Re: index fossils

Bill Payne (bpayne15@juno.com)
Tue, 22 Jun 1999 21:06:09 -0600

On Mon, 21 Jun 1999 21:24:34 -0500 Glenn Morton <grmorton@earthlink.net>
writes:

>Bill, I would disagree with what David Campbell wrote. Rapid burial is
>not necessary for the nannofossil UNLESS one believes in a global
>flood. The depositional rate in the deep ocean is quite slow today and
>the slow rain of dead nannofossils can take a century or a millennium
>for all I care. Speciation events occur only once every hundred
>thousand years or so. Thus you will have 100 millenniums of the same
>species slowly raining down on the ocean floor before it is replaced by
>a newly evolved species.

But David said either rapid burial or deep-ocean burial was necessary to
prevent bioturbation from mixing everything up. Are you saying that all
of the Gulf coast sediments were deep-ocean deposits? Do we see layering
in these deposits?

>Document a case of stress-induced, irreversible morpholgical change
>among forams, nannoplankton or diatoms. I don't know of any such case.

Document a case of _evolution_-induced, irreversible morpholgical change
among forams, nannoplankton or diatoms. Prove that the change was slow
and gradual rather than rapid.

>This is an argument for solpsism. YOu are saying that we can't know
>anything therefore we can believe what we want to. If we really can't
>know anything then drinking a bottle of arsenic won't hurt you. We
>can't know that it will hurt us and we have a poor understanding of
>reality. Do you believe this?

No, do you?

>My lawyer advises this disclamer: I don't advise anyone to drink arsenic
>as it will kill you. We have a good enough understanding of reality to
>KNOW this inspite of what Bill says.

There you go again, tell others what they must believe. :-)

Bill