What features would you need to see in order to accept that a fossil bed evidenced an old Earth or old life?
Here is a polystrate telephone pole. Was this one caused by a global flood?
Methods for dating sedimentary rock above.
Even more, I am asking for evidence we haven’t seen, but if seen would falsify a recent global flood.
If the Flood really happened 4500 years ago or so, shouldn’t we kind fossils of nearly every kind of Ark animal close to the Mountains of Ararat, with fewer and fewer fossil kinds the further out we go? Think of it as a nested hierarchy of corpses correlated with geographical distance.
(I’m using the r-speir definition of a nested hierarchy with a ‘broad base’)
Again, been done. Why do you ignore this?
You’ve been given this evidence over and over, not just in this thread. Here’s a post from a few months ago when I did the same:
OMG, the only reason I am even going to respond to this is because you really believe yourself, yet you are so very wrong. In that very thread you linked, I told you exactly why you are not dating sedimentary rock. Go find the answer again (although you already know it and are feigning ignorance).
#2 Reason. If what you are claiming is true, then you simply must tell the world about it …! Because science has not yet caught with your private revelation knowledge that sedimentary rock can be independently dated. They would LOVE to be privy to this knowledge. Go now. Ring them up. Get them on the line. You will change science forever…!
You did not.
You understand that I am referencing the primary scientific literature, right?
Good night.
Ah, flouncing. Typical creationist tactic.
70% of worldwide fossil beds aren’t there.
Checking any geological map will quickly reveal that most fossil beds have been eroded to a small fraction of their original extent. The Grand Staircase in the US is a good example. The English channel cutting through Cretaceous chalk beds is another. Any angular conformity with fossils in the lower sections demonstrates that many fossil bearing strata are no longer there.
The only polystrate fossils that I am aware of are those resulting from either (i) plants/animals burrowing/tunnelling/rooting through existing strata or (ii) successive strata being deposited around or within large immobile structures.
I am not aware of any other examples of fossils that extend through multiple layers.
There are methods of dating sedimentary rock that return long ages. Here’s one example of dating carbonate deposits that returns Mya ages. Here’s another example of dating carbonate deposits that, while it tops out at around 500,000 years rather than milllions, is still enough to falsify a recent global flood.
So much for falsification of YEC.
Can fission track dating be used to determine the age of sedimentary rocks?
YEC and its critics: is there a way forward?
I don’t really think so.
If you invent made up reasons for rejecting the very evidence you ask for, that does put a damper on progress.
I somewhat agree.
Progress cannot be made on the basis of evidence, because in the YEC world, it is an axiom that evidence is always subject to two interpretations, which is decided according to your worldview. When Ken Ham states that nothing would change his mind, he is really saying that whatever evidence is presented now or in the future, he will simply interpret in a way which supports a young earth. Ultimately, evidence becomes irrelevant, it may as well cease to exist. Even interpretation does not really matter, it is all about unfalsifiable worldview.
Fun fact: the well-known absence of C-14 in coal is used to determine if Vanilla is genuine. Real plant based vanilla is radio-active, the imitation stuff made from petrochemicals isn’t. Vanilla Carbon-14 Analysis Natural Product - Beta Analytic
Another fun fact for those who live in the USA and drink alcohol: the same sort of C-14 test is applied to alcoholic beverage alcohol to make sure that it is from recently alive plant sources.
So by law in the USA, you might say that all alcoholic beverages must be radioactive to be sold for oral consumption.
POSTSCRIPT: I just now looked it up and the standard is defined so that a 750ml bottle of wine, for example, must register at least 400 decays per minute. (This may explain why my second grade teacher, who kept a bottle of gin in the bottom drawer of her classroom desk, made the Geiger counter go crazy when she judged the school science fair.)
CLARIFICATION: Synthetic Alcohol for Oral Consumption
Apparently this topic is much more complicated than I had heard. The science behind the aforementioned test for “recent plant-based alcohol” is sound but it is not clear that anybody is routinely testing for it. Also, it is apparently more of a truth in advertising, labeling issue rather than a ban on synthetic alcohols for oral consumption per se.
One must use caution with this type of Internet source but it appears that Snopes does a reasonable job of summarizing the situation:
It’s less than ideal to have r_speir represent the YEC viewpoint when he has already acknowledged he doesn’t know, nor care to, what Creation Scientists and organizations like AIG say on any given topic, especially what kinds of evidence might change their mind.
