All posts in The Biggest Challenges to Evolution

Comets – Creation Perspective

 

Creation Answer:

As written in the Bible, God created the Sun,  the Moon, and the stars on day 4 of the creation week, and we can assume this includes comets and all other objects in space. There are about 100 short-period comets and over 500 long-period comets discovered so far, which is still too many comets in our solar system, even if it is supposedly 4.6 billions of years old.

Day 4Comets have very elliptical or stretched orbits, unlike the circular orbits of planets. A comet’s orbit can be changed due to collisions with other objects or even just having a close encounter with a massive planet, like Jupiter. When a comet comes close to these planets, it can be sling-shot around (possibly toward or around the sun) due to the gravity of the planet and it also melts partially as it goes around the sun.

After a certain number of trips, the comets completely burn up and cease to exist. Creation Astronomer, Jason Lisle, estimates that “Comets can orbit the sun for only so long (perhaps about 100,000 years at most) before they completely run out of material.”[i]

Comets often orbit at long distances from the sun, but “if a comet’s orbit takes it too far from the Sun, then the comet could easily be captured by the gravitational attraction of other stars and thus would be lost to the Solar System.” This estimation of the maximum distance from the sun then tells us that comets must orbit around the sun within 11 million years. That means that in the supposed 4.6 billion year history of our solar system, they would have done nearly 400 trips around the sun, more than enough trips to have melted away completely.

Comets can be burned up, thrown out, or even consumed immediately by crashing into the sun or another planet. Evidence of these collisions are the craters that can be seen on some of our moons and planets. Objects (comets) in outer space will not last indefinitely.

Even one of the most famous comets, Halley’s Comet, was bigger and brighter in the past. It is estimated to be only a few thousand years old and may only withstand trips for the next 40,000 years.[ii]

If the Kuiper Belt does exist, as some evidence may suggest, it would provide some answers for short-period comets, but it still can’t explain everything. Creation Astronomer Spike Psarris says that, “Unfortunately for evolution, recent discoveries have shown the Kuiper Belt model doesn’t work any better than the Oort Cloud did.” He also explains how comets had “silicates that the evolutionary model says CAN’T have been out there where comets were supposedly born.”[iii] Naturalistic explanations for the origin of today’s comets are still riddled with problems and questions.

In fact, the Oort cloud cannot be observed and may never be observed. A popular secular astronomer, Carl Sagan and his wife Ann Druyan, wrote that, “Many scientific papers are written each year about the Oort Cloud, its properties, its origin, its evolution. Yet there is not yet a shred of direct observational evidence for its existence.”[iv] So we must ask the question: Is it scientific? It has to exist to make sense of the long age of the solar system and the existence of long-period comets. Studies have shown that over the supposed 4.6 billion years, many forces should have dissipated the Oort Cloud and so again, it shouldn’t be there.

Referencing our solar system, cosmologist Hal Levison says that “the standard model can’t produce anywhere near the number of comets we see.”[v] Therefore, naturalists are forced to assume that maybe comets came from other solar systems and have been captured by our sun and now orbit around our solar system. This model is challenged by the fact that the chances are extremely slim to actually capture these objects into orbit around our sun. It is more likely that the sun would either sling comets out and away or actually pull them into itself. To cause an object to come into a stable, precise orbit, necessitates a complex amount of forces being applied on the object.[vi]

Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/UMD

Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/UMD

Comet Hartley 2 is particularly intriguing in that it is still spewing out carbon dioxide from one of its sides as it spins through its orbit of the sun. It is a mystery how it formed, why it is spinning the way it is, and why it still has carbon dioxide. It appears to be quite young and further challenges the long-age naturalistic explanations.[vii]

There have been objects found orbiting beyond the orbit of Neptune, which would be in the region of the Kuiper Belt, but those objects are much larger than what a comet’s size should be. Also,  if the Kuiper Belt model is correct, there should be “around a billion icy cores” out there that have yet to be observed.[viii] This is similar to the idea of transitional fossils of geology/biology; there are still not enough found to justify their models.

 

What the Bible Says: Gen 1:14-19 

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] Dr. Jason Lisle, The New Answers Book 2, Chapter 9: Does the Bible Say Anything about Astronomy, March 4, 2010, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab2/bible-say-anything-astronomy, accessed January 20, 2014.

[ii] Danny Faulkner, “Comets and the Age of the Solar System,” December 1, 1997, Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/tj/v11/n3/comets, accessed January 20, 2014.

Chaisson, Eric and Steve McMillan. 1993. Astronomy Today Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, p. 339.

[iii] Spike Psarris, What You Aren’t Being Told About Astronomy, Vol II Our Created Stars and Galaxies, Creation Astronomy Media, DVD, 2012.

[iv] Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan, Comets, Random House, New York, 1985, p 201.

[v] Coulter, Dauna, The Sun Steals Comets From Other Stars, November 23, 2010, NASA Science: Science News, http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2010/23nov_aliencomets/, accessed January 22, 2014.

[vi] Brian Thomas, M.S., New Comet Origins Idea Adds New Problems, December 9, 2010, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/new-comet-origins/, accessed January 22, 2014.

[vii] Thomas, Brian, M.S., Young Comet Challenges Solar System Formation Theory, June 28, 2011, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/6217/, accessed January 22, 2014.

[viii] Newton, Robert, Kuiper Belt Objects: solution to short-period comets?, Journal of Creation 16 (2): 15-17 August 2002, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/kuiper-belt-objects-solution-to-short-period-comets, accessed January 22, 2014.

Comets – Naturalistic/Evolutionary Perspective

 

Introduction:

CometComets are dirty snowballs composed of rock, frozen gas and ice that can be the size of a small town. Comets orbit the sun and when they get close enough, they begin to heat up, melt, and lose dust and gases which then form a tail. These tails can stretch out for millions of miles.[i] Astronomers are constantly finding new comets each year. How large can they get? How long do they last? Where do they come from? Can comets tell us something about the age and history of our solar system?

Naturalistic/Evolutionary Answer:

Comets are the building blocks for life because they contain dirt, frozen gas and ice just like the earth. They are leftovers from the formation of the planets and now originate from the Kuiper Belt or Oort cloud.[ii]

The Kuiper belt was theorized by Gerard Kuiper and states that there is a ring of comets that orbit around the sun past Neptune. These comets are pushed, or sent, inward due to gravity and collisions.  These are called short-period comets, because they orbit the sun approximately every 200 years or less. Theoretically, there is an abundance of comets in the Kuiper belt just waiting to be sent in toward the center of the solar system or already making their trek around the sun. Therefore, these comets typically orbit along the same plane or disk as the rest of the planets, as we would expect from the naturalistic history of our solar system.[iii]

The search for Kuiper Belt Objects (KBOs) has been successful and NASA reports that “more than 1,300 KBOs have been identified since 1992.” NASA also reports that the Kuiper Belt is “probably populated with hundreds of thousands of icy bodies larger than 100 km (62 miles) across and an estimated trillion or more comets,” and “the Oort Cloud probably contains 0.1 to 2 trillion icy bodies in solar orbit.”[iv]

Halley-computerized-colorThe Oort Cloud is the large spherical area around our sun that can extend 100,000 times the distance from the sun to the earth, as theoretically developed by astronomer Jan Oort. In this vast amount of space there are billions of these comets, or other objects, that have very unpredictable orbits around the sun and can take up to 30 million years to complete one trip. They are consequently called long-period comets and are often so far away that they cannot be viewed from Earth. Some of these comets do not orbit in the same plane as the planets and some even go in a retrograde motion, or moving backwards, compared to the way the planets circle the sun. These differences in orbits are probably due to collisions and other forces.[v]

It has been suggested that the interactions between the Kuiper belt and the Oort cloud causes both short-period and long-period comets and thus solves the challenges with the origin of new, young comets.[vi]

Check back tomorrow for the Creation Answer.  Thanks again for your constructive help.

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Is the above correct? Do you evolutionists agree with this position? I have tried to write it as you believe it. Do you have any disagreements or concerns or additions?

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] Charles Q. Choi, “Comets: Formation, Discovery and Exploration,” November 15, 2010, SPACE.com, http://www.space.com/53-comets-formation-discovery-and-exploration.html, accessed January 20, 2014.

[ii] NASA, “Comets: Overview, 10 Need-to-Know Things About Comets,” http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Comets, accessed January 20, 2014.

[iii] NASA, “Comets: Read More,” http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Comets&Display=OverviewLong, accessed January 20, 2014.

[iv] NASA, Kuiper Belt & Oort Cloud: Read More, http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=KBOs&Display=OverviewLong, accessed January 22, 2014.

[v] NASA, “Comets: Read More,” http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/planets/profile.cfm?Object=Comets&Display=OverviewLong, accessed January 20, 2014.

[vi] Danny Faulkner, “Comets and the Age of the Solar System,” December 1, 1997, Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/tj/v11/n3/comets, accessed January 20, 2014.

Ocean Sediments and Salts: What do they really tell us? Creation Perspective

 

Creation Answer:

salt-in-oceans-no-words“Every year water and wind erode about 20 billion tons of dirt and rock debris from the continents and deposit them on the seafloor,” so “the seafloor should be choked with sediment many miles deep.” On average, there is only about 1,300 feet of sediment, which is not even close to a mile deep. Sediment is known to be lost due to tectonic plate activity, but with everything taken into account, that 1,300 feet of sediment would take 12 million years to form and that’s it. However, that doesn’t cause a problem for us, because the global flood would have caused a lot of sediment to build up initially. Over about 3 billion years, there would be “250x more sediment than we see today.” This is a huge difference.

The argument that the sediments may not have accumulated that fast in the past still has other problems. The shape of the sediments off the coast is evidence of sediments being rushed off the continents quickly and not by a very slow process. The underwater landscape would look totally different if it had formed slowly over billions of years.

Ultimately, as erosion rates go, the continents would erode “into the ocean in about 14 million years.”[i] So how do we still even have continents, if the Earth has been changing for supposedly millions and billions of years?[ii]

Salt-In-OceansPart of the sediments eroding into the water is salt, which is dissolved into sea water and thus giving the oceans a salty taste. So over time, as more erosion occurs, the oceans get saltier. “After 3 billion years, we would expect to see 70x more salt in the ocean than we see today.” 122 million tons of sodium are removed from the oceans each year, but this is not much compared to the 458 million tons that are added in that same time. Current salt levels would have only taken 42 million years to add up.

Again, to uphold an old earth point of view, one would have to claim that the rates of change were a lot different throughout history.[iii]

From an old earth point of view, these sediments and salts would be devastating to the evolution of ocean and land organisms. If the waters had too much sediment or salt, they would not be very suitable for life.

Evolutionists have to make large, extensive assumptions about the history of the Earth, whereas one assumption (accredited by God and history) that there was a massive worldwide flood over a short Earth history is a much simpler solution.

 

What the Bible Says: Creation – Genesis 1, The Flood – Gen 7-9

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] Morris, J. D. 1994. The Young Earth. Master Books. pp. 88-90.

Stewart E. Nevins, M.S., Evolution: The Ocrean says NO!, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/56/, accessed October 11, 2013.

[ii] A Pocket Guide to…Best Evidences: Science and the Bible refute millions of years, Answers in Genesis – US, 2013.

Andrew Snelling, #1 Very Little Sediment on the Seafloor: 10 Best Evidences From Science That Confirm a Young Earth, September 11, 2012, Answers in Genesis – US, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v7/n4/little-sediment, accessed October 11, 2013.

Stewart E. Nevins, M.S., Evolution: The Ocrean says NO!, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/56/, accessed October 11, 2013.

[iii] A Pocket Guide to…Best Evidences: Science and the Bible refute millions of years, Answers in Genesis – US, 2013.

Andrew Snelling, #1 Very Little Salt in the Sea: 10 Best Evidences From Science That Confirm a Young Earth, September 11, 2012, Answers in Genesis – US, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v7/n4/sea-salt, accessed October 11, 2013.

Stewart E. Nevins, M.S., Evolution: The Ocrean says NO!, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/56/, accessed October 11, 2013.

Ocean Sediments and Salts: What do they really tell us? Naturalistic/Evolutionary Perspective

 

Introduction:

The ocean is salty and full of sediments. How salty is the ocean? How much sediment is in the oceans? Is this evidence that the earth is only thousands and not millions of years old? Why is the ocean salty? Does the saltiness of the ocean fluctuate?

Naturalistic/Evolutionary Answer:

There is not as much sediments in the ocean, as some expect, because seafloor sediments have accumulated at a much slower rate in the past and high levels of tectonic activity would rid the oceans of much of the sediments that had been deposited.[i]

The slower rate of sediment accumulation in the past may be in part due to increased desertification and human influence on the land, like so much deforestation, loss of vegetative cover, and simply hard use of the land. Live Science reports that “human activity causes 10 times more soil erosion than all natural processes combined.”[ii]

Continental DriftSome sediment has subducted into the crust of the earth due to the movement of tectonic plates. Sea floor spreading is the process of the sea floor moving like a conveyor belt with new rock churning up from below and sediments on the ocean floor funneled back into the earth under ocean trenches.[iii]

Oceans have also been in different places in the past and so as continents uplift, submerge, or change over time, the oceans are not constantly stacking up sediment in one place. Ocean floor can uplift and again become landmasses.[iv]

How salty is the ocean? “Some scientists estimate that the oceans contain as much as 50 quadrillion tons (50 million billion tons) of dissolved solids. If the salt in the sea could be removed and spread evenly over the Earth’s land surface it would form a layer more than 500 feet thick .”[v]

The oceans are salty because of the sediments and salts that are constantly washed out into the sea from off of the continents. The oceans are not too salty because today they “probably have a balanced salt input and outgo” because “about the same tonnage of salt from the ocean water probably is deposited as sediment on the ocean bottom.”[vi]

The extensive size of the oceans (about 70% of the Earth’s surface) create challenges in truly understanding everything about the oceans. “The salinity of ocean water varies. It is affected by such factors as the melting of ice, inflow of river water, evaporation, rain, snowfall, wind, wave motion, and ocean currents that cause horizontal and vertical mixing of the saltwater.” It is also possible that “sea life has a strong influence on the composition of sea water.”[vii]

“At least 72 chemical elements have been identified in sea water,” with some more abundant in certain places. Europe, for instance, contributes more salt to the ocean than Australia. In chemistry, when certain chemicals come together, they become insoluble (not dissolvable in water). So those solid salts will gradually fall to the ocean floor.[viii]

Ultimately, there are so many things going on with…the ocean, that there may be many other factors that affect the sediment and salt content of the ocean. Rates and estimations are approximated and so one has to be careful in evaluating, extrapolating, and making conclusions about the age of the ocean.[ix]

Check back tomorrow for the Creation Answer.  Thanks again for your constructive help.

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Is the above correct? Do you evolutionists agree with this position? I have tried to write it as you believe it. Do you have any disagreements or concerns or additions?

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.

 


[i] A Pocket Guide to…Best Evidences: Science and the Bible refute millions of years, Answers in Genesis – US, 2013.

Stewart E. Nevins, M.S., Evolution: The Ocrean says NO!, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/56/, accessed October 11, 2013.

[ii] Earth Movers: Humans Cause Most Erosion, November 3, 2004, LiveScience Staff, LiveScience, http://www.livescience.com/63-earth-movers-humans-erosion.html, accessed October 11, 2013.

[iii] A Pocket Guide to…Best Evidences: Science and the Bible refute millions of years, Answers in Genesis – US, 2013.

Stewart E. Nevins, M.S., Evolution: The Ocrean says NO!, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/56/, accessed October 11, 2013.

[iv] Stewart E. Nevins, M.S., Evolution: The Ocrean says NO!, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/56/, accessed October 11, 2013.

[v] Herbert Swenson, Why is the Ocean Salty? US Geological Survey Publication, http://www.palomar.edu/oceanography/salty_ocean.htm, accessed October 11, 2013.

[vi] Herbert Swenson, Why is the Ocean Salty? US Geological Survey Publication, http://www.palomar.edu/oceanography/salty_ocean.htm, accessed October 11, 2013.

[vii] Herbert Swenson, Why is the Ocean Salty? US Geological Survey Publication, http://www.palomar.edu/oceanography/salty_ocean.htm, accessed October 11, 2013.

[viii] Herbert Swenson, Why is the Ocean Salty? US Geological Survey Publication, http://www.palomar.edu/oceanography/salty_ocean.htm, accessed October 11, 2013.

[ix] Matthew S. Tiscareno, Is There Really Scientific Evidence for a Young Earth?, 1999-2000, http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/~matthewt/yeclaimsbeta.html, accessed October 11, 2013.

Similar Worldwide Rock Layers: What do they really tell us? Creation Perspective

 

Creation Answer:

FoldedMountains“Evolutionists and creationists agree: the ideal conditions for forming most fossils and fossil-bearing rock layers are flood conditions. The debate is just whether it was many “little floods” over a long time, or mostly the one big Flood of Noah’s time.”[i]

Go out and find a piece of concrete and try bending it. This is one of the problems for old rock layers all over the world, in that hardened rock will crack and break when pushed or pulled. But we see smoothly bent rock layers all over the world.[ii]

This could be done if the layers (millions of years worth) were soft at the same time or if the layers were under extreme heat and pressure; their shape could deform without breaking. The problem with the latter view is that the pressure and temperature would have metamorphosized and changed the rock, but these examples of bent layers are still sedimentary rock layers. The best explanation is that they were still soft after being laid down and then uplifted and bent at nearly the same time. This is a massive geological event consistent with a global flood.[iii]

Rock layers are different from each other based on their composition, temperature, and how fast or slow their flood current is. In some layers, you have very fine grains of sediments and in other layers, there large boulders as big as cars, which means that a fast current would have had to carry those huge boulders. From their view, evolutionists can’t explain these boulders.

As different currents are swirling during the time of the flood, you would have different layers (think of them like pancakes) formed even in different places (offset pancakes). This is why there are often missing layers in one region but are in order in a different region.

 

Tapeats Sandstone Map

Tapeats Sandstone Map

Ph.D. Geologist Steven A. Austin says that “Every continent contains layers of sedimentary rocks that span vast areas. Many of these layers can even be traced across continents.” There are “six megasequences (very thick, distinctive sequences of sedimentary rock layers) that can be traced right across North America.”[iv] Some of these sequences include layers like the Tapeats Sandstone that covers most of North America and even beyond, and chalk beds that stretch across a large part of Europe and into the Middle East, and the Coal Bed that stretches through much of North America as well.[v]

PolystrateTree

PolystrateTree

Other evidences that point to a global flood are the rapidly buried fossils (some even “misplaced” or “out of place” fossils with reference to the evolutionary timeline[vi]), jumbled-up mass fossil beds, sea creature fossils high above sea level, rapid or no erosion between strata, sediments in rock layers that have been transported long distances, and layers that appear to be laid down in rapid succession (polystrate fossils lie vertical through “millions of years” of deposition).[vii] The global flood would have been perfect conditions for making these rock layers.

 

polystrate-tree-cartoonWhat the Bible Says: Genesis 6-7

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.

 


[i] Dr. Gary Parker, Creation: Facts of Life, How Fast?, January 1, 1994, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cfl/how-fast, accessed October 10, 2013.

[ii] A Pocket Guide to…Best Evidences: Science and the Bible refute millions of years, Answers in Genesis – US, 2013.

[iii] A Pocket Guide to…Best Evidences: Science and the Bible refute millions of years, Answers in Genesis – US, 2013.

[iv] Andrew A. Snelling, Ph.D., Transcontinental Rock Layers: Flood Evidence Number Three, May 7, 2008, Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n3/transcontinental-rock-layers#fnList_1_1, accessed October 10, 2013.

L. L. Sloss, “Sequences in the Cratonic Interior of North America,” Geological Society of America Bulletin 74 (1963): 93–114.

[v] Andrew A. Snelling, Ph.D., Transcontinental Rock Layers: Flood Evidence Number Three, May 7, 2008, Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n3/transcontinental-rock-layers#fnList_1_1, accessed October 10, 2013.

[vi] Dr. Gary Parker, Creation: Facts of Life, How Fast?, January 1, 1994, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cfl/how-fast, accessed October 10, 2013.

[vii] Andrew A. Snelling, Ph.D., Geologic Evidences for the Genesis Flood: Part 1: An Overview, September 18, 2007, Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n4/geologic-evidences-part-one, accessed October 10, 2013.

CEM Research and Polystrate Fossils, Creation Evidence Museum of Texas, http://www.creationevidence.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=49, accessed October 10, 2013.

Similar Worldwide Rock Layers: What do they really tell us? Naturalistic/Evolutionary Perspective

 

Introduction:

Rock layers are levels of sediment that build up over time. They look like bands and they usually run horizontally, but can sometimes be slanted or vertical due to its compaction and formation being on an angle like sand dunes or due to seismic activity. In rock layers, fossils can be found giving evidence of the past. How did the rock layers really form? How fast did they form? How many rock layers are there? How do the rock layers compare all over the world? What causes their deformation?

geologic-column

Naturalistic/Evolutionary Answer:

Rock layers are formed by many seasonal flood deposits, by volcanic deposition, and by sediment deposition, especially at the bottom of lakes or large ancient seas. Volcanic material and/or sediments build up and cover the earth and rock layers are created by wind or by water when enough sediments are built up creating pressure on lower layers.[i]  A rock layer will cover dead and living animals and plants.

The amount of lime or cementing agent is used in the sediment mixture will determine how long it will take to turn into rock. If there is a lot of lime it may take only a few years, if there is little to none, then pressure and hot water have to pack the sediment into rock and that might take “many thousands of years.” This is part of why different rocks have a higher or lower hardness.[ii] Volcanic rocks could form within minutes.

The age of the fossil can be determined by its depth below the surface, the deeper the fossil, the older the age.  Older rock layers have simpler, less evolved organisms than higher, younger rock layers.[iii] This is not “an abstract diagram: this is the actual record of the earth’s crust, recorded in rocks around the world…Since fossils progress from fish at the bottom to humans at the top, we have clear evidence that life evolved through time.”[iv]

Occasionally in the fossil layers, there are unconformities where there are missing layers in one region. Those missing layers may not have formed in that area at that time or they did form, but were consequently eroded away.[v]

Check back tomorrow for the Creation Answer.  Thanks again for your constructive help.

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Is the above correct? Do you evolutionists agree with this position? I have tried to write it as you believe it. Do you have any disagreements or concerns or additions?

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.

 


[i] Shlomiya Bar-Yam, Fossil Layers, New England Complex Systems Institute, http://www.necsi.edu/projects/evolution/evidence/layers/evidence_layers.html, accessed October 10, 2013.

[ii] Bob Avakian, Time to Form Sedimentary Rocks, February 2009, Newton: Ask a Scientist, U.S. Department of Energy Office of Science, http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/askasci/env99/env99396.htm, accessed October 10, 2013.

[iii] Rock Layers: Timeline of Life on Earth, Prehistoric Planet, PaleoClones, LLC, http://www.prehistoricplanet.com/news/index.php?id=48, accessed October 10, 2013.

[iv] Rock Layers: Timeline of Life on Earth, Prehistoric Planet, PaleoClones, LLC, http://www.prehistoricplanet.com/news/index.php?id=48, accessed October 10, 2013.

[v] David J. Leveson, Relative Age: Determining Relative Age From The Rock Record, 2006, http://academic.brooklyn.cuny.edu/geology/leveson/core/topics/time/froshlec8.html, accessed October 10, 2013.

Index Fossils: How old are they? Creation Perspective

 

Creation Answer:

“The order of the fossil record can best be explained by hydrological sorting during Noah’s flood.[i]  Currents direct the different sediment types to where they will be laid down. Animals often move in herds, flocks, or groups and thus you will find similar organisms with similar organisms.

Some animals could run and climb from tidal waves for longer or fly for longer before being submerged by the catastrophic flood. Because of these abilities, we see evidence for the order in the fossil record.

Coelacanth

Coelacanth

Index fossils are not only found deep in sediment, but some have been found still living to this day. An example of a living index fossil is the Coelacanth. This is a fish that is found in 70 million year old rocks. This fish was thought to have gone into extinction at that time and so we can date other things to about 70 million years ago, but now they are found in the Indian Ocean. So now we can’t be sure if an organism next to a Coelacanth is 70 million years old or 10 million years old or 10 years old.

Other living fossils include: the gingko tree, graptolites (300 million years old), “the tuatara (supposedly extinct since the Cretaceous Period until found still living in New Zealand), the Lepidocaris crustacean (only found as fossils in Devonian rocks), the Metasequoia conifer tree (thought extinct for the past 20 million years), the Neopilina mollusk (supposedly extinct for 280 million years), the lingula brachiopod (“extinct” since the Ordovician), and even the trilobite (chief index fossil of the even more ancient Cambrian Period).” Algae that is supposedly in 3.4 billion year old rocks still exist today…are those rocks really 3.4 billion years old?

Search “living fossil” on the internet and the list goes on and on for more examples. There is simply abundant evidence that living organisms today are practically identical to fossilized grandparents of “millions of years ago” if not “billions of years ago.” This is evidence that no evolution has taken place in those organisms.[ii]

Index fossils are the primary method of dating something. Often there are huge inconsistencies between dating based on rock layer and index fossils as compared to radiometric dating methods.[iii]

fossil-dragonfly-&-contemporary

Fossil dragonfly with contemporary dragonfly

Scientists study fossils (including index fossils) and claim that evolution happens from one fossil to another, but currently there is much confusion over what a “species” actually is. A snail with a different color or shape to its shell could be a totally different species. This is simply variety within the snail kind, but not evidence of evolution. They still have the same DNA which allows that variety.

This leads to another question, “are the index fossils a reliable way to date rock layers over billions of years of history if scientists can’t agree on the classification of living creatures today?”[iv]

Ph.D. geologist Steven A. Austin, also describes how index fossils often have a large range of layers where they can be found and that the geologic record has many inconsistencies, with fossils and rocks in places that they shouldn’t be.[v] There are many examples that “as more and more fossils are found, the ranges of fossils keep increasing.”[vi] So those fossils are less of a pinpoint to how old something is. Austin explains how the geologic record is not as cut and dry and simple as evolution would assume by saying “strata systems are believed in some places to be inverted, repeated, or inserted where they do not belong.”[vii]

The jumbled and ordered nature of the rock layers and fossils, alongside of the fact of many missing transitional fossils, provide better evidence of a massive global flood rather than the slow build up of layers over millions of years.

 

What the Bible Says: Genesis 6:17, Genesis 7-9

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] John C. Whitcomb and Hemry M. Morris, The Genesis Flood: The Biblical Record and Its Scientific Implications, P & R Publishing, October 20, 1982.

[ii] Henry Morris, Ph.D., The Profusion of Living Fossils, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/774/, accessed October 8, 2013.

[iii] Roger Patterson, Evolution Exposed: Earth Science, Chapter 6: Geologic Column, January 20, 2011, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee2/geologic-column, accessed October 8, 2013.

Andrew Snelling, Geological Conflict: Young Radiocarbon Date for Ancient Fossil Wood Challenges Fossil Dating, March 1, 2000, Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v22/n2/geology, accessed October 8, 2013.

[iv] Roger Patterson, Evolution Exposed: Earth Science, Chapter 6: Geologic Column, January 20, 2011, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee2/geologic-column, accessed October 8, 2013.

[v] Dr. Gary Parker, Creation: Facts of Life, How Fast?, January 1, 1994, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cfl/how-fast, accessed October 10, 2013.

[vi] John Woodmorappe, The fossil record: Becoming more random all the time, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/the-fossil-record, accessed October 8, 2013.

[vii] Steven A. Austin, Ph.D., Ten Misconceptions about the Geologic Column, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/242/107/, accessed October 8, 2013.

 

Index Fossils: How old are they? Naturalistic/Evolutionary Perspective

 

Introduction:

An index fossils is a common, widely distributed fossil that is typically found in the same geologic layers or range.[i] It can then be used to give a relative age of rock layers and other fossils since they know what layer it usually comes from and therefore how old it is.

Index fossils are mainly found in sedimentary rock. How old are they? Can we trust their estimated ages? Are they consistently found in the same place? Are index fossils being found alive today?

 

Naturalistic/Evolutionary Answer:

trilo-daves-vbs“Often, the layers of rock can be dated by the types of fossils they contain… Scientists have determined the relative times of appearance and disappearance of many kinds of organisms from the location of their fossils within the sedimentary rock layers.”[ii]

The fossils preserved in the fossil record show the history and evolution of organisms throughout time. “The stretch of geologic history is commonly referred to as “deep time.”” By charting the geologic layers and their fossils, we can understand the history of the earth better and the process of evolution better. The oldest rock is estimated at over 4 billion years old and the oldest fossils being about 3.5 billion years old. The history of life can be charted from evidence in the fossil record as follows: little bacteria to algae to soft bodied organisms to an explosion of life called the Cambrian explosion to land plants and fishes to amphibians to reptiles to mammals and birds to finally everything that exists today including humans.[iii]

 

Common index fossils include shelled organisms like Ammonites, brachiopods, graptolites, corals, nanofossils (microscopic fossils), trilobites, mollusks and more.[iv]

 

Check back tomorrow for the Creation Answer.  Thanks again for your constructive help.

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Is the above correct? Do you evolutionists agree with this position? I have tried to write it as you believe it. Do you have any disagreements or concerns or additions?

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] Index Fossils, Enchanted Learning, http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/dinosaurs/glossary/IndexFossils.shtml, accessed October 8, 2013.

[ii] Dating Rock Layers, Genesis Park, http://www.genesispark.com/exhibits/fossils/dating/, accessed October 8, 2013. Quoting Glencoe, Biology Textbook, 1994, pp. 306-307.

[iii] Deep Time, PBS, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/change/deeptime/, accessed October 8, 2013.

[iv] Roger Patterson, Evolution Exposed: Earth Science, Chapter 6: Geologic Column, January 20, 2011, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee2/geologic-column, accessed October 8, 2013.

Index Fossils, Enchanted Learning, http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/dinosaurs/glossary/IndexFossils.shtml, accessed October 8, 2013.

Missing Links: Will we find them…or not? Creation Perspective

 

Creation Answer:

Piltdown Man

Piltdown Man

Evolution assumes that every organism has evolved and so ultimately the burden of proof should be on them to show the transitions of every type of organism. It is okay to hypothesize that there are transitional forms in the fossil record, but at a certain point, if evidence is not found, the hypothesis should be discarded.

There is little to no evidence for the transitions of: giraffes, elephants, the platypus, dinosaurs, Precambrian to Cambrian, Invertebrate to Vertebrae, Fish to Amphibian, Amphibian to Reptile, and Reptile to Birds and Mammals.[i] I grant that every once in a while, a new fossil comes out that supposedly links organisms together, but with the amount of organisms alive today, there should be more transitional fossils than the number of fossils already found.[ii]

Evolution is a process of slow change, and so there should be a lot of transitions. Evolutionists solve this by resorting to “punctuated equilibrium,” meaning that evolution happened rapidly and therefore the conditions weren’t right to fossilize the transitions during that time. The lack of evidence (fossils) is their evidence for this hypothesis.

The evidence of transitions has often consisted of hoaxes or misunderstood fossils before they could be properly identified, such as: Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Java Man, Pakicetus, Ida, and Archaeoraptor. [iii]

Archaeopteryx

Archaeopteryx Fossil

Even Tiktaalik and Archaeopteryx are highly debated as links. There are 4-footed land animal footprints 18 million years before Tiktaalik, which would show that Tiktaalik wasn’t the first link to land dwelling animals.[iv] And there have been fully formed birds found before Archaeopteryx, so Archaeopteryx wasn’t the link between dinosaur and bird. Some even say that Archaeopteryx is simply just a bird with no evidence of being part dinosaur.[v] Many even debate if Australopithecus afarensis is a human ancestor.[vi]

“The renowned evolutionist Stephen Jay Gould wrote:

The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed our inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution.”[vii]

Here is an interesting quote from Johnjoe McFadden, an evolutionist and professor of Molecular Genetics:

“Most species, including most horses, appear abruptly in the fossil record, change very little over their entire history and then disappear just as unceremoniously. This pattern is well known to paleontologists who have actually attributed it to the imperfection of the fossil record: the missing links between one species and another have all died without the decency to leave their remains as fossils.”[viii]

Ph.D. creation researcher Jonathan Sarfati continues this thought in saying that “All 32 mammal orders appear abruptly and fully formed in the fossil record.”[ix]

Transitional organisms may not be as well suited for their environment. For example, “If a bat or bird evolved from a land animal, the transitional forms would have forelimbs that were neither good legs nor good wings. So how would such things be selected?”[x]

God designed everything in the beginning, as they still are today. There is fossil evidence that living organisms have changed very little or not at all in supposed millions of years. There are small changes, but only within kinds as is already allowed for in their DNA.

 

What the Bible Says: Creation – Gen 1 (“after their kind”), Flood – Gen. 7-9

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] Wolf-Ekkehard Lönnig, The Evolution of the Long-Necked Giraffe, last updated October 19, 2010, http://www.weloennig.de/Giraffe.pdf, accessed October 8, 2013.

Elephant Evolution, http://www.himandus.net/elefunteria/library/science+nature/evolution.html, accessed October 8, 2013.

Paula Weston, The Platypus: Still More Questions Than Answers for Evolutionists, March 1, 2002, Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v24/n2/platypus, accessed October 8, 2013.

Dinosaurs: Phylogenetic Chart, July 2, 1998, Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/1998/07/02/phylogenetic-chart, accessed October 8, 2013.

Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D., F.M., Refuting Evolution, August 23, 2008, Creation Book Publishers, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-3-the-links-are-missing, accessed October 8, 2013.

[ii] John D. Morris, Ph.D., What’s a Missing Link?, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/2709/, accessed October 7, 2013.

[iii] Archaeoraptor hoax update – National Geographiic recants!, March 2, 2000, http://creation.com/archaeoraptor-hoax-updatenational-geographic-recants, accessed October 8, 2013.

Carl Wieland, The evolutionary parade of ‘missing links’: The floats keep changing!, May 29, 2012, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/missing-links-parade, accessed October 8, 2013.

Don Batten, Darwin fossil hyper-hype, May 23, 2009, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/darwin-fossil-ida-hype, accessed October 8, 2013.

[iv] Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D., F.M., Tiktaalik roseae – a fishy ‘missing link’, April 15, 2006, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/tiktaalik-roseae-a-fishy-missing-link, accessed October 8, 2013.

Carl Wieland, The evolutionary parade of ‘missing links’: The floats keep changing!, May 29, 2012, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/missing-links-parade, accessed October 8, 2013.

[v] Gary Bates, That quote! – about the missing transitional fossils: Embarrassed evolutionists try to ‘muddy the waters’, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/That-quotemdashabout-the-missing-transitional-fossils, October 8, 2013.

[vi] “Lucy” isn’t the “Missing Link!”, June 1, 1990, Answers in Genesis, http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v12/n3/lucy, accessed October 8, 2013.

[vii] Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D., F.M., Refuting Evolution, August 23, 2008, Creation Book Publishers, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-3-the-links-are-missing, accessed October 8, 2013.

[viii] Johnjoe McFadden (Professor of Molecular Biology and Quantum Physics), Quantum Evolution, 2000, p. 71.

[ix] Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D., F.M., Refuting Evolution, August 23, 2008, Creation Book Publishers, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-3-the-links-are-missing, accessed October 8, 2013.

[x] Jonathan Sarfati, Ph.D., F.M., Refuting Evolution, August 23, 2008, Creation Book Publishers, Creation Ministries International, http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-3-the-links-are-missing, accessed October 8, 2013.

Missing Links: Will we find them…or not? Naturalistic/Evolutionary Perspective

 

ape-to-man-progression-(ours)Introduction:

Missing Links are the hypothetical intermediates between two differing types of organisms, like between humans and apes. They are termed “Missing” because they are…missing. “There are missing links all over the evolutionary tree”[i] between different kinds of organisms. How many missing links are there?  Are they still missing? Why are they missing?

 

Naturalistic/Evolutionary Answer:

“There are many transitional fossils.”[ii]

Darwin’s tree of life explains how all current organisms are related to each other. Undiscovered transitional forms (Missing links) are the bridges or branches backward in time. Species evolve over time and branch out evolving into different species. So there should be a lot of transitional forms. Practically speaking, every fossil that we are lucky enough to find is a transitional fossil as organisms evolve from a previous ancestor into new species.

The number of transitional fossils is unknown. There are many factors as to why all of them have not been found. Fossilization only happens when the conditions are just right, so it is pretty rare. So fossils are pretty rare. Only a small portion of organisms even fossilize. Most fossils are shells, but the larger organisms are even more rare. [iii]

Also, only a small fraction of the available fossils have been found due to the incompleteness of the fossil record, the amount of rock to look through, and the small amount of scientists actually looking and digging for fossils. Erosion, the movement of the rocks, and non-scientific digging endeavors can cause many fossils to be destroyed and lost forever.

Homo-habilis-skullIt is even possible that as ancient environments changed, the ancient organisms tended to change or evolve rapidly to survive. The change happened so rapidly that fossils are just not preserved, since again, conditions in the environment were not right for fossilization and therefore preserve the organism.

More links between different animal kinds are expected to be found. Just because they have not been found yet, doesn’t mean that they are not in the fossil record.

Every year, we are finding more and more fossils. In recent years, there have been many specific transitional fossils that have been found and here are five examples among others that could be named.

 

Fish to Amphibian Link:  Tiktaalik Rosae

Reptile to Mammal Link:  Thrinaxodon

Reptile to Bird Link:  Archaeopteryx

Land Mammal to Aquatic Mammal Link:  Ambulocetus natans

Quadrupedal Primate to Bipedal Primate Link:  Australopithecus afarensis[iv]

 

Check back tomorrow for the Creation Answer.  Thanks again for your constructive help.

 

by Brian Mariani and others

 

Is the above correct? Do you evolutionists agree with this position? I have tried to write it as you believe it. Do you have any disagreements or concerns or additions?

 

Before commenting, please read the following disclosures.

Any offensive language will automatically disqualify your comment for publication, even if the arguments contained are good. Please comment on the ideas that are presented and not the presenter.  If your comment becomes an ad hominem argument and does not substantially address the issue, your comment will be disqualified as well.  We are looking for real arguments, not fallacious ones, so that we can present and challenge opposing ideas and arguments as they are truly believed by evolutionists.  We do not want to tear down straw men as well as you do not want to be misrepresented. Also, please keep your comments as brief as possible, and if the majority of the comment does not address the current issue, but becomes a red-herring, it will not be posted as well. If your comment does not fall into one of the above restrictions, then your comment will be posted unedited (you may want to check your spelling, grammar, etc.) We thank you for your time and comments.

One thing to keep in mind, each blog is one piece of evidence. Evidence has to then be interpreted, which is not a fact…but evidence strengthening or weakening a specific hypothesis or theory. So there can be multiple ways of interpreting the same evidence. I am not being unscientific, but asking more questions and being skeptical is being more scientific. I am still working on these, so please help with your comments.

 

If you would like to see if an AOI seminar is right for you, or you would like to help the work of Alpha Omega Institute, please visit our website events page or our donate page. Keep up to date with what AOI is doing.  Thanks for your partnership.



[i] John D. Morris, Ph.D., What’s a Missing Link?, Institute for Creation Research, http://www.icr.org/article/2709/, accessed October 7, 2013.

[ii] Claim CC200, http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CC/CC200.html, Accessed October 5, 2013.

[iii] Prothero, Donald R. (2007). Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why it Matters. Columbia University Press.

[iv] Fossil Evidence, NOVA, PBS, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/tran-nf.html, accessed October 5, 2013.