<p>Joel -</p><p>You've neglected the fact that the same things that caused rapid radioactive decay during the flood would also have speeded up the digestive processes of animals (except for those on the ark, which were protected by a force field).</p><p>Oh ye of little faith ...</p><p>George Murphy</p><p /><p /><p /><p>> > > I was reading about the coprolite mining industry in England in the > late 19th century and was amazed by the shear volume of coprolites > unearthed there. Although not all of these nodules where necessarily > fossilized excreta it still got me thinking about the volume of faeces in the > fossil record. Does anyone know of any estimate of volume of coprolites versus > preserved organismal remains or have any general impressions of how common > fecal material is versus other fossils? One location that came to my mind > is the Green River formation. It seems > to be loaded with fish pellets that I imagine might account f!
or many time the > mass of the preserved fish themselves. The reason I am interested is that > it struck me that in the YEC model one would predict that coprolites should be > less common than other fossils (how many time can the animals taken up by the > flood poop in a few days?) especially considering faeces could have been easily > dissolved in a flood while the YEC model considers animals to have been well > preserved. > > Joel > > > > -------------------------------------------------------- > Dr. R. Joel Duff, Associate Chair > > Associate Professor of Biology > > 185 ASEC, Department of Biology > > University of Akron > > Akron OH 44325-3908 > > rjduff@uakron.edu > > --------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > > > </p>
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Jan 9 11:52:34 2007
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jan 09 2007 - 11:52:34 EST