The Elusive Pre-Cambrian Rabbit



Now you know how I feel about athiests!

It’s not that their comments are incoherent, it’s that if you assume that they are actually trying to present a coherent argument, you are going to be disappointed.

(S. Joshua Swamidass) #22

Both Christians and atheists can present coherent and incoherent arguments. No one has a monopoly on logic.


What we need is a recognition that it does not require an expert to analyze an argument.

(S. Joshua Swamidass) #24

Of course, one does not need to be an expert. One merely has to be knowledgeable, coherent, and fair. In biology, very few people qualify.


You, of course, are qualified in all respects. But you are special. You are also qualified to judge whether others are knowledgeable, coherent, and fair. In biology.

(S. Joshua Swamidass) #26

Flattery will get you no where, hehe.


Let’s ignore the ages for the moment. Let’s look at just the facts.

What geologists call Cambrian deposits are defined by ratios of isotopes in igneous rocks found above and below the deposits. What you need to explain in your flood model is how a flood is able to sort rocks and organisms such that only certain types of species are found below rocks with specific isotope ratios of U, Pb, K, Ar, Rb, and Sr (to name a few). How does a flood create a correlation between species groups and isotope ratios in rocks?

(Robert Byers) #28

i don’t like this isotope stuff. anyways even this stuff probably follows deposition events.
Godd question about deposition.
This yEC, and other but not enough, do need sorying mechanisms for the deposits of sediment/that means sedimentary rock,
The flood was not the point. instead i think we must imagine great waterflows under great pressure sweeping powerfully great amounts of sediment, nay, great chunks of lanscape from here to there.
so its not trivial sorting but emplacement of sections of ground. then this happens a lot and so great layers of great chunks of land are flopped onto each other and this is the norm.
Its not ceratin species found below but that great layers are laid suddenly with whatever biology is caught up.
in fact creationism should predict very great segregation of biology because of great segregation of landscape being moved fantastically by great pressure of water. i think this pressure comes from the separating continent into its modern parts.

(The Honest Skeptic) #29

Creationism (of the flood geology type) does predict great segregation of biology, because that is what is observed. So it is the story being matched to the evidence.

Creationism should not predict a great segregation of biology, for the reasons that you include above. If things were moved fantastically by great water pressure, everything should be mixed together. They, clearly are not.

Consider varves, which are found in specific locations all over the earth. They are delicate little layers, containing fossils of delicate bits of life (like ferns, fronds and fish)… each layered gently. These are explained away by flood geologists as quickly sorted layers of sediment settling out from the same forces that fantastically moved great volumes of landscape. And yet, where do we find varves?? Not over the entire planet, but in lake beds and sea beds, where water naturally enters and creates them anew, seasonally.

(Robert Byers) #30

The thing I always stress is how powerful the water pressure was. It was moving hugh gobs of land hundreds of miles INTACT. nothing like a chaos we would see today in a moving flood. Just great thumps of movement.
In fact so much power it could never be slow enough to mush things up.
So the geology columns show these events. The sea scraped clean and piled. then some great lanfmass thyrown on top. Remember creationism needs this to explain the collection and squeezing of biology to instantly form oil/gas etc and that beneath what squeezed it.

I know about varves. I see them as a very minoe event in a very segregated body of water that arranges itself that way by pulses. It also was common after the great flood in other fossil assemblages.
Not seasonly by a single event. This is indeed everywhere.
Varves would not be created by the great waterflows created during thye flood year unless in isolated pockets.

I see all geology can work in a creationist model.
Then the biology just follows the deposition story.
However this idea of timelins indicated by layers is very unlikely .
So predicting where rabbits should be in biology trails is distorted by geology errors.
Biology origins must be divorced from geology speculation.
Its not true science.
Biology must prove its conclusions by biology and not geology. Its cheating on the discilie of evidence.
EVEN if one had a video of biology evolving it would not be biological evidence.
It would just be a video. not biological processes.

(The Honest Skeptic) #31

You realize, of course, that water pressure only occurs in a closed system (or mostly-closed system.) Once your massive “chunks” of land are broken apart, the “pressure” that somehow existed would be relieved. There is no mechanism that allows for this imaginary process to occur. It is a shame that you cannot see that you have invented an entire series of processes in order to support your theology.

… and the winner is …

Possibly the rabbits caused the great thumps of movement??

(The Honest Skeptic) #32

@Robert_Byers And one more thing. I work in technology now, but I grew up in construction. Anyone who has seen a water main break knows what happens when water pressure is unleashed on the surrounding land. It liquifies the soil, displaces the fine material, settles the heavy material, and leaves behind a void. Never, ever does it pick up “large chunks of land” and move them “several hundreds of miles” only to stack them neatly (or haphazardly) one on top of the other.

(John Harshman) #33

If somehow it were shown beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was a Precambrian rabbit fossil, I’d say that it would be good evidence for time travel. That’s the simplest hypothesis compatible with all the data. Somebody tested their time machine by sending back a lab animal.

(Robert Byers) #34

Funny about the thumping rabbits!!
The origin gor the water pressure would be from the separating continent. We agree there was a single continent and its breakup , suddenly and quickly, moving to its present place or taking some months would create fantastic water pressure. This is the mechanism. actually the ice age mega floods, though very less, themselves would and did break up the geography but nothing to do with saturating the land. Its very unlike our trivial water pressures today.
The water pressure is there to move fantastically hundreds of miles of intact chunks of land

(Robert Byers) #35

Thats the point that is wrong. Its not the RABBIT. ITS the precambrian thats the issue. Then one can add the whole problem with evolution evidence is that is 80% based on geology evidence.
Its not accurate scientific investigation. This will be pointed out in the future. Even some ID thinkers say this though still accepting the geology paradigms.


How would this sort rocks and fossils so that there is a correlation between the species of fossil and the isotope ratios in the igneous rocks above and below them? These are the facts you need to address.


What evidence do you have that it isn’t accurate?

(Robert Byers) #38

its not sorting but lumping together great surges of material. One must imagine fantastic power of water flows to strip off a entire, france size. area INTACT and deposit it hundreds of miles away, intact, and then other chunck on top.
Then volcanic action/rocks here and there would pile on top then another chunk load from far away thrown on top with such a thid that it turns what ios beneath into stone.
the origin of the sediment(ary) rock is the origin of the layers. its great pressurized moving water moving faster then fast and being loaded intact on top of each other.
What you see is exactly what it is. Great layers of intact segregated sediment loads from segregated flows plus volcanic action interfering with its material…

(Dan Eastwood) #39

Are you saying that if we just waffle the kilubrihauser, it will all just sort of calificate? That makes lopric fiduicczen.


This doesn’t explain the correlation between the isotope ratios in the igneous rocks and the fossils found above and below those rocks.