This is interesting. Thanks for sharing. I'm a firm believer in both creation and evolution. Yes, throw the tomatoes my way. But hear me out. I
believe G-d used evolution for a special purpose.
Shark fossil found in Kentucky coal mine., page 1
privacy
Pages:
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times
ATS Members have flagged this thread 5 times
Topic started on 19-4-2011 @ 11:24 AM by theindependentjournal
Website with info Creationist view site
UPI Story Link
Everyday more and more evidence is coming out that makes Evolution look stupid. Even some of the most renowned Evolutionists have ran away from it and moved to ID (Intelligent Design) but this is not GOD for them, it is usually Aliens. Which I think begs the question, who made the Aliens or where did they come from?
This story puts something into question though, are we wrong about how coal was formed in bogs or are we wrong about the age of the Earth? Possibly Noah's flood caused everything we keep finding?
I aint really looking for a debate on it, just interesting story and food for thought.
UPI Story Link
Everyday more and more evidence is coming out that makes Evolution look stupid. Even some of the most renowned Evolutionists have ran away from it and moved to ID (Intelligent Design) but this is not GOD for them, it is usually Aliens. Which I think begs the question, who made the Aliens or where did they come from?
This story puts something into question though, are we wrong about how coal was formed in bogs or are we wrong about the age of the Earth? Possibly Noah's flood caused everything we keep finding?
I aint really looking for a debate on it, just interesting story and food for thought.
reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:45 AM by Essan
reply to post by theindependentjournal
A lot of coal deposits formed in low lying tropical forests, like, for example, around the Amazon today. Periodicially (every few hundred thousand years or so) sea levels would rise, and some estuarine sediments would be deposited. Then sea levels drop and rainforest returns.
Under such circumstances, the idea of a shark being buried in estuarine deposits between layers of coal is quite
feasible.
Or maybe, the shark tooth was washed into a coastal forest during a tsunami or storm surge?
If you understand geological processes, such findings are not the least bit strange.
A lot of coal deposits formed in low lying tropical forests, like, for example, around the Amazon today. Periodicially (every few hundred thousand years or so) sea levels would rise, and some estuarine sediments would be deposited. Then sea levels drop and rainforest returns.
Under such circumstances, the idea of a shark being buried in estuarine deposits between layers of coal is quite
feasible.
Or maybe, the shark tooth was washed into a coastal forest during a tsunami or storm surge?
If you understand geological processes, such findings are not the least bit strange.
reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 11:57 AM by grey580
reply to post by theindependentjournal
Here is the problem with Science.
It only uses evidence it can directly confirm from empirical evidence.
If it can not directly confirm something then it pretty much gets thrown out.
Imagine it like a court case. The evidence is presented. Some evidence is circumstantial, some evidence is dna, some evidence is forensic. Some gets thrown out and invalidated because it cannot be verified. Then the scientific community reviews the case and then either confirms or denies something as being true or not.
And herein lies the problem. Sometimes things happen that are so outside the realm of science that they cannot be verified by scientific means. And I think this is a huge problem with science. Case in point this fossil found in coal. Something out of the ordinary happened. It doesn't fit the model for coal formation.
Now this doesn't mean that science is stupid. In fact it's quite the opposite.
But that doesn't mean it's perfect either.
Before criticizing something you should first understand the process.
Now I will criticize the process and will agree that in some areas science can be somewhat deficient in certain areas. But at least they are trying to explain what is happening in procedural method.
BTW I like the mention of the flood and scripture in the article. There are legends worldwide that describe the flood from other cultures. It's very possible that it's something that happens every so often. Possibly every time we pass through the milky way galaxy.
Here is the problem with Science.
It only uses evidence it can directly confirm from empirical evidence.
If it can not directly confirm something then it pretty much gets thrown out.
Imagine it like a court case. The evidence is presented. Some evidence is circumstantial, some evidence is dna, some evidence is forensic. Some gets thrown out and invalidated because it cannot be verified. Then the scientific community reviews the case and then either confirms or denies something as being true or not.
And herein lies the problem. Sometimes things happen that are so outside the realm of science that they cannot be verified by scientific means. And I think this is a huge problem with science. Case in point this fossil found in coal. Something out of the ordinary happened. It doesn't fit the model for coal formation.
Now this doesn't mean that science is stupid. In fact it's quite the opposite.
But that doesn't mean it's perfect either.
Before criticizing something you should first understand the process.
Now I will criticize the process and will agree that in some areas science can be somewhat deficient in certain areas. But at least they are trying to explain what is happening in procedural method.
BTW I like the mention of the flood and scripture in the article. There are legends worldwide that describe the flood from other cultures. It's very possible that it's something that happens every so often. Possibly every time we pass through the milky way galaxy.
reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 12:02 PM by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by theindependentjournal
...this shark jaw is from around 300 million years ago, that's sort of within the scope of evolution, geology, paleontology, etc. What's the problem with evolution here? How does this contradict anything in modern science?
It's an Edestus fossil for crying out loud.
Name some and explain how.
...except that they haven't. Unless you're talking about the dishonest edit job done on Richard Dawkins...so a straw man.
The shark jaw is 300 million years old, and geologists are quite right about how coal forms.
Except for not a single shred of geologic evidence actually resembles anything that would be found in a world which was globally flooded.
The actual story itself is interesting, not the ignorant creationist distortions of it.
...this shark jaw is from around 300 million years ago, that's sort of within the scope of evolution, geology, paleontology, etc. What's the problem with evolution here? How does this contradict anything in modern science?
It's an Edestus fossil for crying out loud.
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Everyday more and more evidence is coming out that makes Evolution look stupid.
Name some and explain how.
Even some of the most renowned Evolutionists have ran away from it and moved to ID (Intelligent Design) but this is not GOD for them, it is usually Aliens.
...except that they haven't. Unless you're talking about the dishonest edit job done on Richard Dawkins...so a straw man.
This story puts something into question though, are we wrong about how coal was formed in bogs or are we wrong about the age of the Earth?
The shark jaw is 300 million years old, and geologists are quite right about how coal forms.
Possibly Noah's flood caused everything we keep finding?
Except for not a single shred of geologic evidence actually resembles anything that would be found in a world which was globally flooded.
I aint really looking for a debate on it, just interesting story and food for thought.
The actual story itself is interesting, not the ignorant creationist distortions of it.
edit on 19/4/11 by madnessinmysoul because: (no reason
given)
reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 01:20 PM by uva3021
reply to post by theindependentjournal
A fossil of a genus of shark was found in a region where the genus was believed to be indigenous to, dated to the time frame from which all other related fossils have been dated.
This proves evolution to be false? Explain your view sir.
Now if the fossil were dated to 100 mya, the anomaly would merit further consideration.
Don't know why this is even newsworthy, aside from being local chatter. Though, the person who found it certainly should be proud. But its just another rock to throw on top of the mountain of evidence for evolution.
A fossil of a genus of shark was found in a region where the genus was believed to be indigenous to, dated to the time frame from which all other related fossils have been dated.
This proves evolution to be false? Explain your view sir.
Now if the fossil were dated to 100 mya, the anomaly would merit further consideration.
Don't know why this is even newsworthy, aside from being local chatter. Though, the person who found it certainly should be proud. But its just another rock to throw on top of the mountain of evidence for evolution.
edit on 19-4-2011 by uva3021 because: (no reason given)
reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 02:06 PM by john_bmth
reply to post by grey580
Yes, but the biblical account has only one world wide flood and it doesn't mention it being 300 million years ago. Assuming he is referring to the biblical flood, it is a bastardisation of science to pick elements out of context to support your faith whilst conveniently ignoring the wider context and conflicting evidence.
Yes, but the biblical account has only one world wide flood and it doesn't mention it being 300 million years ago. Assuming he is referring to the biblical flood, it is a bastardisation of science to pick elements out of context to support your faith whilst conveniently ignoring the wider context and conflicting evidence.
reply posted on 19-4-2011 @ 03:18 PM by grey580
reply to post by john_bmth
I don't believe that he is using the biblical flood account as the event that put that bone in the coal layer.
It is quite obvious that the flood of noah was not 300 million years ago.
It would of have to have been another flood in another age.
I think he's just using the biblical flood event as an example that a "flood" did occur at some time in the past.
He was however trying to show that the bible was a historically relevant book.
And research shows that it is based in some fact.
I don't believe that he is using the biblical flood account as the event that put that bone in the coal layer.
It is quite obvious that the flood of noah was not 300 million years ago.
It would of have to have been another flood in another age.
I think he's just using the biblical flood event as an example that a "flood" did occur at some time in the past.
He was however trying to show that the bible was a historically relevant book.
And research shows that it is based in some fact.
reply posted on 20-4-2011 @ 04:39 AM by madnessinmysoul
reply to post by grey580
...there's evidence of large and possibly catastrophic flooding....but nothing on a global scale. Sure, we have evidence that regional floods occurred on scales that we have yet to witness in recorded history...but there's not a single shred of geologic evidence that shows that any global floods have happened.
...there's evidence of large and possibly catastrophic flooding....but nothing on a global scale. Sure, we have evidence that regional floods occurred on scales that we have yet to witness in recorded history...but there's not a single shred of geologic evidence that shows that any global floods have happened.
reply posted on 22-4-2011 @ 01:17 PM by Byrd
Very cool find of an Edestus fossil fragment... from the era when most of the eastern seacoast was under the ocean (and interestingly enough, this was
during a time of glaciation when sea levels were lower. Map of it his here: en.wikipedia.org...:US_pennsylvanian_general.jpg )
I like the idea that the miner will get to keep his fossil.
(edited to add that the Creationist story mentions it was found at the top of a coal seam. This means that the area was becoming an ocean as the glaciation period ended and sharks and other creatures that live along the continental shelf came into the environment.
I like the idea that the miner will get to keep his fossil.
(edited to add that the Creationist story mentions it was found at the top of a coal seam. This means that the area was becoming an ocean as the glaciation period ended and sharks and other creatures that live along the continental shelf came into the environment.
edit on 22-4-2011 by
Byrd because: (no reason given)
Pages: ^^TOP^^
Newest topics, updated in real-time:
So, who discovered the location of the Equator? Who discovered the latitude zero? How?
Science & Technology: 47 seconds ago
Science & Technology: 47 seconds ago
Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:
"CIA are drug smugglers." - Federal Judge Bonner, head of DEA- You don't get better proof than th
General Conspiracies: 17 hours ago, 53 flags
General Conspiracies: 17 hours ago, 53 flags
Quantum Gravity Model "Loads" "Programs" from NON-PHYSICAL DIMENSION with INVERTED PENTAGRAMS!
Science & Technology: 15 hours ago, 32 flags
Science & Technology: 15 hours ago, 32 flags
Was Jesus a Greek-Phoenician Philosopher? A hidden book, revealed…
Conspiracies in Religions: 11 hours ago, 18 flags
Conspiracies in Religions: 11 hours ago, 18 flags
Newest topics getting replies, in real-time:
German elite are discussing various scenarios involving the use of force to ensure control over Gree
Global Meltdown: 11 hours ago, 60 replies
Global Meltdown: 11 hours ago, 60 replies
"CIA are drug smugglers." - Federal Judge Bonner, head of DEA- You don't get better proof than th
General Conspiracies: 17 hours ago, 50 replies
General Conspiracies: 17 hours ago, 50 replies
How long would a footprint stay visible on the surface of the moon?
Space Exploration: 11 hours ago, 47 replies
Space Exploration: 11 hours ago, 47 replies
The Above Top Secret Web sites are a
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.010 seconds
Page processed in: 0.162 seconds
wholly owned social content community of
The Above Network, LLC.
This content community relies on
user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership
who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides
a collaborative venue for free expression.
ATS Server: www2.theabovenetwork.com
Header data: 0.010 seconds
Page processed in: 0.162 seconds
