The Fall of Historical Adam, (Federal Head of man), impacts all of humanity to need Christ's Salvation

[Paraleptopecten (Timothy Campbell)]

@Burrawang

The rot started way back in the 17th century and gelled for many in prominent academic positions since then, names like, Deist Abraham Werner; James Hutton; Charles Lyell; Georges Cuvier; William Smith; Thomas Chalmers; John Summer; Hugh Miller , Ernst Mayr and many others.

The Rev. Joseph Townsend published a decent amount of William Smith’s geological work in a book entitled The Character of Moses Established for Veracity as an Historian Recording Events from the Creation to the Deluge. And Smith was rather late in accepting and had to be convinced by the clergy that he worked with (like Townsend) that his results implied an old earth.

@Burrawang

The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, NOT the evidence of fossils."

He’s overdrawing that a bit–yes, transitional fossils are rarer than one would expect if all change were at a steady pace (a la Lamarckianism), but they’re still there, as I have said about five times, I’ve found over a dozen of them myself, and with a bit of hunting, could list a few hundred more.

@Burrawang

There are likely numerous reasons why the strata have certain fossils in them that have nothing to do with eons of ‘deep time’ such as perhaps the ecosystems buried were at different elevations and vastly separate geographic locations that have nothing whatsoever to do with assumed temporal periods elapsing. We will probably never know why and can only speculate, but the neat orderly progression that allegedly shows evolution in action as some would have us believe is not at all convincing to those of us who know more about the reality in the field.

Ecosystem elevation is a really bad match for depositional order–Cuvier figured that out, and he was strongly opposed to evolution (yes, he had some issues in his views like cyclical history, but he didn’t like the “evolution” of the day. i.e. Lamarkianism). I can tell that it’s not accurate, and have pictures of sites that prove that that is not a realistic description.

And as to “knowing more about the reality in the field”, just how much paleontological field work have you (or anyone affiliated with your sources) done?

@Burrawang

Research into alternative explanations that don’t support evolution rarely get funding from the usual sources and as such are at a massive disadvantage to compete in the field of ideas that explain origins of the biosphere.

Given how incredibly difficult it is to get any significant funding for research on things that aren’t vertebrates and aren’t medically relevant, I don’t think there’s much of a disadvantage.

@jammycakes

@Burrawang

Research into alternative explanations that don’t support evolution rarely get funding from the usual sources and as such are at a massive disadvantage to compete in the field of ideas that explain origins of the biosphere.

The RATE project cost $1.25 million. The Ark Encounter cost $100 million. Prosperity preachers with private jets are a thing. I seem to recall reading somewhere that even Answers in Genesis has a private jet.

There are reasons why young earthism only ever comes up with flaky arguments, consisting as they do of tiny samples with huge error bars, but a lack of funding is not one of them.

How much funding I or my collaborators have received for research on fossil mollusks: <$50,000 over the course of 50 years of research (of course, I haven’t been around for all of that), and basically all of that has gone towards paying for travel expenses, equipment, and printing costs for papers.