to think. We've indoctrinated you in our public schools since you were knee-high to a grasshopper with this darwinian fairy tale. JUST ACCEPT IT!

http://www.answersingenesis.org/

http://www.intouch.org/index_76034.html

http://www.icr.org/

http://www.pleaseconvinceme.com/home.php

http://www.reasons.org/index.shtml

http://www.tektonics.org/

Answer 3

not necessarily, some fossils an be fully preserved by falling in oil pits, or being covered in Ice.
a flood is not the only possibility, maybe the creature lived in an underwater area, and the tectonic powers elevated the surface of the sea.
the possibilities are unlimited.

Answer 4

I second the notion of bad dating methods (by those who claim that the earth is millions of years old)...in fact, some examples of erroneous dates arrived at through our “radiometric” dating methods include shells from living snails being carbon dated as being 27,000 years old (1), living mollusk shells being dated up to 2300 years old(2), a freshly killed seal being carbon dated as having died 1300 years ago (3), and one part of a mammoth carbon dated at 29,500 years while another part carbon dated at 44,000! (4)

1. Science vol. 224, 1984, pp. 58-61
2. Science vol. 141, 1963, pp.634-637
3. Antarctic Journal vol. 6, Sept-Oct. 1971, p.211
4. Troy L. Pewe, Quaternary Stratigraphic Nomenclature in Unglaciated Central Alaska, Geological Survey Professional Paper 862 (U.S. Gov. printing office, 1975) p. 30.

Answer 5

Why would this be completely at variance with what Geologists actually say about the dating of the fossils?

Answer 6

I agree. I have no problem with the knowledge that the biblical Flood wiped out the dinosuars.

Answer 7

made from fossil fuels

Answer 8

Biblehelp,
It would explain some of it. Looking forward to them discovering a Nephalim! We will see. I think that it's got us all fooled. God knows what happened.

Answer 9

no, there are many other ways that can occur, too.

sorry, but no, it doesn't prove the silly "great flood" story in the buy-bull...

Answer 10

Yes, I agree.