Replies

if the lack of transitory species is explained by the fact that the fossils found in the fossil record were laid down in a non-linear chronological progression,

I'm not sure I understand the question. The fossils were deposited in chronological order, obviously. The "linear progression" I was referring to is the idea that dinosaur A evolved into dinosaur B evolved into birdlike dinosaur C evolved into dinosaurlike bird D evolved into a bird. It's not that straightforward--or, rather, there might have been such a lineage, but the chances of finding fossils of A, B, C, and D are slim. Maybe A was the common ancestor of A1, A2, and A3, and A3 was a common ancestor of birds but we only find fossils from A1. And maybe A1s survived past the time D showed up, so we actually have birdlike fossils that are older than the fossils we have of an earlier species. One longtime participant in these threads had a nice clade diagram that showed how this worked--maybe somebody knows where to find it. Whatever--the point is that asking to see every stage of scapular development from dinosaur to bird is probably asking for too much.

(And knowing the age of a fossil bassed on what layer it was found in; and knowing the age of the layer by what fossils are found in it; Is pure circular reasoning.)

Fortunately, there's a lot more to it than that. Courtesy of Coyoteman's home page, a little primer on dating:

Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.

Explaining radiometric dating to a few of the posters here is a waste of time. They are prevented by religious beliefs from accepting its applicability and accuracy, and no amount of fact or data will change that.

But I generally post data of that kind anyway, as other posters and perhaps many lurkers are still willing to learn.

Here is the full list of my radiocarbon links:

ReligiousTolerance.org Carbon-14 Dating (C-14): Beliefs of New-Earth Creationists
Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.
This site, BiblicalChronologist.org has a series of good articles on radiocarbon dating.

Are tree-ring chronologies reliable? (The Biblical Chronologist, Vol. 5, No. 1)
How does the radiocarbon dating method work? (The Biblical Chronologist, Vol. 5, No. 1)
How precise is radiocarbon dating?
Is radiocarbon dating based on assumptions?
Has radiocarbon dating been invalidated by unreasonable results?

Tree Ring and C14 Dating
Radiocarbon WEB-info Radiocarbon Laboratory, University of Waikato, New Zealand.
Radiocarbon -- full text of issues, 1959-2003.

[[The fossils were deposited in chronological order, obviously.]]

You’re sure of htis how?

[[dinosaur A evolved into dinosaur B evolved into birdlike dinosaur C ]]

And you’re positive these weren’t all three uniquely created fully formed creatures of different KINDS hhow?

[[Whatever—the point is that asking to see every stage of scapular development from dinosaur to bird is probably asking for too much.]]

Perhaps- but showing a dino with a scapula and one without is expecting far too much in regards to believing the two are related, and that the one evolved into the other.

As for the radiometric dating- look into the problems with all the methods used, they are not insignificant- beyond approximately 7000- years, the systems used rely on pure speculation and are forced to either ignore or explain away with yet more assumptions all the dates that didn’t fit- not impressed with dating methods that rely on nothign but assumptions and which keep changing- many times by supposedly billions of years.

"I'm not sure I understand the question."[excerpt]

I guess I misunderstood your post.

Your referencing the fossil record along with dates and no method of dating led me to believe that the dates were extrapolated from the fossil record its self.(i.e., not radiometric.)

Also, by fossil record I thought you were referring to the geologic column.