>Group
>
>On Sat, 14 Sep 1996 15:48:38, Glenn Morton wrote:
>
>GM>Stephen cites a book I ghost wrote:
>
>SJ>Seriously, I presume the majority of fossils formed by being
>>rapidly covered by mud or sand. McDowell & Stewart (ghost-written
>>by Glenn) say:
>
>GM>It is not a good idea to cite an author who has changed his mind
>>as radically as I have changed my mind about what I formerly
>>believed. It has a tendency to undercut the validity of what you
>>are citing.
>
>Only if the "author who has changed his mind" did so for the better!
>:-) Besides, Glenn privately gave me permission to quote his book on
>the Reflector.
>
>GM>You wrote of my discussing the Green River formation:
>
>I said nothing about any "Green River formation". The book does not
>mention it, and in any event I was speaking generally. Here is the
>quotes I posted:
>
>"The process of fossilization is itself an evidence of abnormal
>deposition. Today, when an animal dies, whether on land or sea, the
>body immediately begins to rot. The scavengers, such as vultures,
>usually eat the carcass. These two agencies, bacteria and scavengers,
>are very efficient at recycling the material contained in the body. The
>bones of the animal will dissolve in the sea or be weathered away on
>land, so not even the bones are sure to be preserved. Thus, there are
>two agencies which tend to prevent the fossilization of any animal-
>biological scavengers and weather. (Charles Schuchert and Carl O.
>Dunbar, Textbook of Geology, Pt. 2, New York: John Wiley and
>Sons, 1933, p13).
>
>The only manner in which a carcass can be preserved is to remove it
>from these two agencies. This means that for an animal to be
>preserved, it must be buried deep enough so scavengers can't get to it
>and deep enough so oxygen, which bacteria need, is excluded. This
>implies, however, that the animal must be buried shortly after its
>death or there will be nothing left to preserve. As Beerbower states:
>`In general, the more rapidly an organism is buried and the tighter the
>seal of its sedimentary tomb, the better the chance of preservation.'
>(James R. Berbower, Search for the Past, Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-
>Hall, Inc., 1968, p39)
>
>..Thus it can be seen that the mere presence of a fossil indicates
>deposition of sediments had to have been thousands of times faster
>than the normal estimated rates of deposition in order for a fossil to
>be preserved. If you wished to cover a dead fish with two and one-
>half inches of sediment, hoping that would be enough to preserve
>him, you would need a 100 year supply of sediment. And it is
>uncertain whether two and one-half inches would be deep enough
>since worms can easily reach that depth and bring the bacteria and
>oxygen which cause decay. When you look at the major fossil
>deposits in the world, it becomes obvious that tremendous quantities
>of sediment were required to preserve them."
>
>(McDowell J. & Stewart D., "Reasons Why We Should Consider
>Christianity", 1981, Scripture Press, pp191-192)
>
>SJ>..Thus it can be seen that the mere presence of a fossil indicates
>>deposition of sediments had to have been thousands of times faster
>>than the normal estimated rates of deposition in order for a fossil to
>>be preserved. If you wished to cover a dead fish with two and one-
>>half inches of sediment, hoping that would be enough to preserve
>>him, you would need a 100 year supply of sediment. And it is
>>uncertain whether two and one-half inches would be deep enough
>>since worms can easily reach that depth and bring the bacteria and
>>oxygen which cause decay. When you look at the major fossil
>>deposits in the world, it becomes obvious that tremendous quantities
>>of sediment were required to preserve them."
>>(McDowell J. & Stewart D., "Reasons Why We Should Consider
>>Christianity", 1981, Scripture Press, pp191-192)
>
>GM>Since I wrote that piece, I have learned a few things. You
>>yourself say that the Flood was local and lay between Ararat and
>>Babylon.
>
>Not necessarily. I would think it would have been somewhere in that
>general area, since they are two place names use in proximity with
>the Flood story (Gn 8:4 "And the ark rested...upon the mountains of
>Ararat); and (Gn 10:9-10 "Nimrod...The first centers of his kingdom
>were Babylon, Erech, Akkad and Calneh, in Shinar.").
>
>GM>And you seem to believe that the earth is old.
>
>Is this a cross-examination? Is this attorney Jim Bell, or even
>worse, Phil Johnson in disguise? :-) Yes, I am almost convinced
>(quite contrary to the position I started with) that "the earth is"
>(it is like confessing a murder) "old"! (with apologies to Chuck D.)
>
>GM>So why would you care how long it takes for a fish to be covered?
>>I was using this to implicitly argue for a global flood. If there
>>is no Global Flood, as you believe, then it matters not the rapidity
>>with which fossils are formed. Your argument can't be used in the
>>fashion you are trying to.
>
>In fact Glenn was arguing this *explicitly* for a "Global Flood":
>
>"With these and other examples, is it really reasonable to believe
>slow deposition preserved these fossils? How much more reasonable to
>assume they were deposited rapidly in a worldwide flood such as
>described by the Bible." (McDowell J. & Stewart D., "Reasons Why We
>Should Consider Christianity", 1981, Scripture Press, p193).
>
>But I was just answering Glenn's question "How did the fossils form?"
>
>GM>To answer the question of how the Green River fish could be
>>preserved, I have learned the following since I wrote that erroneous
>>piece in Josh's book. Highly saline waters, which Lake Gosuite had,
>>are capable of preserving lots of organic material. Flamingoes
>>which only live along saline lakes, lived along Lake Gosuite (see
>>McGrew and Feduccia "A Preliminary Report on a Nesting Colongy of
>>Eocene birds, 25th Field Conf. Wyoming Geological Assoc.
>Guidebook, 1973, p 162ff)
>
>As I said, I said nothing about 'the Green River". The books has no
>index, so I can't tell if and where it is mentioned. Besides, Glenn's
>question was general and so was my answer: "..I presume the majority
>of fossils formed by being rapidly covered by mud or sand." Is this
>not correct?
>
>GM>Elder and Smith, observing modern evironments, note of the
>>preservation of fish:
>>
>>"He noted that these episodes of mass death may be recorded in the fossil
>>record if nearby runoff is sufficiently strong to cause sedimentation or
> if
>>low temperatures and strong salinities retard decay."~R.L. Elder and G.R.
>>Smith, "Fish Taphonomy and Environmental Inference in Paleolimnology",
>>Paleogeography, Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology 62(1988), p. 577-592, p.
> 581
>>
>>They go ont to say that the mass death of fish are "the result of change
> in
>>alkalinity/salinity conditions with zones barren fo fish interpreted as
>>indicating extreme conditions." (ibid p. 583
>
>Glenn's original question said nothing about "episodes of mass
>death...in the fossil record". He simply aksed, "How did the fossils
>form?" New Reflectorites will note Glenn's (perhaps unconscious)
>technique of changing the subject! :-)
>
>GM>and
>>
>>"But the limited evidence for scavenging, of either the mass death layers
> of
>>Knightia or of Astephus, indicates limited oxygen conditions or bottom
> waters
>>too saline or therwise toxic to support scavenger populations.
> Coprolites,
>>not necessarily of Astephus need only be evidence of surface water
>>populations." (Ibid. p. 583)
>
>Again very interesting, but not relevant to Glenn's original
>question.
>
>GM>The fact is that I was wrong when I wrote what I did in Josh
>>McDowell's book. I would suggest that you be careful (maybe check
>>with me) before you use it as an authoritative source.
>
>That's exactly what I did! :-) Glenn's off-tangent reply has tended
>to confirm that what he originally wrote (as quoted above) is still
>true. :-)
>
>God bless.
>
>Steve
>
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>| Stephen E (Steve) Jones ,--_|\ sejones@ibm.net |
>| 3 Hawker Avenue / Oz \ Steve.Jones@health.wa.gov.au |
>| Warwick 6024 ->*_,--\_/ Phone +61 9 448 7439 (These are |
>| Perth, West Australia v my opinions, not my employer's) |
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm