Convenient. Trust me on something, A would look like the "lowest" layer in the picture when the tilting of strata has been allowed for. E is over A and K is over E. A is the only one which might be hard to find for the non-optically challenged. It's in the southwest corner.
Secondly, if the record were layed down over a long period of time as most evolutionists believe, then it is reasonable to believe the fossils in lower beds represent life forms that preceded those above.
You don't seem very sure that the assumption is reasonable. Creationists of the late 18th century had no problem with that one. In fact, speeding up the process of laying down the layers won't get them in the wrong order. Still Fester seems incredibly vague here.
I am not asking Fester Dumbbleep what evolutionists assume. I am asking Fester what Fester accepts. Hello? Is A older than D which is older than K?
But the interpretation of the fossil record entails more than location.
It entails the fossils and their locations, yes.
Assumptions about which spiecies are related in history must be made.
One does not have to assume the result. Science did not start out assuming the results it has today. It only assumed that straightforward Occam's Razor reasoning from evidence was allowable and would tend to generate results which could be repeatedly tested against new data. That kind of process led to Darwin's work in the 1850s and its validation against all kinds of new evidence since. Also, progress in geology has only confirmed and not at all undermined the assumptions underlying the relative dating principles of Sedgewick and Lyell.
With evolutionists it is a given from their point of view that the more complex forms are derived from the less complex; that common morphology necessitates common ancestry. I do not think it must be so. Either way, we're dealing with interpretations of the past that are not so clear as observations in the present.
Mumble mumble mumble. Let me run another statement past you for a yes or no.
Fester does not accept even the basic first principles of geology, the foundations of all later work, and does not have the integrity to admit it.Comments invited.
On a tangential note, the Creator does not suspend what we understand to be natural laws unless or until it suits the overall purpose of history. The biblical texts attest to the fact that it is neither His desire nor nature to be intrusive, but rather subtle, in dealing with His creation. In fact, the biblical texts go so far as to say the Creator's power is made perfect in weakness.
This only looks to me like Fester should probably be a man, accept, and somehow deal with the existence of fossil series rather than pretend they are artifacts of someone's assumptions.
Whether it is or is not, I generally accept the geological principle that lower strata preceded higher strata in history, although there have been cases where the strata are, for some reason, twisted or reversed. Sedgewick and Lyell, as far as I know, were more interested in geology than in the interpretation of the fossil record. Their understanding of physical laws was, for their day and age, probably on the mark.
But if they launch into the assertion that the geological record is the product of "billions of years of history," then they have exceeded the bounds of what pure science can offer. They have indulged reasonable conjecture at the expense of direct observation and recorded (i.e. in human language) history. As I understand it, Lyell simply asserted as much, and science never questioned his assertion.
Obviously there may have been strata prior to the world-wide deulge referenced by the biblical texts (which in turn denote the eyewitness testimony of Noah). The world-wide deluge would create an environment in which massive sedimentary depositions could be created, wherein a massive deposition of life forms could also be placed, and whereby both old and new stratification could be effected and created.
At the same time, other catastrophic phenomenon could intoduce the inconsistences often observed in the geologic record, along with climactic conditions more harsh than present during civilizations that preceded the world-wide deluge. This is why some fossils denote creatures of larger-than-normal size by today's stanbdards. This may also account for the fact that certain individuals prior to the deluge had exceedingly long life spans.
Well, you have your own reason and senses to which you bow as the ultimate authority. I rely upon the biblical texts and their Author as representative of the truth regarding the origins, history, and destination of the universe.
The difference between us could not be more stark, nevertheless it is incumbent upon me to love and respect you as a fellow human being. I am woefully short on both accounts. You be the man, and trust yourself. I'll be the child, and trust my Maker.
You know, there's absolutely no reason for this type of attitude. I've been following this thread, and nowhere does Fester engage in this type of intimidation.
Personally, I rather like reading his posts and the ongoing discussion between him and Quark, and although it was quite evident that Quark was growing somewhat frustrated, he kept the conversation civil, which earns my respect, even though I essentially disagree with his position.
This may sound like a cliche, but you really need to grow up. if you can't get your point accross without deliberately intimidating people, then there is something seriously wrong with your position.