Paul: 1 revision

2014-05-30T07:59:38Z

1 revision

at 07:59, 30 May 2014

2014-05-30T07:59:37Z

Paul: 1 revision

2014-05-30T07:39:58Z

1 revision

at 07:39, 30 May 2014

2014-05-30T07:39:57Z

Paul: 1 revision

2014-05-30T07:30:16Z

1 revision

at 07:30, 30 May 2014

2014-05-30T07:30:15Z

Paul: 1 revision

2014-05-29T14:28:13Z

1 revision

at 14:28, 29 May 2014

2014-05-29T14:28:13Z

Paul: 1 revision

2014-05-29T13:32:43Z

1 revision

at 13:32, 29 May 2014

2014-05-29T13:32:43Z

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{Evolution Says|The youngest rocks are near the surface of the earth, and contain the younger, more complex fossils. The oldest rocks are at the bottom, and contain the older, simpler, primitive fossils. This geologic column shows a gradual aging of the rocks towards the bottom. The column can be found perfectly intact everywhere around the world. The column provides a continuous gradient of fossils which prove that all plants and animals evolved. }}
 ==The Facts Are ..... ==
@@ Line 57: / Line 56: @@
 ==References==
 <references></references>
-  [[Category:Umasking Evolution]]
+  [[Category:Unmasking Evolution]]

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 ==The Facts Are ..... ==
-(1) "[There are 10 fallacies about the geologic column:-]
+{{Fact|1}} "[There are 10 fallacies about the geologic column:-]
 . The geologic column was constructed by geologists who, because of the weight of evidence that they had found, were convinced of the truth of uniformatarian theory and organic evolution.
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 . The geologic column and the positions of fossils within the geologic column provide proof of amoeba-to-man evolution." Written by geologist Steven A. Austin in his article "Ten Misconceptions About the Geologic Column", in <ref>Acts & Facts, Impact Series No. 137, November 1984</ref>
-(2) The geologic time scale is not a fact which has been derived from the examination of harmonious world-wide geological data. It is interesting to note that:- 66% of the earth's land surface has only 5 or fewer of the 10 geologic periods in place; 80%-85% of the earth's land surface does not even have 3
+{{Fact|2}} The geologic time scale is not a fact which has been derived from the examination of harmonious world-wide geological data. It is interesting to note that:- 66% of the earth's land surface has only 5 or fewer of the 10 geologic periods in place; 80%-85% of the earth's land surface does not even have 3
 geologic periods appearing in 'correct' consecutive order; a significant percentage of every geologic period's rocks do not overlie rocks of the next older geologic period; and, some percentage of every geologic period rests directly on top of Precambrian rock. <ref>Creation Research Society Quarterly, Vol. 18, No. 1, June 1981 p:46-71</ref>
-(3) An examination of the best-known and most numerous examples of the Cambrian fossils (assessed at 500 million years old) in Canada's Yoho National Park reveals that older fossils are not simpler, or more primitive. Scientists have commented that these fossils are more diverse and just as highly-specialized as today's creatures. Some of the fossil molluscs have eyes which are as complex as the human eye, and the trilobite fossil's eyes have been described as "a marvel of optical engineering".
+{{Fact|3}} An examination of the best-known and most numerous examples of the Cambrian fossils (assessed at 500 million years old) in Canada's Yoho National Park reveals that older fossils are not simpler, or more primitive. Scientists have commented that these fossils are more diverse and just as highly-specialized as today's creatures. Some of the fossil molluscs have eyes which are as complex as the human eye, and the trilobite fossil's eyes have been described as "a marvel of optical engineering".
   Highline, 1990 (<ref>the official Yoho newsletter put out by the Environment Canada Parks Service</ref>)
-(4) There are numerous places where fossils in rocks do not fit evolutionary theory. For example:- (1) Spores and bits of wood in Cambrian rocks that formed before plants are supposed to have evolved; (2) Logs protruding through millions of years of strata; and (3) Fossil ammonites protruding through millions of years of strata. I.E. Weier, "Botany", 1974; D. Ager, "<ref>The Nature of the Stratagraphic Record", 1973; Chemical and Engineering News, October 11, 1976 p:40</ref>
+{{Fact|4}} There are numerous places where fossils in rocks do not fit evolutionary theory. For example:- (1) Spores and bits of wood in Cambrian rocks that formed before plants are supposed to have evolved; (2) Logs protruding through millions of years of strata; and (3) Fossil ammonites protruding through millions of years of strata. I.E. Weier, "Botany", 1974; D. Ager, "<ref>The Nature of the Stratagraphic Record", 1973; Chemical and Engineering News, October 11, 1976 p:40</ref>
-(5) In many places, the oceanic sediment of which mountains were composed, has nd to be inverted - ie. older sediment lying on top of younger sediment. This sort of anomaly is common in many sites around the world and is usually recorded in literature in inconspicuous places. William R. Corliss,
+{{Fact|5}} In many places, the oceanic sediment of which mountains were composed, has nd to be inverted - ie. older sediment lying on top of younger sediment. This sort of anomaly is common in many sites around the world and is usually recorded in literature in inconspicuous places. William R. Corliss,
 "Remarkable Unconformities, Unknown Earth: A handbook of Geologic Enigmas", The Sourcebook Project: Glen Arm, Maryland, 1980; & "<ref>Strange Planet: A Sourcebook of Unusual Geological Facts", Vol. E-1, The Sourcebook Project: Glen Arm, Maryland, 1975 p:177-184;</ref><ref>Science News, Vol. 98,o.16, October 1970 p:316; </ref>
-(6) "The great differences in the estimates of maximum thickness of many of the systems [geologic periods] manifestly indicate that thicknesses are unreliable measures of geologic time. As long ago as 1936 the conclusion had already been reached by Twenhofel that estimates of time based on thickness of strata 'are hardly worth the paper they are written on' ..... rocks generally give no internal evidence of the rate at which they were formed." <ref>Written by J.F. White in "Study of the Earth", Prentice-Hall: New Jersey, 1962 p:46</ref>
+{{Fact|6}} "The great differences in the estimates of maximum thickness of many of the systems [geologic periods] manifestly indicate that thicknesses are unreliable measures of geologic time. As long ago as 1936 the conclusion had already been reached by Twenhofel that estimates of time based on thickness of strata 'are hardly worth the paper they are written on' ..... rocks generally give no internal evidence of the rate at which they were formed." <ref>Written by J.F. White in "Study of the Earth", Prentice-Hall: New Jersey, 1962 p:46</ref>
-(7) "I wonder how many of us realize that the [geologic] time scale was frozen in essentially its present form by 1840 .....? How much world geology was known by 1840? A bit of western Europe, none too well, and a lesser fringe of North American. All of Asia, Africa, South America, and most of North America were virtually unknown. How dared the pioneers [of this theory] assume that their scale would fit the rocks in these vast areas, by far most of the world? Only in dogmatic assumption - a mere extension of the kind of reasoning developed by Werner from the facts in his little district of Saxony.
+{{Fact|7}} "I wonder how many of us realize that the [geologic] time scale was frozen in essentially its present form by 1840 .....? How much world geology was known by 1840? A bit of western Europe, none too well, and a lesser fringe of North American. All of Asia, Africa, South America, and most of North America were virtually unknown. How dared the pioneers [of this theory] assume that their scale would fit the rocks in these vast areas, by far most of the world? Only in dogmatic assumption - a mere extension of the kind of reasoning developed by Werner from the facts in his little district of Saxony.
 And in many parts of the world, notably India and South America, it does not fit. But even there it is applied! The followers of the founding fathers [of evolution] went forth across the earth and in Procrustean fashion made it fit the sections they found, even in places where the actual evidence literally proclaimed denial. So flexible and accommodating are the 'facts' of geology." Written by the eminent evolutionist Edmund Spieker in an attempt to set the record straight that there isn't strong global evidence for the evolutionary time-scale. In his article<ref>
@@ Line 47: / Line 47: @@
 p:1803</ref>
-(8) "And this poses something of a problem: If we date the rocks by their fossils, how can we then turn around and talk about patterns of evolutionary change through time in the fossil record?" Written by evolutionist and palaeontologist Niles Eldredge (American Museum of Natural History, New York) in his book "<ref>Time Frames: The Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution and the Theory of Punctuated Equilibria", Simon & Schuster: New York, 1985 p:52.</ref> <ref>Paul S. Taylor, "The Illustrated Origins Answer Book" (4th. ed.) Eden Publications: Mesa (Arizona), 1992 p:102</ref>
+{{Fact|8}} "And this poses something of a problem: If we date the rocks by their fossils, how can we then turn around and talk about patterns of evolutionary change through time in the fossil record?" Written by evolutionist and palaeontologist Niles Eldredge (American Museum of Natural History, New York) in his book "<ref>Time Frames: The Rethinking of Darwinian Evolution and the Theory of Punctuated Equilibria", Simon & Schuster: New York, 1985 p:52.</ref> <ref>Paul S. Taylor, "The Illustrated Origins Answer Book" (4th. ed.) Eden Publications: Mesa (Arizona), 1992 p:102</ref>
-(9) "The procession of life was never witnessed, it is inferred. The vertical sequences of fossils is thought to represent a process because the enclosing rocks are interpreted as a process." <ref>Written by J.E.
+{{Fact|9}} "The procession of life was never witnessed, it is inferred. The vertical sequences of fossils is thought to represent a process because the enclosing rocks are interpreted as a process." <ref>Written by J.E.
 O'Rourke in the article "Pragmatism Verses Materialism in Stratigraphy" in American Journal of Science, Vol. 276, January, 1976 p:53</ref>
-(10) "If you ask, "What is the evidence for continuity?" you would have to say, "There isn't any in the fossils of animals and man. The connection between them is in the mind"." A statement by the palaeoanthropologist Dr Colin Patterson and recorded by Luther Sunderland in his book <ref>"Darwin's Enigma", Master Books: El Cajon (California), 1988 p: p:90</ref>
+{{Fact|10}} "If you ask, "What is the evidence for continuity?" you would have to say, "There isn't any in the fossils of animals and man. The connection between them is in the mind"." A statement by the palaeoanthropologist Dr Colin Patterson and recorded by Luther Sunderland in his book <ref>"Darwin's Enigma", Master Books: El Cajon (California), 1988 p: p:90</ref>
 ==References==
 <references></references>
   [[Category:Umasking Evolution]]

← Older revision	Revision as of 07:59, 30 May 2014
(No difference)

← Older revision	Revision as of 07:39, 30 May 2014
(No difference)

← Older revision	Revision as of 07:30, 30 May 2014
(No difference)

← Older revision	Revision as of 14:28, 29 May 2014
(No difference)

← Older revision	Revision as of 13:32, 29 May 2014
(No difference)

Geologic Column - Revision history

Paul: 1 revision

at 07:59, 30 May 2014

Paul: 1 revision

at 07:39, 30 May 2014

Paul: 1 revision

at 07:30, 30 May 2014

Paul: 1 revision

at 14:28, 29 May 2014

Paul: 1 revision

at 13:32, 29 May 2014