Christians: What goes through your mind when a scientist finds a million year old fossil?

Answer 1

that the mystical natural selection bunny planted it there ...

Answer 2

Nothing. I dismiss it because of the inaccuracy of carbon dating. In fact, several years ago, just to prove how ridiculous "carbon dating" is, a scientist used it on a LIVING mollusk. The results of the dating came back saying that the mollusk (which is like a clam, just to let you know), had been dead for over 200 years, even though it was really very young and still alive.

So really, there's no proof how old fossils are, so i just ignore those discoveries.

Plus, even if the world is really old, I don't personally believe it changes the message of the Bible at all. The Bible even says that the concept of time is different for God as it is for us, so for all i know one "day" could really mean 1 million years.

God bless!

Answer 3

Since neither I nor the scientist were around when the fossil was created I think were both a little out of the loop.

One day we'll all die and then we'll know.

I will say that many scientific discoveries that have been dated using various techniques have been proven false. Scientists don't like to admit their mistakes. Usually when one of these scientific errors occur it is not widely renounced, just a blurb in some scientific journal somewhere.

On the other hand, any discovery that could somehow disprove the bible or creationism is usually front page news.

Answer 4

nothing because they have not yet. they claim this many times. but then the same scientist have also said that there method is only accurate to a couple hundred years. funny how they say one thing but then claim things are millions of years old. i just laugh is all. and think how sad it is that they have to lie and deceive many people.

i mean being that bones would disinagrate after the first million years. to have a fossil you have to bury something rapidly and fast and take the oxygen out and some other factors which would prove a flood because the flood would do that. being that they have fossils that have a fish that is about to eat another fish. so something happend fast.

one method to show how old things are is the different layers in the earth. however this is not true because the layers are layered different on other parts of the earth. and there have been fish in between 3 or 4 layers at the same time. and these layers are supposed to be millions of years apart. i dont think so

Answer 5

i'm sorry yet you're scientifically uninformed. it is noted as the theory of evolution by fact it has no longer, can not be shown, by fact it is crammed with holes. you're making it sound like basically evolutionist believe in technology yet once you probably did your examine lots of the invention's you tout have been got here across via Christan scientists! The Bible instructed us the earth grew to become into around and suspended interior the gap long till now scientists figured it out. certainly technology and the Bible are continuously in unity, although if it is authentic technology no longer assumptions according to an evolutionary view. I advise in the adventure that your suggestions is as open as you little question believe it to be you study The case for introduction via Lee Stroble

Answer 6

I begin thinking of :
The Adequacy of the Fossil Record
Some 140 years ago Darwin put forward the following argument: "Right now there are no transitional forms, yet further research will uncover them." Is this argument still valid today? In other words, considering the conclusions from the entire fossil record, should we accept that transitional forms never existed, or should we wait for the results of new research?

The wealth of the existing fossil record will surely answer this question. When we look at the paleontological findings, we come across an abundance of fossils. Billions of fossils have been uncovered all around the world.48 Based on these fossils, 250,000 distinct species have been identified, and these bear striking similarities to the 1.5 million identified species currently living on earth.49 (Of these 1.5 million species, 1 million are insects.) Despite the abundance of fossil sources, not a single transitional form has been uncovered, and it is unlikely that any transitional forms will be found as a result of new excavations.

A professor of paleontology from Glasgow University, T. Neville George, admitted this fact years ago:

There is no need to apologize any longer for the poverty of the fossil record. In some ways it has become almost unmanageably rich and discovery is outpacing integration… The fossil record nevertheless continues to be composed mainly of gaps.50

And Niles Eldredge, the well-known paleontologist and curator of the American Museum of Natural History, expresses as follows the invalidity of Darwin's claim that the insufficiency of the fossil record is the reason why no transitional forms have been found:

The record jumps, and all the evidence shows that the record is real: the gaps we see reflect real events in life's history - not the artifact of a poor fossil record.51

Another American scholar, Robert Wesson, states in his 1991 book Beyond Natural Selection, that "the gaps in the fossil record are real and meaningful." He elaborates this claim in this way:

STASIS IN THE FOSSIL RECORD

If evolution had really happened, then living things should have emerged by gradual changes, and have continued to change over time, whereas the fossil record shows the exact opposite. Different groups of living things suddenly emerged with no similar ancestors behind them, and remained static for millions of years, undergoing no changes at all.


Horseshoe crab" fossil from the Ordovician Age. This 450-million-year-old fossil is no different from specimens living today. 100-150 million-year-old starfish fossil Oyster fossils from the Ordovician Age, no different from modern oysters.

Ammonites emerged some 350 million years ago, and became extinct 65 million years ago. The structure seen in the fossil above never changed during the intervening 300 million years. 1.9-million-year-old fossil bacteria from Western Ontario in Canada. They have the same structures as bacteria living today.

The oldest known fossil scorpion, found in East Kirkton in Scotland. This species, known as Pulmonoscorpius kirktoniensis, is 320 million years old, and no different from today's scorpions. An insect fossil in amber, some 170 million years old, found on the Baltic Sea coast. It is no different from its modern counterparts.

140-million-year-old dragonfly fossil found in Bavaria in Germany. It is identical to living dragonflies. 35-million-year-old flies. They have the same bodily structure as flies today. 170-million-year-old fossil shrimp from the Jurassic Age. It is no different from living shrimps.


The gaps in the record are real, however. The absence of a record of any important branching is quite phenomenal. Species are usually static, or nearly so, for long periods, species seldom and genera never show evolution into new species or genera but replacement of one by another, and change is more or less abrupt.52

This situation invalidates the above argument, which has been stated by Darwinism for 140 years. The fossil record is rich enough for us to understand the origins of life, and explicitly reveals that distinct species came into existence on earth all of a sudden, with all their distinct forms.



48 Duane T. Gish, Evolution: Fossils Still Say No, CA, 1995, p. 41
49 David Day, Vanished Species, Gallery Books, New York, 1989.
50 T. Neville George, "Fossils in Evolutionary Perspective," Science Progress, vol. 48, January 1960, pp. 1, 3. (emphasis added)
51 N. Eldredge and I. Tattersall, The Myths of Human Evolution, Columbia University Press, 1982, p. 59. (emphasis added)
52 R. Wesson, Beyond Natural Selection, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991, p. 45.

Answer 7

Honestly, what goes through my mind is . . . . . . .
I wonder how many other Christians understand that the earth was here for a very long time before man was created on it.

Answer 8

How would he know it was millions of years old, was he there when it was deposited?
And radio carbon dating is based on a premise. It presumes that one knows how much radiation existed in the atmosphere at that time. How can he know this was he there.

Answer 9

Depends on the fossil.

Answer 10

How foolproof is the method used to age the fossil? Has it EVER been wrong?

Answer 11

Honestly, fossils are not enough to test my faith in God. Fossils are not nearly enough to test my belief in Creation. As for what I think when a fossil is found, I think to myself, "Wow! Long ago, something lived... and then it died. Thanks be to God."

Don't forget that one day you, too, will be a fossil.