|Geology series||Feedback to Tas Walker on Geological Columns
If Tas Walker is right, Pius XII was not wrong to canonise Steno!
Actually Steno was not canonised yet, only beatified, and by John Paul II, as stated in following:
Creationism and Catholicism go well together (second example)
Where do you find Dinosaurs over Trilobites?
Steno and "Vertical Barbecue" contra John Laurie
For example, the evolutionist asks us why a layer of rock containing trilobites is never found to contain dinosaurs, and why a layer with dinosaurs is always found above one with trilobites and never the reverse. Fossil succession can be viewed in terms of solitary fossils, commonly called index fossils. Otherwise, groups of fossils can be used. These are often called fossil assemblages or assemblage zones. The essence of fossil succession, however, remains the same whether individual fossils, of groups of them, are used.
For example, although trilobites and dinosaurs were contemporaries of each other, there is no basis for believing that trilobite-bearing and dinosaur-bearing rocks were necessarily deposited at the same time all over the world. During the Flood, trilobite-bearing beds at one point on earth were probably being deposited at the same time as dinosaur-bearing beds at another place on earth. Nor can it be said that, when dinosaur-bearing beds locally overlie trilobite-bearing beds, the former are significantly younger than the latter. This, of course, excepts the small amount of difference in time, within the Flood, that elapsed between the burial of the trilobites and the burial of the overlying dinosaurs.
From article by Woodmorappe:
The fossil record: becoming more random all the time/John Woodmorappe
There is a place in Morocco where you find trilobites (and some will forge trilobites to sell to tourists). But there are no dinosaurs above them. There are places where you find dinosaurs, including in parts of Morocco, but I know none of these containing trilobites under them.
That is what I was writing to Tas Walker about, and he said he was patiently looking at local geological column after local geological column, like starting all over from zero.
Methodologically speaking, I think we can get as sure a conclusion even without that work. It suffices to look into the known find places of certain types of fossils or fossils from certain periods.
I know - after some wikisearch on Lagerstätten* - of no place on earth, possibly excepting Grand Canyon and one other, where you can find Dinosaurs on one level, Trilobites on a level below it and Sabre Toothed Tigers on a level above it.
I only know that places where you find Dinosaurs are considered to be younger in the fossile column than places where you find Trilobites and older than places where you find Sabre Toothed Tigers. At least as to the relevant level for the fossile diggers. They will consider the level below the Dinos they find there as contemporaneous to a Trilobite level somewhere else, even if they find no Trilobites there. They will consider a possibly missing level above it as contemporaneous to a Sabre Toothed Tiger level somewhere else, even if they find no Sabre Toothed Tigers in it, because the level is missing.
But I know of no place where this consideration of one fossile stratum of Dinos as younger than one fossile stratum of Trilos is actually demonstrated by finding one of them on top of the other. And if Trilos were buried in what was during or previous to the Flood sea, and if Dinos were buried in what was during or rather previous to the Flood land, this is what we expect from that scenario too.
BU Nanterre, Paris X
St Vladimir of Kiev
and St James of Nisibis
Council Father of Nicea
July 15, YooL 2013
*Check this out yourself:
List of Fossile Sites