As I recall, Gen. 1 says that God created the 'greater light' to rule the day, and the 'lesser light' to rule the night. Then it says, 'He created the stars also.' I have always understood that to be separate from the creation of the sun and moon, not occurring on that day, but simply stating that God had also created the stars. As for the sun and moon, I am willing to accept the Biblical account, although I confess that it is beyond my comprehension as to how it could happen. Yet, many things about God are beyond my comprehension, and I don't have a problem with that.

Dwight and Ted and I had a long discussion here a couple of years back - which I can't find on the search page, so it must have got deleted some how.

Dwight's basic concept is that a huge meteor slammed into the earth causing massive and rapid continental drift.

Unfortunately his model does not account for most of the actual long-age clocks that we have - for example the distribution of fossils on the two sides of a split, the meteors in Antarctica, the rocks on the floor of the ocean below the Antarctic Convergence, the magnetic fields in the rocks, ...

/Bevin

Here are a few bits and pieces I found. Interesting that the BBC site says fossilisation is a 'strange, lengthy and very rare process'.

A Flash game about fossilisation! http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/dinosaurs/making_fossils/

http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/scie...Fossilation.htm

http://www.mansfield.ohio-state.edu/~sabedon/biol1520.htm

The Wikipedia one is actually the clearest, simplest and most comprehensive: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil


And by the way, quid pro quo here: I seem to be follosing through on my assignments to go and do research and bring back knowledge and information, but no-one else seems to be following through with the strong scientific refutations of various facets of evolution and long age stuff. I'm busy, so I'm not really interested in being the only one who puts any work in.

I read the articles. They seem to be general survey type articles about fossils. There is brief treatment of the fossilization process, but I did not find any reference to observations of fossilization naturally occurring within recent decades. The specific issue of the requirements for fossilization to occur, would seem to be significant in regard to the occurrence of a GRGF, AND in regard to the validity of long-age evolution. Specifically, then:

1) Has the actual fossilization of soft tissue been observed in process?

2) Am I correct in concluding from the articles, that intense pressure and the absence of oxygen are two requirements for fossilization of soft tissue to occur?

After all, organic material such as dead fish, etc., sinks to the bottom of lakes all the time, and is not fossilized. 'Organic' material decomposes. Something more is required than occurrence in water. (For example, the sea boots of a German sailor (all that was left) found on the bottom of the Atlantic at 18,000 ft. depth I believe, near the remains of the Bismarck.)

The articles stated that fossilization itself is very rare, and the preservation of soft tissue much rarer still. The vast majority of the fossils in the fossil record are of bones and teeth, not whole creatures, so the special case of soft fossils is not the one we should spend all our energy on. Some examples of soft tissue fossils included the mammoths.

There are some examples of modern fossilization (of teeth and bones) occurring that can be used. http://www.asa3.org/archive/evolution/199801/0164.html

Again, soft tissue fossilization is pretty much a red herring in terms of understanding the fossil record.

I carefully read the article. I notice their estimate that the fossilized bones appear to be from "Holocene to Pleistocene in age." Once again, that is from the alleged distant past. They did not claim that the 8-yr. old bones observed had been fossilized, simply that they were intact. One might point out that the bones of the Pharoahs are some 3,000 years old, and still intact. None of that says anything about fossilization. As for the second example, of fossilized fish, they point to the past few thousand years. "The concretions occur in marine clays which apparently were raised above sea level by the isostatic rebound that followed the melting of the Pleistocene ice cap." Hmmmm. Doesn't sound terribly recent to me. The past few thousand years would be around the timetable for the Biblical Flood. Voila!

Quote:

---

I am waiting on the geologist

---

Precisely - but Dwight Hornbacher has been here before, and he does not bring peer-reviewed science, he brings his personal opinions and way-out-of-the-main-stream ideas.

That is not research, knowledge, or information.

/Bevin