I think that you are likely grasping at straws to hold on to a comfortable illusion. The evidence is in your "somehow, someway, anyway".
Grow up and open your eyes. The truth only threatens a fantasy.
2007-10-03 11:48:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by skeptik 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Carbon dating can't date anything old enough for a fossil. You need to use radioactive dating.
Fossils need millions of years to form as the processes that form them are very very slow. I would have thought that something only 100 years old is more along the lines of remains rather than a fossil, anyway.
You can find remains in "beach rock" which forms quite quickly in Geological terms. Some of these rocks are less than 200 years old but these are the exception rather than the rule.
2007-10-03 11:06:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by The Kelda 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Fossilization does not take millions of years but indeed can occur in several years though most fossils were probably deposited in Noah's flood of around 2300 BC.
http://www.dinosauria.com/jdp/fossil/fossil.htm
Rock layers have no date stamp on them so inferences are made as to their supposed age from signature fossils they contain---so the fossils date the rocks and the rocks date the fossils---circular reasoning.
A T-Rex skeleton was found recently and still had soft tissue and blood vessels intact---how could this have survived for supposed millions of years? It's impossible, yet the notion of millions of years is still clung to instead of throwing out or modifying the theory.
2007-10-03 15:56:46
·
answer #3
·
answered by paul h 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
So you think that fossils formed in 1907? I would be interested in your scientific explanation or illogical reasoning, as the case may be.
To explain fossils 100 years old, you would also have to explain deposition and lithification of the host rock of the fossil. A fossil is just an impression of what was once there and is now part of the rock. Your grandfather could have seen it first hand!
Obviously you are a young person where 100 years seems like an eternity. You have not had any earth science courses and have no concept of geological processes. Enlighten yourself in basic earth science and you will find your answers.
Just be glad that we "old earth" geologists are around. We understand depositional environments, what it means to find fossils and what kind they are, what formations are where, etc. Without the science of "old earth" geology, no gas for your car, no car (iron ore for steel), no plastics (refined from crude oil), no copper wires in your iPOD, etc.
Think about it.
Edit 1
Oh Paul_H, what a non-student of science you are. If you had read the article about T-Rex, you would see the key word “appeared” to be vessels. It was a very small amount. This is a rare case in deed, conditions had to be exact to completely seal and preserve soft tissue, if indeed it really is that. If this proves your case of short time earth, then why is this the only apparent instance of it happening? Shouldn’t other T-Rex fossils have soft tissue preservation?
Answer me this question. I recently drilled a core well over 2,000 feet in a coal basin. At 1,953 feet I encountered 12 feet of fossiliferious limestone full of brachiopods. At 1,965 feet, 8 feet of non-marine gray shale with scarce plant fossils. At 1,973 feet we found 6.5 feet of bituminous coal. Now, it is a known geologic fact that it takes 10 feet of accumulated dead, fully grown trees, leaves, etc., in a tropical swamp to make one foot of coal. Now, exactly how did Noah’s flood go from a swamp with 65 feet of tree accumulation, to a non-marine lake with over 8 feet of mud accumulation, to a shallow sea with over 12 feet of dead sea shells – then squeeze everything to lithify (turn into rock) it, AND deposit enough inter-layered muds, sand, etc. to lithify into 2,000 feet of solid rock over top of that – in 40 days?
I am faithful, attend church every week, AND I am a scientist. Don’t try to mix dogmatic chronologies and science. It doesn’t work.
By the way, did you know that time was not measurable until “Day Four”? (Genesis 1, 14-19)
2007-10-03 12:00:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Tom-PG 4
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think that carbon dating fossils is an accurate means of checking age
2007-10-03 10:54:00
·
answer #5
·
answered by Kraig P 4
·
0⤊
1⤋