To: Sopater
My understanding is that the fossil record is an historic record of catostrophy causing rapid burial of various organisms. Do you have a different understanding? You would be correct only if you consider getting stuck and buried in mud or quicksand, or being buried in sediment at the bottom of a body of water, as "catastrophic."
37 posted on
07/18/2008 12:30:31 PM PDT by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
To: Coyoteman
You would be correct only if you consider getting stuck and buried in mud or quicksand, or being buried in sediment at the bottom of a body of water, as "catastrophic."
It would be "catastrophic" for me... ;-)
However, how does an animal become "buried in sediment at the bottom of a body of water" without being consumed by other organisms? It has to happen by rapid burial by sediment.
Even the mud or quicksand scenario is rarely likely to result in fossilization since creatures rarely die by submersion and are more likely to die on the surface due to starvation, dehydration, heat exhaustion, or attack by predatory animals. All resulting in eventually being consumed by other organisms.
Your examples are more the exception than the rule when it comes to fossilization.
38 posted on
07/18/2008 12:48:33 PM PDT by
Sopater
(A wise man's heart inclines him to the right, but a fool's heart to the left. ~ Ecclesiastes 10:2)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson