Fossils in the Wrong Rock Layers?

Sometimes we are told that evolution could be falsified by finding fossils in the wrong rock layers. This just is not true. Consider the linked article (link). As the article points out:

Jim Fassett, author of the research of the US Geological Survey, said many would still doubt the discovery.
He said: “The great difficulty with this hypothesis – that these are the remains of dinosaurs that survived – is ruling out the possibility that the bones date from before the extinction.
“After being killed and deposited in sands and muds, it is possible for bones to be exhumed by rivers and then incorporated into younger rocks.”

You see, there are already explanations for why the bones are in the “wrong” rock layers. And the bottom line is the same – evolution, or at least philosohpical naturalism, is a precommitment of atheistic scientific endeavors.


2 Responses to “Fossils in the Wrong Rock Layers?”

  1. CD Says:

    “…but some doubted” (Matt. 28:17)

    Evidences, facts, etc. aren't the problem, the problem lies in the interpretation. And men are going to interpret everything through the lens of their worldview, as you've aptly pointed out.

    I'm reminded of the story of the man who was convinced that he was dead, and after countless hours of counsel could not be persuaded otherwise.

    In desperation to help his client by discovering some common ground in order find a point of contact and agreement the counselor thought he had a breakthrough.

    After a thorough review of human anatomy and physiology, with an emphasis on the function of the circulatory system the two reached a consensus that dead men do not bleed.

    Immediately the counselor produced a needle, seized the hand of his counselee, and proceeded to prick him, producing a trickle of blood from the wound inflicted.

    Astonished the man exclaimed, “Alas, I was wrong, dead men do bleed after all!”

    The committed materialistic-naturalist will interpret “the evidence” through his materialistic-naturalist colored glasses because of his presupposed worldview, and he'll do so tenaciously and religiously even at the expense of logic and rationality itself.

    Such is the nature of the fool who suppresses the knowledge of God in unrighteousness and says in his heart, “there is no God”.

  2. Jim Moore Says:

    Again, this is not a cogent criticism of evolutionary theory. Mr. Fassett is speaking of a possible dislocation spanning 500,000 years, not 50,000,000. He also doesn't believe the dislocation thesis himself, as explained here, which is a much better account of the story anyway. The article you cite references “carbon” dating, which (unless the author intended some kind of carbon dating I've never heard of) would be useless for materials some 63,000,000 years old. Evolutionary theory could be quite-easily refuted: Find human bones in Cretaceous sedimentary rocks. Trust me, no geologist will tell you they got there by being “exhumed by rivers and then incorporated into younger rocks.”

    As for precommitments, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: