MauiMoto Loc: Hawaii

Of course it sounds like ragtag ideas to anyone under "the strong delusion" that was sent to you. Not possible for me to convey all of the research I have done since I learned of Christian science after boot camp over 30 years ago. But anyone not under this strong delusion, who has not forgotten the word of God and hasn't been given over to a reprobate mind understands completely.

Wander1963

You must be looking in the wrong places. There are literally millions of fossils in collections in museums and universities around the world. Some of them are of lines that died out. Many others actually are predecessors of creatures alive today, back to such creatures as polychaete worms. https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2018/01/annelid-bristle-worm-fossil-discovered-canada-spd/

We don't have many worm fossils, or older critters, because it's very rare for small, soft-bodied creatures to be preserved. The few that weren't eaten we most likely crushed.



Actually, "Piltdown Man" is in a category by itself, because it was a deliberate hoax - a gorilla mandible joined to a human cranium. The hoax was discovered and exposed, because most scientists want to keep the process honest and above reproach.

Peking Man (Homo erectus pekinensis) is legit, about 700,000 years old, though there is debate on whether it was a direct ancestor of modern man.

"Nebraska man" was named on the basis of a badly weathered tooth that was originally misidentified as human. Turned out to be the tooth of an extinct species of peccary. Rather than a hoax, this was a simple mistake. Humans did not evolve in the Americas, but migrated here.




Not bloody likely. Lucy's place in human evolution is well established.



Because evolution applies to life. Not to nonliving objects. The comparison is not valid.



What you see in the sides of the Grand Canyon are the strata of millions of years of deposition. Erosion applies only to exposed surfaces - the top surface, and the sides and bottom of the canyon. The real erosion happened in the canyon itself, where the Colorado River has carved its way through the rocks. I assume you know this, and were throwing out this specious argument in an attempt to "trap" me.

MauiMoto Loc: Hawaii

The grand canyon was created rapidly after the flood, similar to the canyons created right after Mount Saint Helens.
Lucy along with the others are all proven to be fraudulent. Made up for grant money.

Wander1963

...and a vast ignorance of geology! Marine fossils are found on mountains, (I've found them myself) in marine layers that were upthrust during orogeny - the geological mountain-building process. Generally this is found where tectonic plates collide, with one subducting (going under) and the other upthrust, creating mountain ranges like the Rockies and the Himalayas. If you're going to tell me plate tectonics is a myth and continents don't move, let me preemptively answer that we can measure plate movement now, usually a few centimeters per year. Slow, but real, involving emormous masses and kinetic energy to build mountains.

No magic required.

Oklahoma 46

I used the tires angle to keep from offending but you don’t accept it so let me remind you that you too are getting old and wearing out. The argument does apply to life.

The evolution story goes that as the river flowed down it’s channel new strata was deposited taking millions of years for each layer but no erosion took place until the last layer was complete - no erosion that is except for the erosion that kept the river at the bottom of the canyon. Also much of the sediment forming those layers is believed to have come from the area around what is now Pennsylvania. Evolutionists say that material moved to Arizona via a river system. No such river system exists and no evidence of such a river ever existed. Near the canyon is rock strata that is folded in an L shape. Since rocks don’t bend it is obvious this strata formed very quickly - no over millions of years.

Wander1963

Find me a single respectable geologist who will back that assertion.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Stratigraphy_of_the_Grand_Canyon.png



That is a scurrilous and false accusation. The burden of proof is on you. Show me your documentation.

Wander1963

If you're going to fight this battle, at least do your research. Deposition happens on land surfaces all over the world, building up gradually. That's why Rome was buried by the 1800s and had to be dug up - or did you think the Romans buried their city with shovels when they left?

As deposition occurs, yes, erosion also occurs - but it's not even and equal all around, or land would be flat everywhere. Rainwater rolls down into creeks, then rivers, to the sea. As rivers flow, they erode and carve the land, but only in their paths. The Colorado River is believed to have set its current path about 5-6 million years ago. The Grand Canyon is the result of 5-6 million years of river cutting away limestone.

And really, you should know all of this already.

Oklahoma 46

Isn’t Lucy the subject of a documentary on ABC several years ago?

Oklahoma 46

Wasn’t?

Oklahoma 46

I do know that already. That’s why I know it is silly to think the Grand Canyon was built up over millions of years but the only erosion was what occurred parallel to the river channel. Then after the current top layer was formed - then - erosion began cutting smaller channels perpendicular to the river channel.

Wander1963

"Lucy", the Australopithecus afarensis fossil found by Dr Johansen in 1974, has been the subject of many documentaries. A few creationist productions have tried to claim the fossil is a hoax, but none of them have withstood scrutiny. Not only has the fossil held up under the most rigorous examination, but a dozen other fossils of her species have been found.

So, yes, Lucy was the subject of some documentaries.

Wander1963

Flowing water erodes limestone, but not evenly. It will vary with the hardness of the stone and the pressure of the water. For example, if the river turns left there will be greater pressure on the far side of the bend. It will erode faster there than on the opposite bank, gradually digging into the canyon wall. This phenomenon is well understood in the formation of "meandering" rivers as they develop into braided river systems.

In a closed setting like a canyon, this erosion will result in undercutting the canyon walls, creating the beautiful sculpted rock walls, as well as eventually widening the canyon by causing collapses.

The process is well known. No flood required.

Shutterbug57

So, dogs mating keep producing dogs is your version of evolution in action? You need to brush up on chapter 6 of Darwin’s on the Origin of Species.

Oklahoma 46

Just wanted to make sure Lucy is the right fossil and not some imposter. Lucy probably isn’t a fraud. She probably really is a fossil. The documentary about her was fraudulent. There were 6 points where they defrauded viewers. They made a big deal about Lucy having fingernails instead of claws like others in the animal kingdom. Within an hour after the close of the movie a group in California sent out an email encouraging viewers to not be deceived. All primates have fingernails - always have. They continue to be primates just like they always have been. It has been too many years since the movie and I forgot the other five points. That doesn’t matter - the movie is irrelevant. One evening about a month after the airing of the Lucy movie I signed on to the internet. For some reason I happened to notice an inconspicuous blurb and almost laughed out loud when reading it. The makers of the Lucy movie made a retraction. Actually they made six retractions. They retracted every point they made that the California group noted. It was as if they got the notice from the California group and found out they were wrong. Except they knew all along they were wrong. They deliberately deceive and later make retractions so if they are called on the ‘mistakes’ they can make assurances that they corrected those ‘errors’. This happens way too often.

Oklahoma 46