Words of a Fether

I am the way, the truth, and the life;
no one comes to the Father except through me. ~Jesus

site banner


What are the scientific facts about fossils?

Having sampled many pro-evolution sites for information on how fossils form (don’t worry, I took some Dramamine first), I sought to sift the fact from the fiction and just report the actual hard evidence about how they form:

So we see that for an organism to become the typical fossil, it must be rapidly buried by water-borne sediments and have hard or bony structures. This is why we observe that the fossil record is heavy with marine organisms having shells or bones. There are some rare extreme exceptions, but most significant is the composition of the vast majority of fossils we observe.

We know that burial must be rapid, but how long it takes for the hard structures to fossilize is dependent upon many variables, to the point where we simply don’t know in most cases. We know that it does not require even hundreds of years, let alone millions, due to finds such as miner’s hats or even food such as hams that have been found completely turned to stone in less than 150 years. As in an earlier article, a water wheel in Australia turned to stone in less than 100 years.

What can we deduce from the fossil record? The FACTS that were discussed are all we know. What we CANNOT know is how long ago they were buried or how long they took to fossilize. Only those that were known to form in recorded history have a known age, not because of any scientific tests, but because of historical record and eyewitness testimony-- LEGAL evidence.

Because fossils tend to be “organized” by size, we have to wonder why. Our first clue is the fact that they were largely created by aquatic processes. Water carries sediment, and the more violent the movement of water, the more rapidly layers of sediment are formed. This is completely inconsistent with the theory that fossils form very slowly over millions of years by gradual processes. Instead, the physical evidence we observe points to catastrophic movement of water. But oh no, we CAN’T accept what the evidence implies, for that would lend support for Noah’s Flood!

It’s curious and even laughable that astronomers are currently breathless over the REMOTE likelihood of discovering evidence of liquid water on Mars, the planet that they concede COULD have once been covered by a GLOBAL FLOOD! But no, this could never happen on earth, they scream. Mars yes, earth no. Why? Because of scientific evidence? Not a chance. It’s because of their fanatical hatred of the Bible. After all, they used to claim a global flood was scientifically proven to be impossible, but suddenly it has become possible on other planets! These people would never let creationists get away with such hypocrisy.

Choosing to ignore the evidence for a global flood on earth, “science” has decided to use the imaginary progression of life to determine the age of rocks. That’s right, it isn’t the rocks that determine the age of fossils, it’s the other way around. They give it the term “index fossils”, meaning you judge a rock’s age by the fossils typically found in that type of rock. And the age of the fossil is determined by..... are you sitting down?.... the rock it’s found in!

That’s right ladies and gentlemen, tautology (circular reasoning) at its finest. The rock is old because of which fossils we find there, and these fossils are old because they are always found in that type of rock! And around and around we go.... Here’s a link to a typical chart:

fossil chart

And here’s a priceless quote from that same website:

However, unlike tree-ring dating -- in which each ring is a measure of 1 year’s growth -- no precise rate of deposition can be determined for most of the rock layers. Therefore, the actual length of geologic time represented by any given layer is usually unknown or, at best, a matter of opinion... Because fossils actually record the slow but progressive development of life, scientists use them to identify rocks of the same age throughout the world.
Real science should be thoroughly embarrassed by such circularity, but they’ll stoop to any level to bolster their undying faith in evolutionism. This is the new state religion, and the faithful priests are well-indoctrinated in our finest universities. In spite of this massive propaganda machine, which includes all media, there are a brave few who are willing to call a spade a spade, and are abandoning the theory of evolution as, to use Gould’s term, “self serving mythology”. Here is a link to a growing list of scientists who see evolutionism as an obstacle to science:

cosmology statement

Clearly, the fossil record proves nothing about the age of the earth or the alleged progression of life.

Posted 2005-09-01 under science, science, age, fossils