So how could bones of both land and sea creatures become fossilized in “ancient seas” on the continents, as claimed by evolutionary scientists, in the fossil record?
Why is that?
The term evolutionary scientists becomes even more dubious in such context too.
We see all types of sedimentary rocks being formed right now. As one example, the many river deltas depositing large amounts of sediments. There is tons of limestone forming in the Caribbean.
You don’t need either a global flood nor a recent flood to create those deposits. Ironically, the Mt. St. Helens eruption and subsequent flooding is a perfect example that shows how global flood myths are so misguided. You don’t need a global flood to produce these deposits.
And are you finding fossilized (or even fossilizing) bones in these sediments?
Sequence stratigraphy is showing us that the sedimentary rock layers of the fossil record are not haphazard, random groupings of sedimentary rock layers. Rather, they are distinct groupings of layers–the product of systematic ocean flows, “transgressions” and “regressions” that deposited sediment layers in a distinct order: “fining” up (sandstone–shale–limestone) with transgression flows and “coarsening up” (limestone-shale-sandstone) with regression flows.
And the deposited sediments had lain adjacent to one another in an ocean environment prior to being transported across the continents.
In fact, one source said the sediments (sand, clay, calcium carbonate) of a sequence were transported together in the same flow even:
“Thus it should be recognized that in sedimentary interpretation the application of Steno’s principles and Walther’s Law provide powerful and useful simplifications that assume the sediments packaged by surfaces accumulated within discrete moments of time, and are considered contemperaneous”
So, you think the Mt. St. Helens flooding–or any other flashflooding of our times–was capable of burying alive a herd of 10,000 10-ton maiasaurs, as happened in Montana?
And, when you realize that these “flash floods” just happened to be likewise burying dinosaur herds in other parts of the world–all at the same time (Cretaceous/ Zuni)…and you further learn that global sea levels were about 1,000 feet above today’s level at that time…would you actually conclude these were just random, disassociated, local floodings?
As a “detective,” is this the conclusion you would logically arrive at?
Flood’s are far from rare. A big chunk of Pakistan is dealing with catastrophic flooding right now. Nobody is attributing that to the Biblical flood. This last year my own province had entire herds of livestock drown as flooding overwhelmed efforts to save them. Nobody attributed that to the Biblical flood either. That herding animals die in local floods is to be expected.
Serious question, were sea levels actually that much higher, or was the land just lower? If no ice caps, perhaps the seas were a little higher, but for the most part, my understanding is that the lands in question were lower and have been uplifted by tectonic action.
“Senility”…well, maybe. On the other hand, I would have appreciated a bit of clarity on your part, like saying, “So, why, in the OP, did you put ‘ancient’ in quotation marks?” See what I’m saying?
I put “ancient” in quotation marks in order to say this is the term used by evolutionary scientists to describe these bodies of water, as they view them as even hundreds of millions of years old. It is they, not creationist scientists, who use this term.
In fact, I don’t agree that these were seas at all. Even evolutionary scientists acknowledge that these “seas” were very mobile–“transgressing” across (in the Sauk/Cambrian) about 75% of North America, then “regressing”, as flooding ocean flows. In fact, transgressing and regressing in high energy waters, able to hold and gradually deposit massive loads of ocean sediments across this area (specifically, 3 million cubic kilometers of sediments, according to geologist and hydrologist, Tim Clarey).
I am reminded of our recent visit to Florissant Fossil Beds National Monument where a nearby volcano blanketed a lake with ash intermittantly, leaving layers of shale trapping fish, insects, and plants in abundance within those layers.
Most sources I have read have used the term “eustatic”–meaning, of course, global–to refer to sea levels during the Cretaceous (Zuni megasequence).
But I do believe they are correct in saying “global,” because the same sea level–at the same time–is evidenced on other continents, like Africa and South America.
Seafloor spreading–which elevates the seafloor–certainly contributed to the elevated levels.
Because it was a period of highest global sea levels. That is, the sea level, all over the world, was not up and down during this whole time–it held at this flooding level.
There is still an 80 million year time span for floods to occur, so why would you think every flood deposit in the Cretaceous happened on the same day or week?
I wouldn’t either, and these kids are being taught simply–and effectively, for example using animations–what is simply untrue about how bones are fossilized.
And other geologists are Old-Earth advocates. So, why should he be any more suspect than they are?
Actually, though, I have not found his sequence stratigraphy work to conflict with that of evolutionary scientists (and I have spent a great deal of time reading their studies)–except, of course, with their trying to fit sequences into the evolutionary time scale of hundreds of millions of years,
The sediments were deposited in layers by strong ocean flows (dynamic enough to hold sediments in suspension, while gradually depositing them across continents to varying extents)–but sequentially, not in one big blast. And it was over at least a five month period, according to Scripture.
Sequence stratigraphy describes this sequential, pulse-like deposition. There could even have been brief sub-aerial periods.as the layers of each megasequence were being deposited. This would account for the presence of trace fossils.