For Creationists: Why Are there No Mammals in the Pre-Cambrian Layer?

[MSizer]

OK, so I've heard the silly statement that the fossils are all a result of the great flood, and that the fossils are layered because first the smaller weaker animals would die, and then the bigger smarter ones would follow. Supposedly this explains why we find only mollusks in the lower rock layers, and more complex organisms progressively as we move up through the layers.

Here's my problem with that argument. It could only be correct if not a single mammal ever had died prior to the flood. The fact that there isn't a single rabbit, human or cat in the precambrian layer means that not a single single mammal or bird or fish could have died prior to the flood. Not even one single specimen.

Can any creationists account for this?

 

[Gunfingers]

Well obviously the flood was post Cambrian. I mean, everyone knows THAT! :sarcastic

 

[McBell]

Why Are there No Mammals in the Pre-Cambrian Layer?

Well duh.
God had not made them yet.

 

[MSizer]

Hey you two gunfingers and mystemia, I'm only looking for serious intelligent claims supported by science here. 8^)

 

[fantome profane]

For Creationists: Why Are there No Mammals in the Pre-Cambrian Layer?

Hey you two gunfingers and mystemia, I'm only looking for serious intelligent claims supported by science here. 8^)

Then why would you ask Creationists?

 

[McBell]

Hey you two gunfingers and mystemia, I'm only looking for serious intelligent claims supported by science here. 8^)

You are inconsistent.

 

[MSizer]

No takers? So Creationists, you're admittedly stumped then? Have I proven Creation to be bunk?

 

[Man of Faith]

When asking a question to creationists one might want do it on a day that is not the Lord's day because we could be in church on that day worshiping our creator. It's ironic that the OP is pointing to early fossils as evidence for evolution when this sudden appearance of many animal groups with no known antecedents is the greatest single objection to the ToE. We need to look at how fossils are formed. Most complete fossils are invariably linked to a catastrophe in some way in which they were buried quickly. This can be something like a flood a mudslide or landslide, a layer of volcanic ash, etc. So we see that it is possible that most fossils were formed by the great deluge which would validate the reasoning that the lower life forms would be at the bottom layers. And if a rabbit is found in Precambrian I would expect all evolutionists to fall on their knees and ask for forgiveness to God.

 

[MSizer]

...This can be something like a flood a mudslide or landslide, a layer of volcanic ash, etc. So we see that it is possible that most fossils were formed by the great deluge which would validate the reasoning that the lower life forms would be at the bottom layers.

Uh, really? Plant matter floats. Therefore most plants would be on top of the all of the animals in one big layer if a big flood were the cause of fossils. Plants of course are evenly spaced throughout the layers.

And when a rabbit is found in Precambrian I would expect all evolutionists to fall on their knees and ask for forgiveness to God.

Actually no, it would be necessary to say "holy crap, teh ToE is fundamentally flawed, we need to rethink the whole thing". Despite your conviction, creationism would still be completely void of any validity.

But, what matters most is that there are no rabbits in the precambrian layer. If you're so certain that a rabbit in the precambrian layer would prove Creation, why aren't creationists working day and night to find one? Because they know it's a futile exercise to bother, or they're not smart enough to recognize the impact such a find would have on the ToE.

 

[Gunfingers]

When asking a question to creationists one might want do it on a day that is not the Lord's day because we could be in church on that day worshiping our creator.

It's also worth noting that most of the world's creationists are Muslim or Hindu. Hindus don't have a rest day to the best of my knowledge and Muslims do it on Friday.

 

[Man of Faith]

[/size][/font][/color]

Uh, really? Plant matter floats. Therefore most plants would be on top of the all of the animals in one big layer if a big flood were the cause of fossils. Plants of course are evenly spaced throughout the layers.

Animals float also.

Actually no, it would be necessary to say "holy crap, teh ToE is fundamentally flawed, we need to rethink the whole thing". Despite your conviction, creationism would still be completely void of any validity.

But, what matters most is that there are no rabbits in the precambrian layer. If you're so certain that a rabbit in the precambrian layer would prove Creation, why aren't creationists working day and night to find one? Because they know it's a futile exercise to bother, or they're not smart enough to recognize the impact such a find would have on the ToE.

This is an ad hominem argument and therefore will not be given credence in this post.

 

[Man of Faith]

It's also worth noting that most of the world's creationists are Muslim or Hindu. Hindus don't have a rest day to the best of my knowledge and Muslims do it on Friday.

Sorry, that's off topic.

 

[MSizer]

Animals float also.

Then why are there layers in the first place? If so, they should just all be intermingled.

This is an ad hominem argument and therefore will not be given credence in this post.

It's my thread, so by all means, you're welcome to proceed.

(this is cool - I've finally found something that not even the follishness of "creation science" can supposedly "explain")

 

[Smoke]

Sorry, that's off topic.

It's a direct response to your post, so if it's off-topic, your post was off-topic, too.

On topic, we have a single response from a creationist that fails to address the question, but does offer the interesting phrase, "Most complete fossils are invariably ... "
Most and invariably don't got together in this way.

 

[Sunstone]

And when a rabbit is found in Precambrian I would expect all evolutionists to fall on their knees and ask for forgiveness to God.

If you are so certain that a rabbit will be found in Precambrian rock, then I will bet you any amount of money not less than $1000 that a rabbit is not found in Precambrian rock within the year. Next year I will be willing to make the same bet again. And afterwards, again. It should be an easy bet for you.

 

[Man of Faith]

If you are so certain that a rabbit will be found in Precambrian rock, then I will bet you any amount of money not less than $1000 that a rabbit is not found in Precambrian rock within the year. Next year I will be willing to make the same bet again. And afterwards, again. It should be an easy bet for you.

I meant to say if.

 

[fantome profane]

When asking a question to creationists one might want do it on a day that is not the Lord's day because we could be in church on that day worshiping our creator.

That is actually a valid point. Although there are creationists of faiths other than yours with different holy day traditions, we all do need to be more patient. But you are here now and surely can answer the question.

It's ironic that the OP is pointing to early fossils as evidence for evolution when this sudden appearance of many animal groups with no known antecedents is the greatest single objection to the ToE.

Actually this is not true, the “Cambrian explosion” as it has come to be called represents a period or relatively rapid development of new varieties, but all of the new forms have antecedents that are found in the Precambrian. The precedents of mammals for example can be found in the fossil record (reptiles with mammal like features, mammals with reptile like features, etc). But no mammals are found in the Precambrian. How does creationism explain this?

We need to look at how fossils are formed. Most complete fossils are invariably linked to a catastrophe in some way in which they were buried quickly. This can be something like a flood a mudslide or landslide, a layer of volcanic ash, etc. So we see that it is possible that most fossils were formed by the great deluge which would validate the reasoning that the lower life forms would be at the bottom layers.

Yet this is not what we observe in the fossil record. It is not sorted according to size, or according to mobility, or according to the ability to swim, or according to density or the ability to float.


(source)

millions of years
before present event
4500 origin of earth
3500 oldest fossil bacteria
3000+ appearance of photosynthesis
2000+ oxygen containing atmosphere
1500 appearance of eucaryotes
800+ appearance of metazoans
600+ appearance of chordates
600 appearance of organisms with hard parts 600 end of precambrian eon
600 85% of earth's history already over
600 start of phanerozoic eon
600 beginning of Cambrian period
550 appearance of jawless fish
500 end of Cambrian period
450 appearance of terrestrial plants
420 appearance of jawed fish
350 appearance of amphibians on land
300+ appearance of reptiles
300 appearance of insects
250 appearance of mammal-like reptiles
200+ appearance of mammals
200+ appearance of dinosaurs
200 start of Jurassic period
150 end of Jurassic period
150 appearance of birds
80 appearance of tree shrew-like protoprimates
65 meteor strikes earth leading to
extinction of dinosaurs
65 end of the Cretaceous period
65 beginning of the Tertiary period
65 beginning of the "age of mammals"​

And when a rabbit is found in Precambrian I would expect all evolutionists to fall on their knees and ask for forgiveness to God.

When a Precambrian rabbit is found I personally will reject the theory of evolution. What would it take for you to reconsider Young Earth Creationism?

 

[MSizer]

This is cool - I finally have stumped the creationists and they even recognize it themselves this time! I should be allowed to frubal myself for this. 8^)

 

[McBell]

This is cool - I finally have stumped the creationists and they even recognize it themselves this time! I should be allowed to frubal myself for this. 8^)

um...
how exactly does non-participation in a thread give validity to the thread topic?

 

[MSizer]

um...
how exactly does non-participation in a thread give validity to the thread topic?

OK, fine, let me be more specific - it does not in all situations give validity, but I believe, based on the vocal nature of some creationists on RF, that silence is strong evidence for defeat.