• On Monday (April, 26) the site will be down for maintanance for around 12 hours, starting at 11:00 pm UTC as we complete the sh.org archive with the missing threads. 1300 new or upgraded threads will be added, and there will be complete reply archives for 2500 threads, adding around 20,000 replies.

GEOLOGIC Column is wrong (part 4)

WorldWar1812

Deleted
Trusted Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2020
Messages
165
Reaction score
401
Location
Spain
Part 1: GEOLOGIC Column is wrong
Part 2: GEOLOGIC Column is wrong
Part 3: GEOLOGIC Column is wrong
Part 5: GEOLOGIC Column is wrong


WHAT DO THE STRATA TELL US? The basic idea of geology is that strata stack one on top of another in a slow process. Geologists believe that this process takes millions of years, as was taught by Charles Lyell. Charles Darwin embraced Lyell’s ideas.
The geological time scale depicting different eras, geological strata, and fossils found in each stratum, was based on the assumption that this slow formation of layers was true, as was the theory of evolution. The geological time scale and its index fossils play an important part in geological dating. [Index fossils: Forms of life which existed during limited periods of geologic time and thus are used as guides to the age of the rocks in which they are preserved.]
But what do strata and the fossils held within them tell us? Evolution theorists believe that development and processes took place over the course of millions of years. We should not believe this because (1) we have evidence that such strata can be quickly formed, and (2) several renowned palaeontologists have admitted that fossil data proves that macroevolution is imaginary. Although no evidence to support it has been found, some people still want to believe that it is a fact.
Some of the conclusions we can make based on what we now know about from strata and fossils are found below.

Deficiency of the strata. One observation one can make about all the strata around the world is that they are defective. The Geologic Time Scale (GTS) describes 12 (or 13) periods (layers). However, rarely do we find even three or four layers.
The Grand Canyon is often used to illustrate the layers/periods of geological time. However, in the Grand Canyon we can find only five of the twelve most important strata (periods) described by the Geological Time Scale. In regards to the Grand Canyon and other places around the world, the geological time scale is meaningless.

Strata in the wrong order. In addition to the number of layers being defective they are often found in the wrong order with old layers on top – even on mountain slopes. The example below, taken from a Finnish geology textbook, describes how old layers (the Triassic era “250–210 million years ago” and the Palaeozoic era “600–250 million years ago”) were found on Alpine slopes. According to the geological time scale, these layers should be found kilometers (miles) below the ground level, but this is not the case. This proves that the geologic time scale rests on a very shaky foundation. The writer describes fossils of marine animals and is using the geological time scale to determine the age of the fossils.

There is reason to look closely at the original nature of the rocks in the mountain ranges. It is best seen in the Alps, in the lime Alps of the northern, so-called Helvetian zone. Limestone is the main rock material. If we were to scale the steep slopes of some mountain or peak – if we had the energy to climb up there – we would find fossilized remains of marine creatures. They are often badly damaged, but it is possible to find recognizable pieces. All those fossils are lime shells or skeletons of sea creatures. Among them are spiral twisted ammonites and many bivalves. (…) The fossils in most strata of the Northern Lime Alps are those that are known to have lived during the early of the middle periods of life, i.e. during the Triassic period. (…) There are also strata older than the Triassic, i.e. Palaeozoic strata in the Alpine mountains. They are mostly beach strata, such as quartzite and pudding rock formed from sandstones. (…) The reader might wonder at this point what it means that mountain ranges hold so many sediments, which can also be found stratified in the bottom of the sea. (26)


One or several catastrophes? When reading literature about evolution, one often encounters the idea of destruction. The authors admit that the Earth has been ravished by a catastrophe or several catastrophes. The quote below is about how people believe the catastrophes took place.

Around 30 million years before the dinosaurs, life on the Earth had almost died out. The facts and numbers of the mass destruction that took place at the end of the Permic period are simply astounding. The extent of destruction makes the catastrophe that eradicated the dinosaurs 185 millions later seem like a tiny ripple in the pond. A total of 95% of all life on Earth was destroyed. Ecosystems were destroyed, and complete species, such as giant frogs and predatory reptiles, disappeared. There were even fewer insects. The devastation was even worse in the sea. Ancient sea lily and coral communities were wiped away, and the trilobites – which had flourished in the oceans of the world for millions of years – were destroyed.

The problem faced by scientists trying to interpret this event is finding out what could have destroyed such a huge quantity of flora and fauna, both on land and in the water. (27)

The best explanation for the devastation described above is that a single event caused all of it. Since scientists interpret everything based on the geological time scale, they believe that the different species lived and were destroyed at different times. However, if the time scale is wrong (as it is), there is no reason to believe that several major catastrophes took place. All the species that were destroyed could have lived simultaneously on earth and thus also be simultaneously destroyed by a catastrophe. This is the most reasonable explanation.
Furthermore, the most reasonable approach is to believe that the catastrophe in question was the Flood. There are plenty of signs about it in nature, but we will not go very deep into it in this writing. Instead, we will only study the subject by considering a few quotes. The first is from the “father of geology”, J. Hutton, who writes in his book about traces of marine fossils in layers of earth:

We have to conclude that all the layers of earth (...) were formed by sand and gravel that piled up on the seabed, crustacean shells and coral matter, soil and clay. (J. Hutton, The Theory of the Earth l, 26. 1785)

Another quote from 1938 is about petrified fish found on top of Mount Everest (the previous quote was about marine fossils that were found in the Alps):

There are bones of oxen and horses in the Himalayan glaciers. An ice slide starting at a glacier at the altitude of 5,000 metres (three miles) brought such bones with it.
A large British expedition that almost reached the peak of Mount Everest found petrified fish lying on the mountain. (28)


The next quotes are about the Grand Canyon. The consensus is that it formed slowly over the course of millions of years. A more likely explanation, however, is that water formed the layers seen in the canyon. This is because there are clear signs of the beautiful area once having been flooded. Let’s study three quotes about this, the first of them from Finnish geologist Pentti Eskola:

Let’s keep in mind that the Colorado River is the second longest river in North America. It brings water from the Rocky Mountains, which get a lot of rainfall, and it carries on average a million tonnes of rock matter as silt each day. This is how much the river erodes its own bottom and sides. (...) There is only marine limestone with shells of clams and Brachiopods, crinoids as well as coral reefs in the topmost part of the path and on the ground to the south of the canyon. At that time at the end of the Palaeozoic era when the current strata of the Grand Canyon already existed, there was a vast and deep, clear sea over the area and there was no sign of the Colorado River. (29)


Professor G. M. Price has stated the following: “Clear and strong embankments high above the current water level can be found in all of the large rivers and streams of the world. These embankments prove that there has been a large flood that settled down and marked the shores of seas and the banks of streams in valleys and in highlands. Such embankments formed by water can be found up to the altitude of 2,000 feet on the shore of the Seine, the Rhone, the Mississippi and the Colorado. Such signs of a devastating flood can be found on the shores of the Mississippi River a mile or two above the current water level."
Famous naturalist Cuvier has stated the following: “If geology has to offer any definite and infallible truth, it is that some major catastrophe took place on the earth 5,000 or 6,000 years ago.” (30)

American geologist Clifford L. Burdick did some practical studies of the Grand Canyon, the Bonita Canyon in Arizona and in other places. In his article, “Nature Tells the Truth,” he recorded these impressions:
“When you drive along the hundreds of miles of Colorado upper plains in Northern Arizona with thousands of square miles of rock pointing to the same direction, you must truly be blind if you cannot see the signs of a major flood. What else could cause literally transverse layers that cover such huge areas and up to such a depth?” Signs of the Times, October 1957, p. 12 (31)

Stories about the Flood. It was mentioned above that there exist clear signs of a catastrophic event much like the Flood in nature. Scientists do admit that a catastrophe or several catastrophes have taken place but, motivated by their own ideologies, they have tried to provide other explanations.
More evidence supporting the historical Flood event can be found in the traditions of different peoples. They describe similar events as the Bible: birds being sent out from the ark, a rainbow and devastation caused by water. Together, these sources provide strong evidence of a historic event:

Around 500 cultures – including indigenous peoples of Greece, China, Peru and North America – are known in the world where the legends and myths describe a compelling story of a large flood that changed the history of the tribe. In many stories, only a few people survived the flood, just like in the case of Noah. Many of the peoples considered the flood to have been caused by gods who, for one reason or another, got bored with the human kind. Perhaps the people were corrupt, like in Noah’s times and in a legend by the Native American Hopi tribe of North America, or perhaps there were too many and too noisy people, like in the Gilgamesh epic. (32)

Famous anthropologist Sir James Frazer has collected traditional lore on the Flood from a variety of remote locations, such as the Leeward Islands, Bengali, China and Malaysia. This terrifying event has been retained in the memory of peoples all around the world, including very primitive tribes. The stories agree on one issue: the Flood was a punishment for severe sins and only a few devout people were saved.

Titus Flavius Josephus is generally considered to be the most reliable historian of the classical period. He writes in his book Antiquities of the Jews: “The Armenian called the place (where Noah and his family exited the ark) theApobaterion, the landing place.” (33)

Lenormant made the following statement in Beginning of History:
“We are able to prove that the story of the Flood is part of the universal traditions in all branches of the human family, and anything that is such definite and uniform in the tradition can surely not be considered an imaginary tale. It must be the memory of a true and terrifying event, an event that made such a huge impact on the first of the human race that even their descendents have not forgotten it.” (34)

The study of history has taken more than one wrong turn. Other errors were made when the site of human origin was changed from Mesopotamia to Africa, and when it was said that human development required millions of years (even though no data supports any such thing). There is much stronger evidence to support that humans were born in the Mesopotamian region in the Middle East, then spread from there to the rest of the world, and that this happened more recently -- not even many thousands of years ago. Modern-day researchers have turned to telling tales and rejecting historical data by offering other explanations about where people came from, and about the Flood (cf. 2 Tim 4;3,4: For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned to fables).

William Dawson assures in Modern Science that he and other prominent scientists are convinced that the Euphrates region must – from a geological perspective – have been the only place where people at first could live.
Dr. Armstrong says the same in Nature and Revelation: “Where is the cradle of the human kind? The learned pretty much disagree on this and on the question of racial integrity. The high regions giving birth to the Euphrates and the Tigris are considered to be the cradle of the human race. This is proven by many facts, such as the fact that the traditions of almost all tribes mention this part of the world as their original home. Furthermore, all of the types of grain used as human food originate here. Geological studies also lead to the same conclusion.” (35)

Did mammoths and dinosaurs live at separate times? If we dig up a fossil and study it, we cannot find any tag showing the time when the particular fossil was alive and walked the Earth. There is no way of discerning any such information from the fossil. This is self-evident to anyone holding a fossil. (The same applies to cave paintings: some scientists assume that they are tens of thousands of years old even though there can be found no signs of such age in the paintings themselves. In fact, these paintings may only be a couple of thousand years old.)
Regardless of this, one of the basic assumptions of the theory of evolution is that these ages can be determined. Even though we cannot find any such information in fossils, many evolutionists claim to know when the fossils were alive (based on the so-called index fossil table). They believe that they have specific information as to the history of ammonites, trilobites, mammals and other life forms on the Earth, even though it is impossible to make such conclusions based on the fossils or the environment in which they were found.

“There is no man on this Earth who knows enough about rocks and fossils to be able to prove in any way that a specific type of fossil is truly essentially older or younger than another type. In other words, there is no-one who could truly prove that a trilobite from the Cambrian period is older than a dinosaur from the Cretaceous period or a mammal from the Tertiary period. Geology is anything but an exact science.” (36)

The same problem applies to fossils of mammoths and dinosaurs that are excavated from the ground. Many scientists assume that they lived at separate times and became extinct separately from each other but they cannot prove this. It was already noted before that both animal and human fossils as well as fossils of man-made items have been found in mineral carbon strata. If both findings have been well preserved and there is even some radiocarbon left in them, it is impossible to prove that the creatures did not exist at the same time.
There is a simple reason why scientists believe they lived at different times: they are loyal to their geological time scale; it guides their views. They look at the time scale to see when animals lived; this is why they believe what they believe. They trust in the time scale even though many findings prove it false and full of conflicts.
It is well justified to believe that both mammoths and dinosaurs lived at the same time, and that this time was not long ago – not millions of years ago. Below are some reasons why.

Well-preserved fossils of both mammoths and dinosaurs are often found. Soft tissue, blood cells, non-petrified bones, meat and skin have been found of them. Even a mummified dinosaur has been found just like mummified people have been found (a mummified human was found in the Alpine mountains in 1991).

A startling further proof of a major, sudden natural catastrophe once having occurred on Earth are the millions of mammoths and other large animals that were suddenly killed in the Northern Hemisphere (Northern Siberia and Alaska). Many of the animals have been completely preserved and unharmed (except for being dead, of course) with intact muscles and hair. In some cases, they have either stood on their knees or stood full upright with food still in their mouths. Their eyes and red blood cells have been very well preserved and water has only partially separated in their cells; this indicates very fast and permanent freezing. (37)

When Mary Schweitzer was five years old, she announced that she would become a dinosaur researcher. Her dream came true, and at the age of 38, she was able to study an almost perfectly preserved skeleton of a Tyrannosaurus Rex, found in Montana in 1998 (Journal of American Medical Association, 17 Nov. 1993, Vol. 270, No 19, pp. 2376–2377). The age of the skeleton was estimated at "80 million years." As many as 90% of the bones were found, and they were still intact. Schweitzer specializes in tissue research and calls herself a molecular palaeontologist. She selected the thighbones and shinbones of the finding and decided to examine the bone marrow. Schweitzer observed that the bone marrow had not been fossilized and that it had been unbelievably well preserved. The bone was completely organic and extremely well preserved. Schweitzer studied it with a microscope and noticed curious structures. They were small and circular and had a nucleus, just like the red blood cells in a vein. But the blood cells should have disappeared from the dinosaur bones ages ago. "I got goose pimples, it was as if I was studying a modern bone sample,” says Schweitzer. "Naturally, I was unable to believe what I saw and I told the laboratory technician: “These bones are 65 million years old, how can the blood cells have been preserved for so long?” (Science, July 1993, Vol. 261, pp. 160–163). What is significant with this finding is that not all of the bones had been completely fossilized. Gayle Callis, a specialist researcher of bones, showed the bone samples in a scientific meeting where a pathologist incidentally saw them. The pathologist remarked, "Did you know that there are blood cells in this bone?" This led to a remarkable thriller. Mary Schweitzer showed the sample to Jack Horner, a famous researcher of dinosaurs, who looked at the sample and said, "So you think that there are blood cells in it?", to which Schweitzer replied, "No, I don't." "Well then, just try and prove that they are not blood cells,” Horner replied (EARTH, 1997, June: 55–57, Schweitzer et al., The Real Jurassic Park). Jack Horner presumes that the bones are so thick that water and oxygen have been unable to affect them. (38)

Traditions. It is a well-known fact that there are cave paintings depicting mammoths. This means that the creatures lived at the same time as people.
There are just as compelling grounds for believing that people and dinosaurs lived at the same time because there are several indications to that effect in traditions of different peoples. The older the descriptions, the more realistic they are. They do not call the creatures dinosaurs, though; instead, they call them dragons. The name “dinosaur” was not invented until in the 1840s, long after these stories.
One peculiar fact is that one of the leading palaeontologists of the world, Stephen Jay Gould, stated that there are descriptions of dinosaurs in the Book of Job (Job 40, 41) but assumed that the people of Job's times got their idea from dinosaur fossils (Pandans Tumme, p. 221, Ordfrontsförlag, 1987).
Finnish geologist Pentti Eskola, on the other hand, states in the quote below that the descriptions of dragons are reminiscent of dinosaurs. The World Book Encyclopedia notes the same:

The varying forms of lizard-like animals seem so funny to us because many of them resemble – in a distant and often caricature-like way – modern mammals living under similar conditions. However, most dinosaurs were so very different from the modern life forms that the nearest analogues can be found in the depictions of dragons in legends. Strangely enough, the authors of the legends had naturally not studied petrifactions or even knew of them. (39)

The dragons in legends are, strangely enough, just like real animals that lived in the past. They resemble large reptiles (dinosaurs) that ruled the land long before man is supposed to have appeared. Dragons were generally regarded as bad and destructive. Each nation referred to them in their mythology. (The World Book Encyclopedia,Vol. 5, 1973, p. 265)

Mammoths and dinosaurs buried in silt. It was mentioned above that plenty of remains of mammoths and other large animals have been found in Siberia and Alaska, buried together with plants. Some scientists have even talked about millions of mammoth fossils.
There is clear evidence suggesting that dinosaurs were also buried in silt in the same way. One piece of evidence proving this is the large dinosaur burial grounds and the fact that their fossils can be found inside hard rock. The only way fossils inside rock could have formed, is that dinosaurs were quickly covered in mud and silt that then hardened around them as rock. This is not a question of any slow process that takes millennia; apparently, it all happened in a matter of hours or days. This could have occurred during an event like the Flood. It is the most probable explanation for the destruction of both species and the destruction some scientists have assumed to have occurred during earlier eras. (The quote below suggests that swirling water could have gathered dinosaur bones into heaps. The bold face has been added to the quotes to make the point clear.)

He went to the deserts of South Dakota, where there are bright-colored red, yellow, and orange cliffs and rocks. Already in a few days, he found from the cliff some bones he assumed to be what he had gone to search for.When he dug the rock around the bones, he noted that the bones were the skeleton of an animal. They were not together, as the bones of dinosaurs often are. Many of these piles seemed as if created by a powerful whirl of water.
These bones were now in blue sandstone that is very hard. The sandstone had to be removed by a road scraper and loosened by explosives. Brown and his assistants made a hole of almost seven and a half meters deep to get the bones out. Getting one large skeleton out took them two summers. By no means did they remove the bones from stone. They transported these blocks of stone by train into the museum where the scientists were able to chip the stone material away and set up the skeleton. This tyrant lizard now stands in the exhibition hall of the museum. (40)


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ZyIG_jZzBs
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top