Fossils: Evidence of evolution or evidence of a global flood?

Post deleted

Just curious, by your figures of population density, how many squid per cubic foot would there be bunched up before the flood?

2 Likes

There are 1.386 x 109 cubic kilometres of water in the oceans. (Source.) That is 1.386 quintillion cubic metres, or 48.9 quintillion cubic feet.

The figure of one quadrillion in @Joel_Duff’s article refers to only the Bighorn Basin in Wyoming. The Bighorn Basin has an area of about 20,000 square kilometres, or 1/25,000 of the earth’s surface area.

So if at the time of the Flood, the waters were evenly distributed over the whole earth, there would have been at least one belemnite for every two cubic feet over Wyoming. The flood waters in that location would have been 100% belemnite.

And bear in mind also that the number is a conservative estimate, the real figure is almost certainly considerably higher. Then you have all the other species of marine critters to account for as well.

Sorry, @r_speir, it’s not as simple as that.

On the contrary. We believe parts of the Bible that you don’t. In particular, 2 Peter 3:8 and Psalm 90:4.

5 Likes

I’m glad you can do the math but the numbers were only 1/2 the story. Of course exponential growth can explain populations sizes within a short time frame. It’s the context of the fossils that is important. They are not found scattered throughout the fossils record but within a discrete band of rock.
You suggest that they could have “piled up by the time of the Flood” but that would require ignoring the context in which they are found. there are thousands of feet of sedimentary fossil-bearing rock below them. I assume you believe these rocks were laid down in a flood so how did the quadrillions of remains–of many size classes–get sorted out together in the upper flood sediments? If you think they were all alive at the time of the flood you still have a sorting problem. I address multiple additional problem in my article. Arriving at a large number only is the beginning of the problem so you are now ready to start answering the questions.

4 Likes

@r_speir You simply assumed exponential population growth. Where are your sources that show the environment in which the belemnites lived could support this number of animals? I am no biologist but know that animal populations reach a maximum size based on available food, space, and predation. So I am awaiting your sources that show your population estimation could in fact be supported by the environment.

2 Likes

Post deleted

Are you aware that the place you’re talking about is now dry ground, about 4,000-6,000 feet above sea level? “Those local waters” would have been nothing more than rivers and lakes.

1 Like

Post deleted

Obviously, jammy, all these squid like creatures were scurrying to higher ground when they gave out and piled up in Wyoming. Must have been quite the sight.

3 Likes

Post deleted

Yeah, it really is amazing that a part of Wyoming 100 miles wide was uplifted by more than a mile without releasing enough energy to destroy all life on the planet many times over.

@r_speir, are you actually a real YEC or are you just parodying them?

5 Likes

Post deleted

Well, even that is not very gradual. Lets see, 6000 feet over 500 years is about a foot a month, average. May I ask what observations support that scenario?

Post deleted

You think that an upthrust of 6000 feet in 500 years is plausible?

Have you studied the physics of plate tectonics?

1 Like

Evidently it sounds as if no amount of data will change your mind, so fair enough. I understand that your interpretation trumps everything else. However, how do you rationalize the apparent ancient age of creation as determined by multiple independent observations with God who is faithful and true?

2 Likes

@r_speir

Then how do you explain the sedimentary layers above the layer with the belemnites? From the article you used, “The Sundance Formation is overlain by the terrestrial deposits of the Late Jurassic (148–155 Ma) Morrison Formation” which by the way contains terrestrial not marine dinosaurs.

I am reminded of a line from “Crocodile Dundee”, “That’s not a knife. That’s a knife.”

2 Likes

@r_speir

I have no idea how this article is supposed to support a YEC position…

And in a related thread, I am impressed with your impassioned support of Maffat and his bold theories on varying changes of the speed of light:

“Moffatt is not from ICR, AiG, etc… The guy is a cosmologist. Not a cosmetologist. Cosmology is the academic study of the cosmos. It’s a sub-topic of astrophysics.”

But aren’t you cherry-picking? You bring in Moffatt to boggle the minds of those who support mainstream Cosmologies …and yet you reject Moffatt’s Old Earth position on the Cosmos and the Earth.

Surely you must blush before you post things like this?

Is that this post? That wasn’t @r_speir — it was somebody else. Unless he’s sock puppeting, and I can’t see what he’d have to gain from doing that…

Post deleted