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

[aikido7]

Did you ever think the Genesis flood story is a myth (not factually correct, but "true" nonetheless)?

Sumer, Babylon, Mayans, Greeks, etc. ALL of these ancient civilizations and more had stories of great floods.

(Of course, OUR stories are historically true and theirs....)

 

[George Affleck]

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?

Are you kidding?

We can't even find MH370 and that just happened!

 

[TracerBullet]

Given a surface area of the earth of around 197,000,000 square miles, make an assumption of the population of the earth at the time of the Flood and divide that number by 197,000,000. This is a starting point to seeing how scarcely populated the post flood sediment would be for dead human beings per square mile.

Next assume fossilized remains do not happen for each and every dead creature, including humans. The per square mile density of potential fossils shrinks even more.

Assuming a billion people existed at the time of the flood yields only about 5 potential human fossils per square mile. In other words, go to a 640 acre plot of land (1 square mile) and find 5 dead human bodies buried there, possibly very deeply, too. Even at 20 billion people, that is still only 20 dead human bodies, and assuming fossilization took place in every instance (it would not), and whole human bodies, not just parts, were fossilized.

Given this, absence of evidence is no claim to evidence of absence to be used to discount the young earth view from Scripture.

AMR

yet we can find untold numbers of dinosaur fossils and primitive fish fossils and early reptile fossils and fossils of millions of extinct creatures and plants all of which supposedly lived within the last 6000 years...

 

[The Barbarian]

Assuming a billion people existed at the time of the flood yields only about 5 potential human fossils per square mile. In other words, go to a 640 acre plot of land (1 square mile) and find 5 dead human bodies buried there, possibly very deeply, too. Even at 20 billion people, that is still only 20 dead human bodies, and assuming fossilization took place in every instance (it would not), and whole human bodies, not just parts, were fossilized.

And it's pure bad luck that we can find all sorts of other, much more uncommon organisms, but never a human? Sorry, that's too much "luck" to be very plausible.

 

[6days]

References?

And electricity isn't a part of the fossilization process

You know lots of things which aren't necessarily true.
"New*laboratory experiments are showing that fossilization is a rapid process under certain conditions. Furthermore new evidence is at hand that electric fossilization is the probably tool of fossilization and this has generally been ignored. High voltage electricity either from within the earth or from cosmogenic effects such as comets, coronal mass ejections, planets in disturbed motion or nebulae interactions from outside the universe may be the major cause of petrifaction and fossilization. What dies is thus quickly recycled biotically, unless some geological intervention occurs. And this intervention that fossilizes is almost always connected to the cause of death."
http://www.ancientdestructions.com/a...ts-fossilized/

 

[Kdall]

You know lots of things which aren't necessarily true.
"New*laboratory experiments are showing that fossilization is a rapid process under certain conditions. Furthermore new evidence is at hand that electric fossilization is the probably tool of fossilization and this has generally been ignored. High voltage electricity either from within the earth or from cosmogenic effects such as comets, coronal mass ejections, planets in disturbed motion or nebulae interactions from outside the universe may be the major cause of petrifaction and fossilization. What dies is thus quickly recycled biotically, unless some geological intervention occurs. And this intervention that fossilizes is almost always connected to the cause of death."
http://www.ancientdestructions.com/a...ts-fossilized/

Your link won't work. But I'll admit, it sounds possible. Obviously it would only account for a fraction of a percentage of all fossils found, but nevertheless it seems reasonable.

That being said, the "About" page from your website, which is a blog written by one person, casts some doubt on the credibility of this site:

"Peter ‘Mungo’ Jupp is the author of the series. He is an Australian archaeologist with a passion not to follow traditions in archaeology. Peter does not think archaeology involves being ‘thrilled’ by dusting off broken pots and bones. What drives him is a passion to ask questions about civilisations and huge constructions that were suddenly smashed and just ‘disappeared’ from the face of Earth. He also questions how cosmic interference affected our planet."
http://www.ancientdestructions.com/about/

I found the blog post specifically mentioning possible electrical fossilization due to CMEs here: http://www.ancientdestructions.com/giant-wombats-and-electrical-fossilization/

 

[CabinetMaker]

Is this how you are always going to operate? I was asked a question, I gave an answer. Then you leaped in with an ignorant response and mockery and when called on it switch to a rabbit trail.

This is why evolutionists are mocked.

Dino and human remains are not found together because they did not live together. OP is answered. Have you something relevant to share, or are you going to be a troll your whole life?

Doesn't matter if they lived together or not. Once dead, they were all in the same large body of water. As that water drains, ALL bodies will naturally collect where restrictions in the water flow occur. We fond Dino bone beds. Logically, human bones should be in those same beds.

 

[The Barbarian]

As usual, we get an abundance of unsupported excuses from creationists trying to explain away the fact that the fossil record doesn't look anything like it should if creationism were true.

Magic, unscriptural miracles, "nebulae from outside the universe" etc. are all called in to patch up the holes.

No data, though. Just imaginary effects that they hope will explain why the evidence doesn't look the way they think it should.

What the hey is "nebulae outside the universe?"

 

[Cross Reference]

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?

Whatta ya think you have been digging up?

 

[The Barbarian]

No humans at all in strata containing dinosaurs, primitive mammals, etc. You'd think out of millions of humans, there'd be one at least.

But no.

 

[Caino]

No humans at all in strata containing dinosaurs, primitive mammals, etc. You'd think out of millions of humans, there'd be one at least.

But no.

Be patient, someone will be along shortly to explain that Satan took the bodies to trick everyone.

But I'm glad you are alive Barbarian, not long ago Christians would have killed you and me both all for the good of the cause simply for pointing out the obvious.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Given a surface area of the earth of around 197,000,000 square miles, make an assumption of the population of the earth at the time of the Flood and divide that number by 197,000,000. This is a starting point to seeing how scarcely populated the post flood sediment would be for dead human beings per square mile.

Next assume fossilized remains do not happen for each and every dead creature, including humans. The per square mile density of potential fossils shrinks even more.

Assuming a billion people existed at the time of the flood yields only about 5 potential human fossils per square mile. In other words, go to a 640 acre plot of land (1 square mile) and find 5 dead human bodies buried there, possibly very deeply, too. Even at 20 billion people, that is still only 20 dead human bodies, and assuming fossilization took place in every instance (it would not), and whole human bodies, not just parts, were fossilized.

Given this, absence of evidence is no claim to evidence of absence to be used to discount the young earth view from Scripture.

AMR

Apply this reasoning to the number of dino fossils we have found and calculate the number of dinos that would have had to have been around at the time of the flood to account for the fossils we have found. Should be an interesting number give that 20,000,000,000 people result in 20 fossils. We have found hundreds of dino fossils. At a ratio of 1:1,000,000,000, that is a lot of dinos.

 

[Stripe]

Did you ever think the Genesis flood story is a myth (not factually correct, but "true" nonetheless)? Sumer, Babylon, Mayans, Greeks, etc. ALL of these ancient civilizations and more had stories of great floods. (Of course, OUR stories are historically true and theirs....)

Evolutionists love denying the Bible.

Are you kidding? We can't even find MH370 and that just happened!

:rotfl:

Doesn't matter if they lived together or not.

Sure, it does. It affects where they would generally be in relation to one another and the conditions they would be exposed to. Also, it would affect their ability to get to other places in the short time they might have had left.

Once dead, they were all in the same large body of water.

And in one body of water we can see differential settling.

As with every time you try to engage on flood mechanics, you bring a simplistic mindset to the problem and leave no room for discussion.

As that water drains, ALL bodies will naturally collect where restrictions in the water flow occur. We fond Dino bone beds. Logically, human bones should be in those same beds.

They probably are. The problem is, you define beds according to your model and demand that the flood model use the same limitations.

 

[6days]

Your link won't work. But I'll admit, it sounds possible. ...

Try from here
http://www.theologyonline.net/forums/showpost.php?p=4266028&postcount=60

 

[Kdall]

Try from here
http://www.theologyonline.net/forums/showpost.php?p=4266028&postcount=60

Thank you for the link. It does seem possible, but unless there is far more evidence pointing to this phenomena happening all over the world commonly, then electrical fossilization won't account for a large percentage of the fossil record

 

[CabinetMaker]

Sure, it does. It affects where they would generally be in relation to one another and the conditions they would be exposed to. Also, it would affect their ability to get to other places in the short time they might have had left.

They had to live close enough together for there to be descriptions such as "behemoth" and "leviathan" to be recorded. Then there is a global flood so the dinos and the humans all end up in the same body of water. As that water drains, it will act to concentrate everything in the water to places where the water is either constricted or loses its velocity for some reason. And we find bone beds.

On the other hand, if you wish to insist that they did live far enough apart to not be in the same global flood (!?!?), you still have a problem with no human bone beds.

 

[Jose Fly]

Are you conceding there was a worldwide flood?

No, I'm saying you're not making any sense.

Not only would the turbulence of the sediment-laden Flood waters probably destroy some of the human bodies swept away

So now we have turbulent waters sweeping bodies away? I thought the creationist explanation earlier in this thread was that humans ran to the mountain tops, died there, and were buried there?

You guys need to make up your minds.

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.

But apparently this never happened to any ancient organisms?

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.

That's pretty much the opposite of what was proposed earlier in this thread. Is this what you're going with?

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.

Or it could be that there was no flood. :think:

 

[6days]

Thank you for the link. It does seem possible, but unless there is far more evidence pointing to this phenomena happening all over the world commonly, then electrical fossilization won't account for a large percentage of the fossil record

You asked for evidence that fossilization can happen in just a couple weeks. I showed you it's possible in hours... depends on conditions.
But one thing we do know... fossilization requires rapid burial. Although there are different ways fossilization can happen, it usually is in waterborn sediment. Fossils are evidence of a castrophic event.

 

[Jose Fly]

Yes... it means there is no evidence that of sophisticated vision evolving.

Seriously? So when a scientist says "in a geological blink of an eye", to you that means "we have no evidence"?

Ooooooooooooook. :kookoo:

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/

Except it wasn't a shrimp....at all. They're not even in the same taxonomic class.

 

[Jose Fly]

As usual, we get an abundance of unsupported excuses from creationists trying to explain away the fact that the fossil record doesn't look anything like it should if creationism were true.

Because this isn't about science or data. Young-earth creationism, including the flood, is about religious beliefs.