[Stultis]

[Oops. Didn't close a font tag.]

Woodmorappe is criticized for pointing out just the type of small, delicate, out-of-order fossils that you say can't be reworked.

No he isn't. Most of his examples are pollen, spores and such. Small, maybe, but not delicate, and ubiquitous as heck. VERY easily reworked (or contaminating sediments they weren't ever actually part of).

Of course the obvious thing about such ubiquitous fossils as pollen is that the anomalous findings should be REPEATABLE in a given formation. But of course they aren't.

[GourmetDan]

"No he isn't. Most of his examples are pollen, spores and such. Small, maybe, but not delicate, and ubiquitous as heck. VERY easily reworked (or contaminating sediments they weren't ever actually part of)."

Ah, there's that 'reworking' arugment that I mentioned to 'atlaw'. He seemed completely unaware of it.

Here is Woodmorappe responding to Morton.

http://www.trueorigin.org/ca_jw_02.asp

[GourmetDan]

Here's another article by Woodmorappe discussing the problems with the concept of the 'geologic' column'.

http://www.trueorigin.org/geocolumn.asp