Truth in science
The truth about fossils
The formation of fossils.
Most books and videos explaining how fossils are formed, give the impression that it takes many years to build up layers of sediment in which organic remains of living things become buried. These organic remains then become fossilised, a process claimed to take millions of years.
What many people apparently don't realise is that this idea of gradual burial, over many years, is demonstrably wrong, because good, intact fossils require ‘rapid’ burial in sufficient sediment to prevent decay or predatory destruction. That is an undeniable fact.
It is common sense that rock containing good, undamaged fossils must have been laid down rapidly. Sometimes in catastrophic conditions.
The very existence of good, intact fossils is powerful testament to rapid burial and sedimentation.
The multi-million year myth.
You just don't get fossils forming from gradual burial. Organic remains don't sit around on the sea bed, or elsewhere, waiting for sediment to cover them a millimetre at a time, over a lengthy time period.
Unless they are buried rapidly, they would soon be damaged or destroyed by predation and/or decay.
The fact that so many sedimentary rocks contain fossils, indicates that the sediment that created them was normally laid down within a short time. Wherever fossiliferous rock is found it indicates the sediment, which forms that rock, was laid down rapidly.
Another important factor is that many large fossils (tree trunks, large fish, dinosaurs etc.) intersect several, or many, strata (sometimes called layers). This clearly indicates that multiple strata were formed rapidly, in a single event, by grading/segregation of sedimentary particles into distinct layers, and not laid down stratum by stratum over a long period of time or during different, geological eras.
This slow superposition of strata is the uniformitarian interpretation of rock layers, this is essential for the so-called fossil record, which evolutionists rely on.
It is claimed that strata/layers of different composition/materials represent different, prevailing environmental eras/epochs, each spanning many millions of years. This hypothesis is the basis of the geological column.
In view of the fact that many large fossils required a substantial amount of sediment to bury them, and the fact that they intersect multiple strata/layers (polystrate fossils), how can any sensible person assume that stratification (strata formation) takes millions of years?
We know from laboratory experiments and field studies of recent, sedimentation events that it certainly doesn’t: sedimentology.fr/
Rapid formation of strata/layers- a wealth of recent, field evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/
No evidence of evolution.
All creatures and plants alive today, which are found as fossils, are the same in their fossil form as the living examples, in spite of the fact that the fossils are claimed to be millions of years old. So all living things today could be called 'living fossils' inasmuch as there is no evidence of any evolutionary changes in the alleged multi-million year timescale. The fossil record shows either extinct species or unchanged species, that is all.
For example: the most abundant fossils are shellfish, molluscs etc. There are literally many millions of them in collections and museums all around the world. Yet there are no examples of partially developed shellfish, no examples of shellfish with partially developed shells. The evolution of shellfish would have taken a long time, so there should be millions of examples of shellfish showing evidence of that evolution, many transitional or intermediate examples, but there are none. Furthermore, shellfish around today are similar to fossilised shellfish that allegedly lived hundreds of millions of years ago - which means they haven't evolved at all in hundreds of millions of years. Yet, it is claimed that enormous evolution has taken place in other species, leading right up to humans, in a similar time period.
Here is something which is not widely known by the public:
Bivalve (shellfish) fossils are extremely abundant in the fossil record, and they are normally found tightly closed.
Why is this important?
Because bivalves open when they die. If they are fossilised in a closed state, it means they were buried while still alive.
This is compelling evidence they were buried rapidly, under a substantial weight (depth) of sediment. It certainly couldn’t have taken millions of years of gradual, sedimentary deposition to bury them, as evolutionists claim.
When no evidence is cited as evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/15157133658
The Cambrian Explosion.
Trilobites and other many creatures appeared suddenly in some of the earliest rocks of the fossil record, with no intermediate ancestors. This sudden appearance of a great variety of advanced, fully developed creatures is called the Cambrian Explosion. Trilobites are especially interesting because they have complex eyes, which would need a lot of progressive evolution to develop such advanced features However, there is no evidence of any evolution leading up to the Cambrian Explosion, and that is a serious dilemma for evolutionists.
Trilobites are now thought to be extinct, although it is possible that similar creatures could still exist in unexplored parts of deep oceans.
See fossil of a crab unchanged after many millions of years:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/12702046604/in/set-72...
Fossil museum - example of living things - un-evolved after many millions of years: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/
The truth about fossils
The formation of fossils.
Most books and videos explaining how fossils are formed, give the impression that it takes many years to build up layers of sediment in which organic remains of living things become buried. These organic remains then become fossilised, a process claimed to take millions of years.
What many people apparently don't realise is that this idea of gradual burial, over many years, is demonstrably wrong, because good, intact fossils require ‘rapid’ burial in sufficient sediment to prevent decay or predatory destruction. That is an undeniable fact.
It is common sense that rock containing good, undamaged fossils must have been laid down rapidly. Sometimes in catastrophic conditions.
The very existence of good, intact fossils is powerful testament to rapid burial and sedimentation.
The multi-million year myth.
You just don't get fossils forming from gradual burial. Organic remains don't sit around on the sea bed, or elsewhere, waiting for sediment to cover them a millimetre at a time, over a lengthy time period.
Unless they are buried rapidly, they would soon be damaged or destroyed by predation and/or decay.
The fact that so many sedimentary rocks contain fossils, indicates that the sediment that created them was normally laid down within a short time. Wherever fossiliferous rock is found it indicates the sediment, which forms that rock, was laid down rapidly.
Another important factor is that many large fossils (tree trunks, large fish, dinosaurs etc.) intersect several, or many, strata (sometimes called layers). This clearly indicates that multiple strata were formed rapidly, in a single event, by grading/segregation of sedimentary particles into distinct layers, and not laid down stratum by stratum over a long period of time or during different, geological eras.
This slow superposition of strata is the uniformitarian interpretation of rock layers, this is essential for the so-called fossil record, which evolutionists rely on.
It is claimed that strata/layers of different composition/materials represent different, prevailing environmental eras/epochs, each spanning many millions of years. This hypothesis is the basis of the geological column.
In view of the fact that many large fossils required a substantial amount of sediment to bury them, and the fact that they intersect multiple strata/layers (polystrate fossils), how can any sensible person assume that stratification (strata formation) takes millions of years?
We know from laboratory experiments and field studies of recent, sedimentation events that it certainly doesn’t: sedimentology.fr/
Rapid formation of strata/layers- a wealth of recent, field evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157635944904973/
No evidence of evolution.
All creatures and plants alive today, which are found as fossils, are the same in their fossil form as the living examples, in spite of the fact that the fossils are claimed to be millions of years old. So all living things today could be called 'living fossils' inasmuch as there is no evidence of any evolutionary changes in the alleged multi-million year timescale. The fossil record shows either extinct species or unchanged species, that is all.
For example: the most abundant fossils are shellfish, molluscs etc. There are literally many millions of them in collections and museums all around the world. Yet there are no examples of partially developed shellfish, no examples of shellfish with partially developed shells. The evolution of shellfish would have taken a long time, so there should be millions of examples of shellfish showing evidence of that evolution, many transitional or intermediate examples, but there are none. Furthermore, shellfish around today are similar to fossilised shellfish that allegedly lived hundreds of millions of years ago - which means they haven't evolved at all in hundreds of millions of years. Yet, it is claimed that enormous evolution has taken place in other species, leading right up to humans, in a similar time period.
Here is something which is not widely known by the public:
Bivalve (shellfish) fossils are extremely abundant in the fossil record, and they are normally found tightly closed.
Why is this important?
Because bivalves open when they die. If they are fossilised in a closed state, it means they were buried while still alive.
This is compelling evidence they were buried rapidly, under a substantial weight (depth) of sediment. It certainly couldn’t have taken millions of years of gradual, sedimentary deposition to bury them, as evolutionists claim.
When no evidence is cited as evidence:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/15157133658
The Cambrian Explosion.
Trilobites and other many creatures appeared suddenly in some of the earliest rocks of the fossil record, with no intermediate ancestors. This sudden appearance of a great variety of advanced, fully developed creatures is called the Cambrian Explosion. Trilobites are especially interesting because they have complex eyes, which would need a lot of progressive evolution to develop such advanced features However, there is no evidence of any evolution leading up to the Cambrian Explosion, and that is a serious dilemma for evolutionists.
Trilobites are now thought to be extinct, although it is possible that similar creatures could still exist in unexplored parts of deep oceans.
See fossil of a crab unchanged after many millions of years:
www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/12702046604/in/set-72...
Fossil museum - example of living things - un-evolved after many millions of years: www.flickr.com/photos/101536517@N06/sets/72157641367196613/