Raup, David M., Record is Catastrophic, Chicago Field Museum of Natural History, Bulletin (Vol.54, March 1983), p.2 1, Univ. of Chicago
http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/flood.html
Handy Dandy Evolution Refuter
http://www.parentcompany.com/handy_dandy/hdertoc.htm
The Fossil Record
Sean D. Pitman M.D.
http://naturalselection.0catch.com/Files/fossilrecord.html
The Missing 150 Million Years! - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Soj7dZ3fsA . The Channeled Scablands; Scientific Bias Against Catastrophism. "In the end, the truth of catastrophism did win, but it took more than 50 years to see the project through. And this was despite the fact that the event in question was relatively easy to document through field observations." E. K. Peters, No Stone Unturned: Reasoning About Rocks and Fossils, 1991, pp. 78 and 84. http://nwcreation.net/scablands.html.
Evolutionists Find Rapid Magnetic Field Reversal (15 Days)! - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fn6pfzjbGHc
Alexander V. Lalomov, Ph.D. Geology - http://www.icr.org/research/index/research_physci_lalomov .
Interpreting Earth History - http://www.icr.org/article/59 .
Kurt P. Wise, Ph.D. Geology (Paleontology) - http://www.icr.org/research/index/research_physci_wise .
Quotes by Evolutionary Scientists Against Evolution - http://www.warneveryone.com/evolution_scientists_quotes.htm
Live broadcasting with instant message - http://www.justin.tv/warneveryone
KJV1611 Bible - http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=authorizedversion&search=Search
The Institute for Creation Research equips believers with evidences of the Bible's accuracy and authority through scientific research, educational programs, and media presentations, all conducted within a thoroughly biblical framework.
info@icr.org
http://www.icr.org
@1212boochie Dr. David Berlinski, professor at Stanford, Rutgers, Columbia etc. doesn't believe in the Bible or Creation Theory, but he said that the fossil record is "simply mystifying. It does not sustain any kind of darwinian prediction that can be intelligently derived from darwinian theory. And it doesn't seem to sustain anything else. It's a perfectly mystifying record." I agree. We all organize the hodgepodge shuffle in the fossil record according to our presuppositions.
RomansGalatians 1 month ago
@1212boochie I guess what i'm trying to say is this: Are you organizing the layers according to your theory? Are you interpreting the data according to your presuppostions?
Because it sounds like the layers are all over the place. Some high, some low, some ocean, some land. And the way that your organize them is according to index fossils. And the way the index fossils are organized are according to Evolution Theory.
RomansGalatians 1 month ago
@RomansGalatians Man that is not how it works ok. The Gulf of Mexico for example the sediment in and around the gulf is lower in elevation but way way way way younger in age than rocks from say Tennessee that is much higher in elevation but older in age. Where there was once was ocean can now be high mountain tops. The elevation of the of earth strata is not why geologist say life started in the ocean. Life started as microscopic prokaryotes, single cell without cell nucleus in the ocean.
1212boochie 1 month ago
@1212boochie And if uniformitarian, and it took millions of years with slow erosion and sedimentation, then the land layers in existence on land would be eroded and lost, and the only record that we would have would be the ocean level.
I can't see how people can say "all life started in the ocean" merely because the bottom of elevation is in the ocean.
RomansGalatians 1 month ago
@1212boochie Well, I agree that the lower layer will be younger than any above it. But how much younger? Let's say there's an earthquake in Juneau and a huge mud and rockslide falls down the mountainside into the sea. The sea life on the bottom was in existence at the same time as the trees and land vegetation.
Whether the vast majority of the earth's crust was catastrophic or uniformitarian, you'd always get sea life on the bottom.
RomansGalatians 1 month ago
@RomansGalatians LOL.....What????????????????
1212boochie 1 month ago
@RomansGalatians Its the other way around.....lower elevation rock will be older than rock in higher elevation(unless there has been movement like thrust faulting) No rock below another rock( unless it has moved) will NEVER be younger than the one above it. Don't forget about the sea floor though as being the lowest.
1212boochie 1 month ago
@RomansGalatians Well more than just index fossils are used like what the other rocks above and below can tell you and other things. To the last thing..... similar climates mean similar age. Similar fauna are going to live in similar climates there by determining the rock type.
1212boochie 1 month ago
@1212boochie Under what possible model, whether Catastrophic or Uniformitarian, would you NOT see the ocean floor as the lowest layer?
RomansGalatians 1 month ago
@1212boochie From the mountains to the sea.
RomansGalatians 1 month ago