Real data. Real decline of lifespans. Real exponential decay. How can this data be falsified?
Fishtank, Mech Eng, PhD
Posted on 10/16/2013 7:50:38 AM PDT by fishtank
Flower Fossils 100,000,000 Years Out of Place?
by Brian Thomas, M.S. *
European scientists have now discovered flowering plant fossils in rock layers supposedly 100,000,000 years older than expected.1 This new finding challenges conventional evolutionary assumptions as scientists struggle to account for what they interpret as an enormous time gap.
Publishing in the journal Frontiers in Plant Science, Peter Hochuli and Susanne Feist-Burkhardt described fossil-pollen grains recovered from a drill core in the north of Switzerland.1
They wrote, "In this paper we focus on fossil evidence, presenting the so far oldest angiosperm-like pollen from the Middle Triassic (ca. 243Ma), a record that predates the generally accepted first occurrence of angiosperm pollen by more than 100Ma [million years]."1
The researchers' distinct color photographs show pollen-grain features diagnostic of flowering plants, not gymnosperms like palms or cycads. "The described pollen grains show all the essential features of angiosperm pollen," according to the Frontiers report.2
And instead of the few primitive-looking pollens that evolutionary scientists were expecting to find in lower rock layers, the researchers discovered many fully-formed pollens of different but well-developed types. The study authors wrote of the "sudden appearance" of angiosperm fossils "on most continents as well as the rapid radiation of numerous clades [which] implies a considerable diversification within approximately 3.5Ma or else it represents a wave of immigration from other areas."1 In other words, they had difficulty explaining how such a wide variety of flowering plants suddenly occur in this Triassic layer.
They encountered an equal challenge in trying to decipher why, after this sudden burst of supposed evolutionary creativity, angiosperms disappeared for 100 million years. The study authors wrote, "If we accepted the monosulcate [e.g., angiosperm] pollen from the Middle and Late Triassic as evidence for a pre-Cretaceous origin of crown group [ancestral] angiosperms the lack of fossil records throughout the Jurassic would remain difficult to explain."1
To account for this difficulty, they invoked speculative "stem relatives," writing, "Considering the hundred million year gap in the record as well as morphological differences to the earliest Cretaceous we suggest that these pollen grains most likely represent stem relatives of the angiosperms."1
Yet, are these conclusions based on scientific observation? It's one thing to assert that these fossils must represent evolutionary ancestors of modern plants because they are millions of years older than the accepted age, but it's entirely circular to then assert that the angiosperm fossils must have formed millions of years before the accepted age simply because conventional evolution tells us plants evolved over long ages.
The Bible's record of all the major phases of world history shows no trace of a Triassic deep-time epoch and offers a better explanation for these fossils.
First, the Bible doesn't rely on circular reasoning or speculations but on "eyewitnesses" who wrote "words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and…the apostles of the Lord and Savior."3,4
Second, Scripture asserts that angiosperms existed alongside all other plants (including gymnosperms) and animals from the very start of creation—reporting instant creation of each plant kind. This exactly fits these fossils' sudden appearance. Third, it describes in detail a worldwide Flood capable of preserving life's traces in fossil forms. And in that context, Triassic flora and fauna do not represent a separate time but distinct ecosystems buried by sediment-laden Flood waters.
Finally, the Bible's timeline shows a creation that is thousands, not billions, of years old, erasing any need to explain why pollen grains buried deep in fossil layers look so similar to living herbs and flowers today.
References
Hochuli, P. A. and S. Feist-Burkhardt. 2013. Angiosperm-like pollen and Afropollis from the Middle Triassic (Anisian) of the Germanic Basin (Northern Switzerland). Frontiers in Plant Science. 4 (344): 1-14.
See Hochuli and Feist-Burkhardt, Frontiers in Plant Science 4 (344): 1-14. The team compared gymnosperm pollen grains found at the same site to show "a distinct contrast to the exine structure of the columellate, angiosperm-like grains." 2 Peter 1:16. 2 Peter 3:2.
* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.
Article posted on October 11, 2013.
Real data. Real decline of lifespans. Real exponential decay. How can this data be falsified?
Fishtank, Mech Eng, PhD
I asked a Jesuit priest if Jesus was bodily resurrected from the dead.
He said that the disciples experienced a joyful rebound of emotions after Jesus’ death, and that was the driving force that propelled their preaching.
Beware the Jesuits.
>> “The Bible’s record shows no trace of anybody getting eaten by a Tyrannosaurus” <<
.
Or of anybody getting eaten by any other animal either.
The evidence got eaten.
The evidence of “dragons” as they were actually called is thick and wide in recorded history.
Alexander the Great curtailed his conquests because of them several times.
Job.
Creation was 6013 years ago, and the Bible is the most reliable historical text in existence.
Do you play hockey?
First, please let me know how you connect climate change, radiation and abortion to evolutionary biology or more specifically, flower fossils.
No ad hominems.
That was my poor attempt at sarcasm...
My view of evolution is that in every way it is a religion as much as any other with its narrative of “in the beginning”, etc.
And some people wonder why religion is sadly losing influence.
The flaws in his theory that Darwin thought time would correct have only become more problematic. For instance, those elusive transitional fossil between the major species which he thought would be found, haven’t been. How many fossils are in existence? 200 million? More? Name one that provides proof of macroevolution. How about irreducible complexity to name another problem Darwin had with his own theory?
You say man is an ape. Do we have 24 pairs of chromosomes? And why, at the very least, do we have 100+ million more bits of info separating us from our supposed closest ancestor? Do you think we need more than one link to bridge that gap? Where this “beautiful lineage” you speak of?
Please tell me what you believe the creature is that is man’s closest relative in Darwinian evolution and I’ll go do more thorough research on it. Spare the condescension and lay the science on me.
what do you expect from a jesuit school?
They are not believers by any reasonable measure.
Nor are they well educated in Yehova’s word; they exist to deny it.
Yes “religion” is losing influence, but the truth of Yehova’s word is gaining influence rapidly among those of his election.
Religion has always been man’s effort to eradicate Yehova’s inerrant word.
I appreciate your inquiry, but as the OP did the honest thing and posted this religious article in the religion forum, any dissent from a young earth creation model gets deleted, as you can see above with all the comments removed by the Religion moderator.
Good day to you all.
Evolution vs. creationism aside...I've always seen that name spelled "Jehovah" rather than "Yehova". Just out of curiosity, why do you spell it in that manner?
LOL, we all get better with practice!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.