To an Article on Ortho-Christian

To an Article on Ortho-Christian · Continuing Previous · To a Comment on the Article

Author Seraphim Hamilton thought a Creationist argument was bad science:

Likewise, the concept that the entire fossil record was laid down by the Flood of Noah is untenable. This does not explain the particular order of fossils that we discover in the ground, especially for what paleontologists call Cenozoic, or Tertiary rocks. Paleontologists divide the Earth’s history into three periods, corresponding to three different layers of rock. There are Paleozoic, or Primary rocks. These contain fossils from the Precambrian and before. Above this, there are Mesozoic rocks, containing fossils from the Cambrian to the end of the Cretaceous, when the dinosaurs are understood to have gone extinct. Finally, there are Cenozoic, or Tertiary rocks, where we find mammals, most birds, and ourselves. The difficulty with the older creationist view that all of these rocks were laid down by the Flood is that we only find humans at the top of the rock layers, and we find remnants of human civilization, which would be completely wiped out by a global Flood. Why do we only find humans at the top?

From : Why I Became a Creationist
Seraphim Hamilton | May 9, 2016
http://orthochristian.com/93210.html
Source: Apologia Pro Ortho Doxa

Well, author was confused about what we actually find.

We do very much NOT find humans above dinos above trilobites.

While in each location the rocks accounted for by geology may be Tertiary over Mesozoic over Palaeozoic, in each location also, there is nearly always one of them you get fossils from.

And that one is, usually, not indeed top soil, which is very recent, but the top of the "geological column".

Say you find a Neanderthal in a cave. You will NOT find that there is a Dino in a lower cave or a Trilobite in a cave even lower than that.

I checked on where fossils are actually found.

The one exception I found to this principle is, at drill holes for petrol drilling, you may find Trilobites under Elasmosauri - if you like, Palaeozoic under Mesozoic, but if you like, bottom living creatures under mid depth living creatures.

That said, I don't believe all Mesozoic is from the Flood. Why? Bc some Mesozoic, that is some dinosaurs are carbon dated to as recently as 22 000 BP. By Mark Armitage, btw.

I think the carbon date for the Flood is more like 40 000, perhaps 30 000 BP.

Flood in 2957 BC (as per St Jerome, you using Syncellus have a somewhat even more old Flood) ...

38 000 BC
-2 957 BC
35 043 extra years = 1.442 percent modern Carbon as initial condition

20 000 BC
-2 957 BC
17 043 extra years = 12.724 percent modern Carbon as initial condition

No, I don't think the atmosphere at 2957 BC had both 12.724 and 1.442 percent modern Carbon at the same time. I rather think, a dino dated to 22 000 BP or 20 000 BC is in fact from some later mudslide than those of the Flood. 1.442 pmC was the Carbon content at Flood, and 12.724 pmC sometime between the Flood and Babel.

But dinos are in whatever carbon date not found in layers that actually lie lower than Uinthatheria or Sabre Tothed Tigers (or Smilodons).

If you go to Belgium, you can claim the Iguanadon is from Cretaceous, the Woolly Rhinos from Tertiary, but you will not find that Woolly Rhinos consistently come from 10 feet deep and Iguanodons from 20 feet deep. Both come from sufficiently near the surface to merit digging.

Probably both Woolly Rhino and Iguanodon were buried in Flood, if not it is possible Iguanodon is the one that is post-Flood. Woolly Rhinos were eaten by Neanderthals, when they didn't eat each other. And these were pre-Flood.

Hans Georg Lundahl
Nanterre UL
St. Moses
4.IX.2018