Keith&Co.
Contributor
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 22,444
- Location
- Far Western Mass
- Gender
- Here.
- Basic Beliefs
- I'm here...
A number of creationists flog 'fossils found on mountains' as evidence of The Biblical Flood.
Fossils require, they point out, rapid burial.
But don't we have fossils that show teeth marks from predators and scavengers? I seem to recall someone pointing out our ancestors' position in the food chain based on whose teeth marks were on the bones before ours...
So they require burial, preferably rapid, preferably in a low-oxygen environment, but not necessarily 'at the moment of death.'
Also, forming fossils requires pressure. Quite a bit of pressure.
Water pressure increases at a rate of 44 PSI per 100 feet of depth, so buried some distance of water includes SOME pressure, but the mountain tops were under water for less than a year. The ark came to rest on the side of Ararat as the waters receded, 10 months after the Flood started.
So, mountaintop fossils would seem to be evidence AGAINST a global flood. Those things had to form when the mountain top was way, way, way below a mountain.
Fossils require, they point out, rapid burial.
But don't we have fossils that show teeth marks from predators and scavengers? I seem to recall someone pointing out our ancestors' position in the food chain based on whose teeth marks were on the bones before ours...
So they require burial, preferably rapid, preferably in a low-oxygen environment, but not necessarily 'at the moment of death.'
Also, forming fossils requires pressure. Quite a bit of pressure.
Water pressure increases at a rate of 44 PSI per 100 feet of depth, so buried some distance of water includes SOME pressure, but the mountain tops were under water for less than a year. The ark came to rest on the side of Ararat as the waters receded, 10 months after the Flood started.
So, mountaintop fossils would seem to be evidence AGAINST a global flood. Those things had to form when the mountain top was way, way, way below a mountain.