Where are the Fossilized Remains of Millions of Humans from the Flood?

Jose Fly

New member
The problem is you cannot deny the flood.

The flood left sediment deposits deeper in some places than others.

Which if true, means evolutionist's theory for dating by depth is completely null and void.

?????????????? That makes no sense at all.

Not only that but as 6 days has pointed out many times here, the land experienced great up heavel which coincides with God's account.

Yet in the midst of all this great upheaval, everyone and everything rested and was buried exactly where it died? Nothing ever got mixed up, ever? Seriously?
 

dialm

BANNED
Banned
Another discussion on TOL about dinosaurs leads me to ask this question.

Young Earth Creationists maintain the Great Flood is responsible for the formation of fossils, as well as other geological constructs. If dinosaur fossils are the result of the Flood and we have found dinosaur fossils all over the world, where are the fossilized remains of the hundreds of millions of humans that would have perished in the Flood?

The Earth is only a few thousand years old. The entire Old Testament is a form of misdirection. It had to be that way in order to confuse the enemy. The enemy is told exactly what will happen. Then the enemy is led down the garden path.

Everything can be neatly explained. All except for theology. That is confusing as helium, (did I spell that right).
 

The Barbarian

BANNED
Banned
The idea that God is deceptive opens a huge can of worms. Once you assume God is not completely truthful, all of his promises are no more reliable than those of humans.
 

6days

New member
JoseFly said:
6days said:
We find features such as extremely advanced eyes in some creatures that evolutionists think were some of the earliest life forms.
That makes no sense, since life on earth has been around for ~4 billion years, and the Cambrian was ~500 million years ago. So how could "evolutionists" think Cambrian organisms were some of the earliest life forms, if they also think life had existed previously for some 3.5 billion years?*
Oooooooooo you got me Jose!

Perhaps I should have said "evolutionists think were some of the earliest life forms...with eyes".*

When evolutionists find something in the fossil record that doesn't fit their beliefs; they often explain it away with terms such as "sudden appearance" or "puzzling", or.... how about in the blink of an eye? By using these terms, they often are trying to cover the fact that they have no evidence... just beliefs.

EXAMPLE:
Dr John Patterson wrote:*
The latest find shows sophisticated vision had evolved very rapidly. It came with a bang, in a geological blink of an eye*
from Nature#480 p237-240*

Also in the Canberra Times Dec7/11*
What the article is about is giant shrimp about 3' long (1 meter) dated at 515 myo by evolutionists. (Anomalocarus). These shrimp like creatures dated at more than a half billion years.*

Notice what he is really saying..... THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THE EYE EVOLVED.
 
Without even considering the young earth versus old earth nonsense; where are the fossilized remains of the 1,503 people that died on the Titanic? For that matter, where is all of the wood?

The only thing left is the steel that made up the ships super-structure, tanned leather items and inorganic matter. Everything else has been consumed by various sea creatures and various forms of bacteria.

Why would 4,200 plus years ago be any different than 103 years 4 months and 11 days ago?
 

Jose Fly

New member
Oooooooooo you got me Jose!

Perhaps I should have said "evolutionists think were some of the earliest life forms...with eyes".*

Ok.

Dr John Patterson wrote:*
The latest find shows sophisticated vision had evolved very rapidly. It came with a bang, in a geological blink of an eye*
from Nature#480 p237-240*

Yes, and do you know what a "geological blink of an eye" means?

Also in the Canberra Times Dec7/11*

An Australian newspaper? Surely you can do better than that. :chuckle:

What the article is about is giant shrimp about 3' long (1 meter) dated at 515 myo by evolutionists. (Anomalocarus).

Oh sure, this looks just like a shrimp...:rolleyes:

no-es-tan-fiero-el-anomalocaris-como-pintan-L-Vq3nWT1.jpg


Notice what he is really saying..... THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THE EYE EVOLVED.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, that's totally obvious. :rolleyes:
 

Alate_One

Well-known member
Some good answers here:

Why Don’t We Find Human & Dinosaur Fossils Together?


I think its mostly because humans would head to higher ground.
So dinosaurs are dumb but humans aren't? Presumably birds could escape better than humans or dinosaurs but we have quite a few bird fossils.

So why are the few human fossils we do find concentrated in the top layers of sediment or found in caves?

Why don't we find dinosaur fossils in caves instead of buried in eroding hillsides?

Why are there so many fossil organisms that are vastly different than anything alive today?
 

dialm

BANNED
Banned
The idea that God is deceptive opens a huge can of worms. Once you assume God is not completely truthful, all of his promises are no more reliable than those of humans.

Mmmmm

God is not transparent.

Plus

God did not say crude oil came from dead reptiles.
 

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
Yoḥanon-benYaʿăqov;4428089 said:
Without even considering the young earth versus old earth nonsense; where are the fossilized remains of the 1,503 people that died on the Titanic? For that matter, where is all of the wood?

The only thing left is the steel that made up the ships super-structure, tanned leather items and inorganic matter. Everything else has been consumed by various sea creatures and various forms of bacteria.

Why would 4,200 plus years ago be any different than 103 years 4 months and 11 days ago?

Not to mention it takes all of 2 weeks to form a fossil.
 

dialm

BANNED
Banned
Like shouldn't there be examples of evolution in action?

Come to think of it I have met some Cro-magnum Roman Catholics at this chat site.

But really there are no cross overs walking around. You are either human or you are not. There is nothing in between walking around.
 

1Mind1Spirit

Literal lunatic
?????????????? That makes no sense at all.

Are you conceding there was a worldwide flood?



Yet in the midst of all this great upheaval, everyone and everything rested and was buried exactly where it died? Nothing ever got mixed up, ever? Seriously?

You think all fossils have been found?

How bout takin' a look at what actually has been found and what hasn't and why.

This site should completely answer the OP.

https://answersingenesis.org/fossils/fossil-record/where-are-all-the-human-fossils/

This is just a snip.

Differential Suspension

Not only would the turbulence of the sediment-laden Flood waters probably destroy some of the human bodies swept away, but differential suspension in the waters could have made it hard to bury those bodies that survived the turbulence. This is because human bodies when immersed in water tend to bloat, and therefore become lighter and float to the surface. This is what is meant by differential suspension. The human bodies floating on the water surface could therefore for some time be carrion for whatever birds were still flying around seeking places to land and food to eat. Likewise, marine carnivores still alive in their watery habitat would also devour corpses.

Furthermore, if the bodies floated long enough and were not eaten as carrion, then they would still have tended to either decompose or be battered to destruction on and in the waters before any burial could take place. This could explain why we still don’t find human fossils higher up in the fossil record/geological column, that is, the later Flood sediments.

When we take all these factors into account, it would seem unlikely that many of the people present at the time the Flood waters came could have ended up being fossilized. Even if a handful, perhaps a few thousand, were preserved, when such a small number is distributed through the vast volume of Flood sediments, the chances of one being found at the surface are mathematically very, very low, let alone of being found by a professional scientist who could recognize its significance and document it properly.

Putting all these factors together and assuming that they are all realistic possibilities, then the probability of finding a human fossil in the Flood sediments today would be very, very small. To date, our investigations of the fossil record indicate that there are no human fossils in Flood strata, so perhaps the above explanations could be some of the reasons why this is so.
 

6days

New member
Alate_One said:
So dinosaurs are dumb but humans aren't?
Perhaps.

Alate_One said:
Presumably birds could escape better than humans or dinosaurs but we have quite a few bird fossils.
True. We find modern type birds in dinosaur layers.*And we even find birds in dino tummies and dinosaur in mammal tummies. We find most dinos that aren't dismembered in a typical drowning pose. We find dinosaur fossil graveyards. We find evidence of rapid burial and preservation. *Ww find marine fossols on every mountain range in the world.We see this and much more in the fossil record as evidence for the truth of God's Word....sudden appearance, intelligently designed, global flood.*

Alate_One said:
So why are the few human fossils we do find concentrated in the top layers of sediment or found in caves?
As Knight said..."it's a good question" and there are several possible Answers that fit with God's Word. One possible answer for the scarcity of human fossols is that they all all post flood fossils. Remember what the purpose of the flood was.... Genesis 6:7 NLT
"And the LORD said, "I will wipe this human race I have created from the face of the earth. Yes, and I will destroy every living thing--all the people, the large animals, the small animals that scurry along the ground, and even the birds of the sky. I am sorry I ever made them."
 

6days

New member
JoseFly said:
6days said:
John Patterson wrote:
The latest find shows*sophisticated vision had evolved very rapidly. It came with a bang, in a geological blink of an eye.
from Nature#480 p237-240
Yes, and do you know what a "geological blink of an eye" means?
Yes... it means there is no evidence that of sophisticated vision evolving. Sudden appearance of sophisticated vision is evidence of Biblical creation.*

JoseFly said:
6days said:
What the article is about is giant shrimp about 3' long (1 meter) dated at 515 myo by evolutionists. (Anomalocarus).
Oh sure, this looks just like a shrimp...
We agree....
"First top predator was giant shrimp with amazing eyes"

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn21251-first-top-predator-was-giant-shrimp-with-amazing-eyes/
 
Top