Monday, June 13, 2011

Dialogue – The Hoax of Geology Part 6

In Part 3 of this series, we made the following assertion:

Assertion #3: If fossils from disparate time-periods (according to evolutionary theory) are found in the same beds, the beds are arbitrarily cut up, horizontally, and sometimes vertically(!), in order to conform to the theory. Thus, the evolutionists can never lose!

This assertion, if true, clearly demonstrates the inability of geology to serve as proof for the theory of evolution. Here are a few quotes from the literature.

This first quote describes a geological survey performed in the Canadian Rocky Mountains. I have interspersed some comments for the benefit of the reader. Comments appear in brackets.

East of the main divide, the Lower Carboniferous is overlain in places by beds of Lower Cretaceous age [meaning that a bed that is 100 million years older than the one below it lies in perfect conformity above it], and here again, although the two formations differ so widely in respect to age [the author is confident that they differ in age because of the diversity of fossils found there], one overlies the other without any perceptible break [meaning that if it were not for the diversity of fossils, it would be impossible to distinguish between the supposedly different beds], and the separation of one from the other is rendered more difficult by the fact that the upper beds of the Carboniferous are lithologically [i.e. structurally] almost precisely like those of the Cretaceous. Were it not for fossil evidence, one would naturally suppose that a single formation was being dealt with. (Annual Report – Geological Survey of Canada, Volume 2, page 8. Available online here)

Well, there we go. This survey was taken over one hundred years ago which means that over a hundred years ago Geologists were already admitting that fossils which belong to evolutionary periods of time separated by hundreds of millions of years appear in what would otherwise be considered exactly the same strata!

Here’s another quote from the early 1900’s by Sir Archibald Giekie, one of the foremost geologists of the time

The strata could scarcely be supposed to have been really inverted, save for the evidence as to their true order of succession [in other words, evolutionary order of succession--sc] supplied by the included fossils…Portions of Carboniferous strata appear as if regularly interbedded among Jurassic rocks, and indeed could not be separated save after a study of their enclosed organic remains. (Sir Archibald Giekie, Textbook of Geology, p. 678)

So, once again we see that fossils normally associated with the Carboniferous period of evolution are found together in the same beds as fossils from the Jurassic period. The only reason the rock has been split up is because the theory of evolution demands it. And lest someone suspect that this type of formation is rare, Giekie goes on to state:

These examples of deceptive conformity are not merely local, but are persistent over wide areas… and are traceable over wide regions (ibid p 842)

All this demonstrates conclusively that the geologic column provides absolutely no evidence to support evolution or the antiquity of the world.

I have much more to say on this subject but I would like to hear from some readers first before composing my final post on this topic.

To be continued…

6 comments:

  1. I have read through your series of posts on this topic. I haven't checked any of your sources, so I will accept what you say at face value.
    However, I don't see any evidence in your sources for a young earth. You have quoted many people who claim that the earth is millions of years old. Surely that disproves any claim that the world is 5771 years old.
    Could you please just explains clearly and simply how you have refuted Rabbi Slifkin's claim that the evidence points to an ancient earth.
    Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Rabbi Sedley,

    Shalom Aleichem!

    Thank you for writing.

    I don't see any evidence in your sources for a young earth.

    Although I do happen to believe in a young earth, this series of posts was not designed to provide evidence for my personal opinion. It was written specifically to refute Rabbi Slifkin’s claim that fossil finds and the geologic superposition of the strata constitute proof for the antiquity of the world.

    You have quoted many people who claim that the earth is millions of years old. Surely that disproves any claim that the world is 5771 years old.

    No, it doesn’t. If you recall, I wrote in the beginning of the series that I would be distinguishing between the claims of the evolutionists and the evidence they possess to support their claims. The people I quoted all indicate that there is no evidence from geology to the antiquity of the world. The fact that evolutionists choose to believe in a theory that possesses no evidence whatsoever is their business. Surely their personal beliefs do not disprove the claim that the world is 5771 years old?

    Could you please just explains clearly and simply how you have refuted Rabbi Slifkin's claim that the evidence points to an ancient earth.

    I’m a bit chagrined by your request. I wrote six posts outlining my refutation in detail! Apparently I was not clear enough…

    I’ll try and synopsize my arguments in a few short sentences. Please let me know if I was successful in communicating my position to you.

    Rabbi Slifkin claimed that notwithstanding Rabbi Meiselman’s thesis re time, the very presence of distinct periods in the geologic column proves that the world must be ancient.

    My response to him is that the geologic column does not conform to his layman’s understanding of it and in point of fact does not represent distinct (and ancient) time periods.

    Do you understand the general structure of my argument now?

    ReplyDelete
  3. One of Rabbi Slifkin's reasons for rejecting the mesorah of a six-day, meta-natural Creation process is this: According to the latter, Man was created less that one day after the animals. Now, no human remains are "found together" with dinosaur remains, indicateing dinosaurs were already extinct by the time Man was created. This would mean that the entire history of dinosaur activity recorded all happenned within a few hours and no more. This seems ludricous.

    I would love to see your response.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Zvi Lampel wrote:

    One of Rabbi Slifkin's reasons for rejecting the mesorah of a six-day, meta-natural Creation process is this: According to the latter, Man was created less that one day after the animals. Now, no human remains are "found together" with dinosaur remains, indicateing dinosaurs were already extinct by the time Man was created. This would mean that the entire history of dinosaur activity recorded all happenned within a few hours and no more. This seems ludricous.

    I would love to see your response.


    You already did. Look at the post. I showed you how “Portions of Carboniferous strata appear as if regularly interbedded among Jurassic rocks” demonstrating that Rabbi Slifkin is wrong and that supposedly “earlier” life forms are regularly found in the same strata as “later” life-forms. This was known over 100 years ago already! If Rabbi Slifkin wants to prove that dinosaurs are never found in the same strata as humans, let him prove it! But he hasn’t, and he can’t; because it’s simply not true. Here’s another quote:

    “A more spectacular example was found on the North Slope of Alaska, where many thousands of bones lack any significant degree of permineralization. The bones look and feel like old cow bones, and the discoverers of the site did not report it for twenty years because they assumed they were bison, not dinosaur, bones.” (Philip J. Curie, 101 Questions About Dinosaurs, Dover Publications, Inc. 1996)

    In other words, these dinosaur bones were found in exactly the same plains that bison bones were expected to be found. And as I’m sure you know, Bison and humans are contemporary meaning that the dinosaur bones were found in exactly the same strata that human bones would be expected to be found. I’m sure if they dug up in the surrounding are they would find human remains.

    One final note: Rabbi Slifkin doesn’t say what you quoted him as saying. He doesn’t ask from the fact that “no human remains are "found together" with dinosaur remains”. That would be a silly ta’anah. There are many life-forms that lived contemporaneously with dinosaurs (from an evolutionary perspective) and are not found “together” with dinosaurs. If this was truly a ta’anah, then his kasha wouldn’t just be on humans. His issue is with strata, not “bones mixed together”. I hope you understand the distinction.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rabbi Slifkin doesn’t say what you quoted him as saying. He doesn’t ask from the fact that “no human remains are "found together" with dinosaur remains”. That would be a silly ta’anah. There are many life-forms that lived contemporaneously with dinosaurs (from an evolutionary perspective) and are not found “together” with dinosaurs. If this was truly a ta’anah, then his kasha wouldn’t just be on humans. His issue is with strata, not “bones mixed together”. I hope you understand the distinction..

    Well, then I must say that he changed his mind, because this is what he had written a few years ago:

    http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol13/v13n071.shtml

    http://www.aishdas.org/avodah/vol13/v13n073.shtm

    All you need to do is go to any of the numerous locations where tens of thousands of dinosaurs' fossils have been retrieved (there are many such places in the US). See if you can find, in those locations, the fossils of dogs, cats, humans, or any modern creatures... or, in Israel,
    go down to the Ramon crater, and look at all the fossils embedded in
    the rock. There are thousands of ammonites -- extinct marine creatures -- but no modern aquatic life-forms. This is clear evidence that there were different eras of life in earth's history, and dinosaurs did not live in the same era as these creatures.

    …findings of fossil remains of hundreds of assorted kinds of similar creatures (ammonites, or dinosaurs), in hundreds of localities all around the world, … indeed constitute … compelling [evidence]… that no other creatures existed elsewhere at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete