Search This Blog

Sunday, March 31, 2013

Easter is NOT a pagan holiday! Happy Easter to all!

Blessed Easter to all! 

(from 2007)

I'll not argue with anyone today. Let tomorrow be a time for that, but today I am simply grateful for a God who made me and made a way for me to choose to live with Him forever.

For all of you who read this post, if you are Christians I say, "He is risen!"

For all who are not.....my hope is not that you become a Christian in order to change your vote or your lifestyle or your scientific point of view. I do hope you do come to know Jesus some time in your life, for I believe deeply that He is "the Way" to eternal life and a relationship with the very God who created the Universe and all that is in it. Jesus tends to change from the inside out but it isn't about that. It is about your life.

If you were a believer in Christ and a Christian, like myself, I would hope that you would care enough about others to tell them about your faith. You would not let fear stop you, nor criticism, nor political correctness. If you knew that you knew that you knew that you had a cure for cancer, wouldn't you get it to the pharmaceutical laboratories so they could begin producing it and save lives? If you knew how to get crops to grow at twice their rate and size, wouldn't you try to get that knowledge to experts in husbandry in order to help put an end to hunger in the world? I would hope that you would!

You know the story, witnessed and historically documented in such a way that Jewish Law would have to consider it to be a true account. Jesus lived a sinless life, died a sinner's death, thereby having the right to suffer in your place and mine and take our penalty. He then rose from the dead as the First of all those born of woman to have eternal life. He was God becoming man to bring man to God forever. He simply seeks for those who will believe, repent, and become one of God's children by asking the Lord to come into their hearts as Savior.

It's not a ritual, it is a decision.

It's not a religion, it is a relationship.

Those of us who know Him reply, "He is risen indeed!"

But just to make sure you can see the word, "Easter" is not of pagan origin...Not to cause argument but simply informational...

Easter and Good Friday: questions and answers

Does Easter have a pagan derivation? Was Jesus really crucified on a Friday?

by Jonathan Sarfati
iStockphoto
Passover
5 April 2008

Dr Tas Walker’s article Genesis and the Cross published on Good Friday at the beginning of the Easter holidays prompted questions that we receive from time to time. The first concerns the word Easter itself, and the second concerns Good Friday.

Easter

We are occasionally rebuked for using the word Easter, on the grounds that it is allegedly derived from the Babylonian goddess Astarte, equivalent to the Assyrian goddess Ishtar. This comes from an oft-cited 19th-century book, The Two Babylons, by the Scots reverend Alexander Hislop:
‘Then look at Easter. What means the term Easter itself? It is not a Christian name. It bears its Chaldean origin on its very forehead. Easter is nothing else than Astarte, one of the titles of Beltis, the queen of heaven, whose name, as pronounced by the people Nineveh, was evidently identical with that now in common use in this country. That name, as found by Layard on the Assyrian monuments, is Ishtar. The worship of Bel and Astarte was very early introduced into Britain, along with the Druids, “the priests of the groves”. Some have imagined that the Druidical worship was first introduced by the Phoenicians, who, centuries before the Christian era, traded to the tin-mines of Cornwall. But the unequivocal traces of that worship are found in regions of the British islands where the Phoenicians never penetrated, and it has everywhere left indelible marks of the strong hold which it must have had on the early British mind.’
So the main question is, how reliable is this connection? A secondary question is: would it be so serious anyway? But first, what did the original God-breathed manuscripts say?

Original languages

The Hebrew word for Passover is פֶּסַח (pesach), which comes from the verb פָּסַח (pasach) which means to pass over. When the Old Testament was translated into Greek, this word was basically unchanged, becoming the Greek πάσχα (pascha). In some English Bibles, this is translated Easter, and other times Passover, but it’s the same word. Most other languages have the same word for both, e.g. Latin Pascha, French Pâques, Italian Pasqua, and Dutch Pasen. English also retains this word in expressions such as ‘pascal lamb’. So where did the word ‘Easter’ come from?

Easter: common Anglo-Saxon term

Does the word ‘Easter’ come from paganism? The answer is a clear ‘no!’. Hislop’s research is very shoddy in many places (Hislop is refuted in A Case Study in Poor Methodology). He tries to see paganism everywhere, on even the flimsiest grounds. In this case, he imagines a connection between Easter and Astarte purely on the basis of sound similarity, with not the slightest trace of linguistic connection or any borrowing. By this spurious method, one could connect the Potomac river with the Greek ποταμός (potamos), although there is no connection between the native American and Greek words.
In reality, the word Easter is really Anglo-Saxon (sometimes Ester),1 not Babylonian. It was the common word for both Passover and Easter. J. R. Clarke Hall’s A Concise Anglo-Saxon Dictionary provides the following list of related words showing that Easter was used for both:
east—I. adj. east, easterly. II. adv. eastwards, in an easterly direction, in or from the east

Easteraefen—Easter-eve
Easterdaeg—Easter-day, Easter Sunday
Easterfaestan—Easter-fast, Lent
Easterfeorm—feast of Easter
Easterfreolsdaeg—the feast day of Passover
Eastergewuna—Easter custom (appears only in the 9th century sermons of Aelfric where he is referring to Christian Easter practices)

The pagan derivation of Easter is conspiratorial fantasy. The word is Anglo-Saxon, and derived from the Germanic Oster meaning Passover, and is related to the words for Resurrection.
Easterlic—belonging to Easter, Paschal
Eastermonath—Easter-month, April
Easterne—east, eastern, oriental
Easterniht—Easter-night
Eastersunnandaeg
—Easter Sunday
Eastersymble—Passover (lit. Easter gathering)
Eastertid—Eastertide, Paschal season
Easterthenung—Passover
Easterwucu—Easter Week An example of the word meaning the Jewish Passover comes from a 1563 homily: ‘Easter, a great, and solemne feast among the Jewes.’

Germanic origin

Anglo-Saxon itself is a Germanic language, and this is the genuine origin of the term Easter. Germans likewise used the word Oster or Ostern for both Passover and our Easter. E.g. when the Reformer Martin Luther (1483–1546) first translated the Bible into German (1545), he used a number of German words relating to this, such as Osterfest (Passover/Easter), Osterlamm (Passover lamb). E.g. compare Luke 22:1, 7
NASB: Now the Feast of Unleavened Bread, which is called the Passover, was approaching.
Luther Bibel 1545: Es war aber nahe das Fest der süßen Brote, das da Ostern heißt.
NASB: Then came the first day of Unleavened Bread on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed.
Luther: Es kam nun der Tag der süßen Brote, an welchem man mußte opfern das Osterlamm.
Describing a Passover at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry, compare John 2:13,23:
NKJV: Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem.
Luther: Und der Juden Ostern war nahe, und Jesus zog hinauf gen Jerusalem.
NKJV: Now when He was in Jerusalem at the Passover, during the feast, many believed in His name when they saw the signs which He did.
Luther: Als er aber zu Jerusalem war am Osterfest, glaubten viele an seinen Namen, da sie die Zeichen sahen, die er tat.
Compare also 1 Corinthians 15:7, identifying the true Passover Lamb, of which the lambs were types:
NIV: For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.
Luther: Denn wir haben auch ein Osterlamm, das ist Christus, für uns geopfert.
Even in modern German, the das jüdische Osterfest means the Jewish Passover. In turn, this word comes from Ost, or the sunrising, i.e. East. In turn, this is likely to come from the old German word auferstehen / auferstanden / Auferstehung meaning rising from the dead/resurrection. Luther used these words as well, e.g. throughout 1 Corinthians 15.

So the pagan derivation of Easter is conspiratorial fantasy. The word is Anglo-Saxon, and derived from the Germanic Oster meaning Passover, and is related to the words for Resurrection.

William Tyndale, Easter and his new English Bible

The brilliant and godly scholar William Tyndale (1496–1536) was the first to translate the Bible into English directly from Hebrew and Greek rather than via Latin, which was also the first English Bible to be printed mechanically. He was fluent in many languages—as well as his native English, he could speak French, Greek, Hebrew, German, Italian, Latin and Spanish. But he was determined to produce a Bible in English, as he said, to ‘cause the boy that drives the plow in England to know more of the Scriptures than the Pope himself!’

However, because of persecution, Tyndale had to flee to Lutheran parts of Germany. Here, he completed his translation, which introduced many popular words and phrases into English:
  • Atonement
  • Jehovah
  • scapegoat
  • let there be light
  • the powers that be
  • my brother's keeper
  • the salt of the earth
  • a law unto themselves
  • filthy lucre
  • it came to pass
  • gave up the ghost
  • the signs of the times
  • the spirit is willing
  • live and move and have our being
  • fight the good fight
Much of his work is better known as providing the basis for the KJV (1611) and the Geneva Bible (1560).

Tyndale was also responsible for introducing the word ‘Ester’ into the English Bible. John Wycliffe, who produced the first English Bible in 1382, had translated from the Latin, and left the word pascha basically untranslated and called it pask or paske. Luther occasionally did likewise, using the transliterated form passah. For example, in Lev. 23:5, he rendered ‘the LORD’s Passover’ as ‘des Herrn Passah’, and in Ex. 12:27, ‘It is the Passover sacrifice to the Lord was ‘Es ist das Passahopfer des Herrn.

But when Tyndale prepared the new Testament, he followed Luther’s more common practice and used the most common word in his native language. That is, while Luther most often used Oster and its cognates, Tyndale used Ester and its cognates.
For example:

Luke 2:41 And his father and mother went to Hierusalem every year at the feast of ester.
Luke 22:15 And he said unto them: I have inwardly desired to eat this ester lamb with you before that I suffer.
John 2:13 And the jews’ ester was even at hand; And Iesus went up to Ierusalem,
John 6:4 (And ester a feast of the jews, was nigh.)
John 11:55 The jews’ ester was nigh at hand
John 19:14 (It was the Sabbath even which falleth in the ester feast, and about the sixth hour)
1 Cor. 5:7 For Christ our ester lamb is offered up for us.
Note, if the Hislop pagan derivation theory were correct, it would imply that the godly Tyndale and Luther before him were really calling Jesus the ‘Astarte Lamb’ or ‘Ishtar Lamb’.

Tyndale and Passover

But when Tyndale translated the Old Testament, he thought that it was anachronistic to use the word Easter for the Jewish feast. This is because, as above, the derivation of Easter comes from the resurrection, which had yet to happen. So Tyndale went back to the root of pesach, i.e. pasach, meaning ‘to pass over’, and coined the new term Passover.

So it is due to Tyndale, not to paganism, that some English Bibles have two different words, Easter and Passover, to translate a single Hebrew/Greek term. As the KJV was essentially the 5th revision of the Tyndale Bible, and retains about 90% of its wording, it keeps this feature. But it more consistently applied Tyndale’s logic to retain Easter only for Acts 12:4, where the Christian resurrection celebration was in view not just the Jewish feast. For all other occurrences, the KJV translators used Tyndale’s new word ‘passover’. But this obscured the traditional meaning of Easter that included the Jewish Passover. Modern translations generally use only one word, Passover, to translate pesach/pascha.

Would it matter that much?

While the above firmly refutes the pagan derivation nonsense about Easter, there are far more familiar things that really are derived from paganism, but about which few people worry. It is illogical to avoid a Christian-based holiday that brings people together in worship because of some perceived tie to paganism, while using everyday products and ignoring their obvious pagan heritage. You might have your muffler replaced by Midas, wear shoes designed by Nike, chew Trident gum, or watch a movie by Orion Pictures. Several days of our week and months of our year are named after Norse gods, except for Saturday that comes from the Roman god Saturn, and Sunday and Monday of course. Several months are named after Roman gods. The eight planets and many of their moons are named after Roman deities. Mazda cars are named for a Zoroastrian deity, and many people drive a Saturn, Mercury, Ares, Aurora … etc.

But even in God’s Word, some of the heroes in the Bible had paganized names. E.g. Mordecai, the real hero of the book of Esther, has a name related to the Babylonian high god Marduk. Consider also Daniel’s three friends who were prepared to be thrown in the furnace rather than worship any but the true God. They were originally named Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah, but are better known by the names the Babylonians gave them: Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego (Daniel 1:7). Abednego means ‘servant of Nebo’, the pagan god.

Was Jesus crucified on Good Friday?

iStockphoto
Tomb
Some readers argue that in Matthew 12:40, Christ said that he would be ‘three days and three nights’ in the tomb, so if Jesus was crucified on Good Friday and rose on Sunday, it couldn’t have been three full 24-hour periods. Thus, they say, the crucifixion occurred on a Wednesday or a Thursday.
However, as I covered in Refuting Compromise pp. 79–80, in Jewish counting, a part of a day was counted as a whole day (a figure of speech known as synecdoche). So while X days and X nights can mean what it means in English, this was only a subset of its semantic range in Jewish idiom. The Jewish Encyclopedia explains (as cited in the Tektonics Apologetics article on this topic):
‘In Jewish communal life part of a day is at times reckoned as one day; e.g., the day of the funeral, even when the latter takes place late in the afternoon, is counted as the first of the seven days of mourning; a short time in the morning of the seventh day is counted as the seventh day; circumcision takes place on the eighth day, even though of the first day only a few minutes remained after the birth of the child, these being counted as one day.’
To demonstrate this, 1 Samuel 30:12 says, ‘he had not eaten bread or drunk water for three days and nights’, and this is equated in the next verse with hayyom shelosha (three days ago) , which could only mean the day before yesterday. Another example is 1 Kings 20:29 (NIV):
‘For seven days they camped opposite each other, and on the seventh day the battle was joined.’
So for Jews, the phrases ‘on the third day’, ‘after the third day’, ‘until the third day’ and ‘three days and three nights’ were synonymous.

In English counting, if they started fighting on the 7th day, it means they were only camping for six whole days. But in Jewish reckoning, the partial days are counted as wholes, so the text says they were camping for seven days. See also Genesis 42:17–18.

So the above shows that X days and X nights need not mean X 24-hour periods. So how should 3 days and 3 nights be understood in the Gospels? As we should interpret Scripture by Scripture, we should see what other passages say about the same event. One website has made a helpful table of all the references.

Interchangeability of terms : (All Bible data on Resurrection)

Bible Term

Duration in grave

Until the third day Mt 27:64 give orders for the grave to be made secure until the third day
In three days Mt 26:61 rebuild it in three days
Mt 27:40 rebuild it in three days
Mk 14:58 in three days I will build another made without hands.
Mk 15:29 rebuild it in three days
Jn 2:19–20 in three days I will raise it up
On the third day Mt 16:21 raised up on the third day
Mt 17:23 raised on the third day
Mt 20:19 on the third day He will be raised up
Lk 9:22 be raised up on the third day
Acts 10:40 God raised Him up on the third day
1 Cor 15:4 raised on the third day
The third day Lk 18:33 the third day He will rise again
Lk 24:7 the third day rise again
Lk 24:21 it is the third day since these things happened
Lk 24:46 rise again from the dead the third day
Three days later Mk 9:31 rise three days later
Mk 10:34 and three days later He will rise again
After three days Mt 27:63 After three days I am to rise again
Mk 8:31 after three days rise again
Three days and three nights Jonah 1:17 in the stomach of the fish three days and three nights.
Mt 12:40 for just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so shall the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
To take Matthew 27:63–64:
Sir, they said, we remember that while he was still alive that deceiver said, ‘After three days I will rise again.’ So give the order for the tomb to be made secure until the third day. Otherwise, his disciples may come and steal the body and tell the people that he has been raised from the dead. This last deception will be worse than the first.’
Note that even His enemies understood that ‘after three days’ meant that they only had to secure the tomb ‘until the third day’. If three full 24-hour periods were meant, then they would want to secure the tomb until the fourth day to make sure. So for Jews, the phrases ‘on the third day’, ‘after the third day’, ‘until the third day’ and ‘three days and three nights’ were synonymous.

We have to not only allow Scripture to interpret Scripture, but should allow for the understanding of the time period in which it was written.

So, on what day was Jesus crucified? The best explanation is that Christ was buried before about 6pm Good Friday (Luke 23:54). Since the Jewish day started at sunset, the late afternoon of Good Friday was the first day; Friday sunset to Saturday sunset was the 2nd day; the 3rd day began on Saturday at sunset, and Jesus had risen from the dead by early Sunday morning.

It is important to realize that when we attempt to work out difficult portions of Scripture, we cannot approach it as if we were reading a modern newspaper. We have to not only allow Scripture to interpret Scripture, but should allow for the understanding of the time period in which it was written. Our preconceived notions of ‘how it should be’ should be left out of the equation. See also Should Genesis be taken literally?

Related Articles

References

  1. The following article is very informative: Nick Sayers, Why we should not Pass-over Easter, Contending Earnestly for the Faith 43:2–7, March 2008. Return to text.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Saturday, March 30, 2013

Back to Fossils and Fossil Rocks Kill Off Evolution! - Part Four

I will remind readers that we did a YouTube-heavy series on Creation versus Evolution recently and the series was compiled and reposted by a couple of readers.  Thanks, guys!   Here is a quick reminder of that series...



From the previous series.
What is Creation and Evolution and who cares? The beginning…
What is Creation and Evolution…part two
What is Creation and Evolution and who cares? Part Three
What is Creation and Evolution and who cares? Part Four!
What is Creation and Evolution and who cares? Part Five!
What is Creation and Evolution and Who Cares? Part Six
What is Creation and Evolution and Who Cares? Part 7!
What is Creation and Evolution and Who Cares? Part 8!
What is Creation and Evolution and Who Cares? Part 9! The Chinese three wise men edition.
What is Creation and Evolution and Who Cares? Part 10!
What is Creation and Evolution and Who Cares? Part 11!
What is Creation and Evolution and Who Cares? The End?

Also well worth mentioning quickly is this set of posts on related subjects:


and

 


Back to scrutinizing the fossil record with Sean Pittman.  We took a big detour and now we are back on the main highway of evidence from the fossil record for Creation and Noahic Flood rather than Evolution:


All references are found at that site.  But I did include three at the bottom of this segment.




Added September, 2011
 
 
 
There are many who argue that dinosaur eggs clearly falsify the concept of a recent global Flood of Noachian proportions. However, as far as I've been able to tell, it seems like dinosaur eggs actually lend greater support to the worldwide Flood model.  I certainly don't see how dinosaur eggs definitively undermine this model as many suggest.

Consider, for example, certain general features of dinosaur eggs: 111, 112
  • Of the hundreds of thousands of eggs that have been preserved in the fossil record it seems likely that over 99% of them contain no embryo.
  • Essentially all of the eggs that have been found were buried by water-born sediments around the world.
  • Many examples of egg beds were laid as sediments were being actively deposited - to include striking examples of eggs within the same "nest" being deposited on multiple levels of sediment (see picture above).
  • Most asymmetrical eggs (eggs with a pointy end) were unexpectedly preserved with the pointy end pointed downward and the larger end pointed upward with a symmetrical inward or outward leaning orientation - consistent with being laid in semi-liquid sediment (like very watery mud).
  • Those eggs that are found with "hatch windows" often contain the shell fragments from the window within the egg itself - a feature not expected from hatched eggs where the shell fragments should be on the outside of the egg following hatching.
  • The overall arrangement of eggs in a nest with "hatch windows" is not disturbed as would be expected from the hatchlings moving the light eggshells around after hatching from their eggs.
  • Trackways of young or baby dinosaurs are extremely rare relative to adult trackways and the trackways that are found (of the adults) are generally found in lower sedimentary layers compared to the body fossils (Leonard Brand).
  • Extremely well preserved embryos from Auca Mahuevo (Argentina), to include the preservation of very delicate embryonic bones and skin, suggests very rapid burial in a supersaturated watery environment. 
  • Commonly identified double layered egg shells suggesting the existence of a stressful environment worldwide (see discussion below).

Now, I do recognize that embryos, though very rare, are sometimes identified (both within and outside of their eggs).  I'm also aware that they show fairly advanced development, to include fully formed skeletons and occasional teeth.   However, this is not entirely unexpected given the Biblical Flood model (on a worldwide scale).  As originally proposed by Leonard Brand (Link), cases are known were reptiles, like the Komodo Dragon for example, will withhold the laying of fertilized eggs until a more favorable opportunity arises or until they are put into very stressful conditions of "fight or flight".  Of course, if eggs are held for too long before being laid, they will develop a "second shell" which suffocates the embryo.  Dinosaur eggs have often been found with such a double shell, suggesting that they were able to avoid laying their eggs for some time in the hopes of more favorable conditions.

Healthy, well-adjusted chickens and marine turtles have only one shell round their eggs. Give chickens a hard time, says Sally Solomon of Glasgow university, and they react in a tell-tale way. 

"They retain the eggs in the reproductive tract and, in retaining it, it either gets an extra coating of calcium or sometimes it actually shoots back up the reproductive tract and it gets an extra layer of shell," she says.  "If you take a busload of tourists on to a beach when turtles are trying to come ashore to lay their clutches of eggs in the sand, they will abandon the process and move back into the sea. When they are in the sea, the eggs are held and an extra layer of calcium is laid down. So you end up with a very thick shell."

What was true for birds and reptiles today must have been true for the ancestors of both birds and reptiles. When Frankie Johnson, a paleontologist working in Montana, sent her samples of eggs from fossil nests of Troodon, Professor Solomon recognized the symptoms immediately. The shells were double.

"It's a huge step to say it's stress in dinosaurs. But they must have had it, what with their world collapsing about them. Here we have a phenomenon common to dinosaurs, extant reptiles and birds. And we know for a fact that stress is instrumental in causing double shelled eggs in turtles, poultry and many wild birds.  Is it too big a step to suggest that dinosaurs, despite their size, also experienced stress? Those shells are abnormal: they were retained in the oviduct for longer than normal.  Why? What was there in that environment which was inclement? These are questions we are looking at." 113

I've read counter arguments suggesting that dinosaurs were warm blooded and therefore could not retain their eggs for very long, but this is debatable and is essentially falsified by the fairly common finding of thickened or doubled dinosaur egg shells within the fossil record.

I've also read arguments where the suggestion is made that dinosaurs likely laid only one or two eggs per day.  Yet, this is clearly mistaken in many cases where there is evidence of many eggs being laid in a very symmetrical pattern within the same day.  Also, I don't agree with the concept that the Flood would have had to kill off all the dinosaurs by the 40th day.  I think that the Flood was complex, not a uniform increase of water over the globe.  It seems to me at least possible that animals could have survived the initial months of the Flood - perhaps close to 150 days from the beginning of the Flood.  Noah was on the Ark, after all, for over a year.   
(Back to Top)


Feathered Dinosaurs
Added April 10, 2012
 
Modern scientists have long believed and taught that modern featured birds originally evolved from theropod dinosaurs.  After all, birds and theropod dinosaurs, or reptiles in general, share many of the same or similar features.  For example, like all other reptiles, birds have scales.  Also, birds lay eggs as do reptiles.  Certain anatomical features, such as the overall musculatures, brain, heart, and other organs, as well as the skeletal system, are fairly similar.
 
 In short, ancient birds shared the following major skeletal characteristics with many certain dinosaurs (especially the Maniraptora, which includes Velociraptors):

  1. Pubis (one of the three bones making up the vertebrate pelvis) shifted from an anterior to a more posterior orientation, and bearing a small distal "boot".
  2. Elongated arms and forelimbs and clawed manus (hands).
  3. Large orbits (eye openings in the skull).
  4. Flexible wrist with a semi-lunate carpal (wrist bone).
  5. Hollow, thin-walled bones.
  6. 3-fingered opposable grasping manus (hand), 4-toed pes (foot); but supported by 3 main toes.
  7. Reduced, posteriorly stiffened tail.
  8. Elongated metatarsals (bones of the feet between the ankle and toes).
  9. S-shaped curved neck.
  10. Erect, digitgrade (ankle held well off the ground) stance with feet postitioned directly below the body.
  11. Similar eggshell microstructure.
  12. Teeth with a constriction between the root and the crown.
  13. Functional basis for wing power stroke present in arms and pectoral girdle (during motion, the arms were swung down and forward, then up and backwards, describing a "figure-eight" when viewed laterally).
  14. Expanded pneumatic sinuses in the skull.
  15. Five or more vertebrae incorporated into the sacrum (hip).
  16. Straplike scapula (shoulder blade).
  17. Clavicles (collarbone) fused to form a furcula (wishbone).
  18. Hingelike ankle joint, with movement mostly restricted to the fore-aft plane.
  19. Secondary bony palate (nostrils open posteriorly in throat).
  20. Possibly feathers... this awaits more study. Small, possibly feathered dinosaurs were recently found in China. It appears that many coelurosaurs were cloaked in an external fibrous covering that could be called "protofeathers."
 
Such similarities have long been recognized.  Many anatomists between the 1500s to 1800s noticed that birds shared various similarities to reptiles.  Then, in 1860, the first specimen of Archaeopteryx lithographica (pictured above) was discovered by a quarry worker in Germany.  For many, it was a beautiful example of a "transitional form" between reptiles and birds - and seemed to confirm Darwin's recently published expectations.  J. H. Ostrom's 1969 description of Deinonychus antirrhopus and its similarities to Archaeopteryx then provided the groundwork for the modern view of birds evolving the ability to fly with the use of feathers.  Then, Dr. Gautheir's cladistic work in the mid-1980's provided analytical systematic support for the dinosaur-bird evolution theory. 

Of course, there has been some disagreement among modern scientists as to the true evolutionary origin of birds.  Dr. Alan Feduccia, for example, has been an outspoken opponent of the dinosaur-bird evolution hypothesis.  During his 2004 talk at the San Diego History Museum on the origin of birds, he said, "Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth-bound, feathered dinosaur. But it's not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that."  (Link)  During this talk he especially emphasized the following points:
 
  • Archaeopteryx is a true bird.
  • "Dinofuzz" is nothing more than collagenic fibers found on many other fossils.
  • Today's highly touted "Feathered Dinosaurs" are a myth: some fossils (i.e. Caudipteryx) have flight-feathers but they aren't really dinos--they are secondarily flightless birds
  • Birds have digits 2-3-4, and theropods have digits 1-2-3. This is powerful evidence that birds couldn't have evolved from theropod dinos.
  • Also, the theropod --> bird hypothesis requires that birds evolved flight from the ground-up. If Caudipteryx has feathers but not for flight, Feduccia finds this explanation quite tenuous. Put simply, ground-up proponents say feathers were pre-adapted for flight but evolved originally for insulation. This is silly because feathers are perfectly suited for flight, and very energetically costly to produce. If insulation was all that was needed, hair would have done the job just fine and would not have been nearly so costly. It strains credibility to say feathers evolved for insulation.
  • Feduccia prefers Microraptor as an ancestor of birds because he likes the trees-down hypothesis, not the ground-up hypothesis.
  • If birds didn't come from theropods, this does leave a rather large time-gap where there is essentially no fossil documentation of exactly what sort of dinos or other reptiles from which birds would have evolved.
 
Of course, the fact that "quill knobs" have been shown on the arms of real dinosaurs like Velociraptors (pictured above) is quite difficult for many scientists to ignore.  How can the pro and con arguments for key similarities and differences be resolved?  

Well, some scientists are now arguing that dinosaurs evolved from birds, not the other way around.  That's right, birds came first with their complex feathers and flight adaptations and then theropod dinosaurs lost these specialized features when they took to the ground.
 
“Raptors look quite a bit like dinosaurs but they have much more in common with birds than they do with other theropod dinosaurs such as Tyrannosaurus,” Ruben said. “We think the evidence is finally showing that these animals which are usually considered dinosaurs were actually descended from birds, not the other way around.”ScienceDaily (Feb. 9, 2010)
 
So, we have yet another example of devolution in action – the same mechanism that produces flightless birds on windy islands or cavefish without eyes. This form of change over time is very easy to explain since it is far easier to break something via mindless mechanisms than it is to create a working complex system to begin with via any known mindless mechanism.
Again, look as you might, you will not find an example in literature of evolution in action beyond very very low levels of functional complexity (i.e., beyond the level of 1000 specifically arranged amino acid residues), nor will you find a mathematical model that makes any useful predictions as to the success of the mechanism of RM/NS at various levels of functional complexity over a given period of time.

In short, faith in the RM/NS mechanism as the primary source of creativity in evolutionary biology for the production of higher level systems of function within gene pools is nothing but fairytale wishful thinking – not science.   Functionally complex differences between different groups of animals, such as the complexity of true bird feathers, can only be explained by deliberate intelligent design.
These are actually 111, 112 and 113 numbered references
  1. Bernhart, Walter R., Dinosaur Nests Reinterpreted, CRSQ Vol 41 No 2 September 2004 ( Link )
  2. Johns, Warren H., Dinosaur eggs and the post-Flood boundary, TJ 19(3) 2005 ( Link )
  3. Tim Radford, Shell shock shows how dinosaurs suffered stress, Science Editor, The Guardian, Thursday 18 February 1999 22.55 EST ( Link )
 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So in the Darwinist world, they cannot decide if dinosaurs evolved from birds or birds evolved from dinosaurs.   Technically, many of the organisms we commonly call "dinosaurs" are not officially dinosaurs from the point of view of Darwinist Scientism.  The Linnaean classification system was an attempt by Linnaeus to identify the "miyn" or "kinds" that were created by God aka "baramin."  

Baraminology is a modern scientific discipline that Creation Science is currently developing, with far better information to begin with, in order to classify the original kinds and then identify the branching off of organisms via speciation.   Creation tells us that basic kinds with very large genetic information stores were the basic organisms from which the vast and innumerable varieties of organisms of today have speciated.   The Creation/Flood model includes and expects to find myriad fossils in the sedimentary rocks as the rapid anoxic burials were unlikely in normal circumstances.   

Extinctions of organisms is also expected because of mutations and changes n ecosystems.   Some organisms were so overwhelmed by the Flood and the climatic changes thereafter that they no longer exist.   However, many organisms supposed to have become extinct and having supposedly evolved into other organisms have been found, the "Lazarus Taxa" discussed many times and in part three of this series.   Some organisms have remained unchanged other than perhaps not get as large or live as long as they did before the Flood.   The record of humanity recorded in the Bible is one of very long lives before the Flood and increasingly shorter life-spans afterwards.   The Bible does tell us that God declares a change in the lifespan of humanity after the Flood and this is apparently true for virtually all organisms.

A few surprising extinctions are noted - particularly the Trilobites.   Trilobites had some of the most advanced eyes in all of the animal kingdom. Yes, these "Cambrian" creatures were remarkably sophisticated and it is surprising they went extinct...if indeed they are extinct.   After all, mankind has not explored much of the ocean floor and there may well be Trilobites found alive, just as the Coelecanth was discovered.  Oh, and those lobed fins?  They are not precursors to legs, they are used by the organism for swimming mobility.  Another creature somewhat similar to the trilobite does remain, the Mantis Shrimp.  Mantis Shrimps also have extraordinary eyesight and very sophisticated attack weapons used to kill prey and open hard shells of their shelled dinner choices.    Mantis Shrimp are also found in the Cambrian rock layers.   We see no precursors to these organisms, with their highly advanced eyesight, supposedly among the more primitive of creatures.   The evidence is that they were designed that way and some survived the Flood and some did not.  

An interesting note about Baramin...there are multiple kinds that fill the same "niche" in the modern food chain.  Multiple kinds of carnivores, of carrion-eaters, of vegetarians, of omnivores.   Among fish, we often find both freshwater and saltwater versions of the same animal.   Studies have shown that both saltwater and freshwater fish can adjust to life in brackish water and many thrive in such an environment.   There is no problem for fish having survived the Flood, one reason being the nature of big floods in which flows of fresh water would be found within the Flood.  It is also likely the oceans before the Flood were less salty and have slowly added salt content since that Flood event.  Therefore saltwater fish and freshwater fish living successfully in brackish water with a very short period of adjustment makes sense.  

Furthermore, tests of carnivorous animals in today's world show that all of them can subsist on vegetables and insects.   For some it is difficult, but this is due to speciation that has caused, for instance, carnivorous cats to be very difficult to feed without adding flesh to their diets.   But then that is a subject for another post.


"To thine own self be true, and it must follow, as the night the day, thou canst not then be false to any man." - Shakespeare


"... you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free." - Jesus Christ

Friday, March 29, 2013

Siberian and Deccan Traps cannot be long-age formations

As one of the commenters has posted on fossils and "paleosols" found in Deccan and Siberian Traps quite often, it is time to put an end to the topic with a flourish, hopefully.   In my last two posts I did try to make it clear to the reader that "paleosol" as used by Darwinists is typically a "pseudosol" or in other words, they are wrong about finding well-established soils forming atop lava flows and then covered up with new lava flows in formations like the Deccan and Siberian Traps.   

We investigated some supposed "paleosols" and found them to be lacking in evidence but instead to be layers of more friable rock associated with the rapid formations of the lava flows occurring in association with the Noahic Flood.  See my last two posts:

Large Igneous Provinces support Creation while Darwinists flail at Straw Men!



Now we move on to show that the Siberian Traps and Deccan Traps had to have formed quickly and in association with the Flood, thus dismissing the concept of long ages.   

That fossils might be found is not surprising if the eruption of lava pierces through forming or already-formed sedimentary layers.  Here we go in three articles that, in order, present the reason Siberian and Deccan Traps are not long-age formations and therefore not of interest to Creation science other than to note their existence.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


New Study Explains Fast-Moving Magma


The Deccan Traps in India, and especially the Siberian Traps, have vast quantities of lava rock near the earth's surface. Many geologists have assumed that this formed over millions of years. However, recent studies testing that assumption have shown just the opposite—the magma moved rapidly from great depths.
A 2000 Science paper calculated that the magma that later hardened into surface rock traveled at about nine miles per hour.1 It started in deeply buried molten form and rose through pipes, penetrating more than 60 miles of continental crust before finally reaching the earth's surface. The 2008 film Journey to the Center of the Earth, adapted from the 1864 novel by Jules Verne, illustrated this kind of pipe—albeit in a highly fictionalized manner.
As the magma traveled from great depths, it carried several minerals, including diamonds. If it rose any slower than the calculated rate, the heat and pressure at depth would have reduced the diamonds to graphite.
Other studies reviewed by geologist Andrew Snelling in 2007 confirm that the magma rose rapidly.2 And with fast enough rates and large enough pipes, the earth's almost continent-size lava fields could have formed in just hundreds, rather than millions, of years.
But exactly how could the magma have risen that fast?
To answer that question, geologists recently proposed a model based on new experimental data on magma behavior. In their report published in Nature, the team explained how materials deep in the earth can rise rapidly to the surface. They wrote, "This mechanism enables the continuous and accelerating ascent of the magma."3
In their conception, when carbon-rich magma mixes with a silicon-containing material, like the pyroxene minerals that comprise crustal rocks, the silicon lowers the solubility of the magma's carbon content. This process discharges carbon dioxide gas from the molten solution.
Since the Nature study geologists knew that magma mixes with silicon-containing crustal minerals on its way up, they suggested that this causes the rising magma to continuously release carbon dioxide gas that propels the magma upward. As it ascends, the magma picks up even more silicon-based material to continue the process, like adding more fuel to a fire.
So now, not only are geologists confident that certain volcanic magmas rose rapidly through continental crust, but they also have a plausible mechanism to explain how it happened. Thus, Bible-believing scientists can have even more confidence that giant lava fields did not require vast time, but merely the right mixture of materials, lending support to the Bible's depiction of a young earth.
References
  1. Kelley, S. P. and J.-A. Wartho. 2000. Rapid Kimberlite Ascent and Significance of Ar-Ar Ages in Xenolith Phlogopites. Science. 289 (5479): 609-611.
  2. Snelling, A. A. 2007. The Rapid Ascent of Basalt MagmasActs & Facts. 36 (8): 10.
  3. Russell, J. K. et al. 2012. Kimberlite ascent by assimilation-fuelled buoyancy. Nature. 481 (7381): 352-356.
* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.
Article posted on February 8, 2012.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now a slightly more technical article that was referenced above that explains why we know the aforementioned traps are rapidly-formed.


The Rapid Ascent of Basalt Magmas



It is now well established that the earth's upper mantle is the source of the basalt magmas erupted by many volcanoes as lava flows1--for example, Kilauea Volcano, Hawaii. The earth's crust is predominantly of a granitic composition, whereas the mantle is closer to a basaltic composition. Pieces of mantle rock are often brought to the earth's surface in basalt lava flows. Other evidence also confirms that the basalt magmas are generated by partial melting of the upper mantle rock.
Explosive Eruptions and Mantle Water
Where such volcanic eruptions occur on the continents, the basalt magmas typically have to ascend some 60-80 kilometers (35-50 miles) from the upper mantle to the surface. Furthermore, the mechanisms by which magmas ascend and the rates of magma ascent are known to play a critical role in the dynamics of volcanic eruptions, but these phenomena have until now been poorly constrained. Critics of catastrophic Flood geology have thus used the presumed long, slow ascent of basalt magmas, and their uniformitarian extrapolation back into the past of the small volumes of basalt magmas delivered to the earth's surface today, to insist that many millions of years of eruptions would have been needed to produce the basalt lavas found in the geologic record.
However, the ascent rate of the gas-rich, explosively erupted kimberlite magmas that host diamonds has previously been determined as four meters per second (about 787 feet per minute or nine miles per hour)!2 Such a rapid ascent rate is crucial to survival of the diamonds carried by these unusual magmas from 200-400 kilometers (125-250 miles) down in the mantle up to the earth's surface. A slower ascent rate would result in the diamonds turning to graphite. To put this ascent rate into perspective, it only takes between 12 and 30 hours for the diamond-carrying kimberlite magma to travel from 200-400 kilometers depth in the mantle up to erupt at the earth's surface (Figure 1).
Small amounts of water have been found dissolved as hydrogen and hydroxyl ions (the dissociated components of water) in the minerals within fragments of mantle rocks (xenoliths) brought to the earth's surface in basalt magmas.3 Even those small amounts have major effects on physical and chemical processes in the mantle, also being critical to plate tectonics.4 Furthermore, experimental studies have shown that this water dissolved in mantle minerals would likely be partially lost during transport to the earth's surface, being partitioned into the ascending magma.5 Consequently, measuring the water still dissolved in such minerals within xenoliths in erupted basalts could provide clues to quantifying magma ascent rates prior to eruption.
Patagonian Basalt Study
Such a study has now been undertaken.6 Olivine crystals were separated from garnet-bearing mantle xenoliths within the Quaternary (post-Flood) alkali olivine basalt flows of Pali-Aike, Chile,7 for Fourier Transform Infrared at the centers of the mineral crystals in these xenoliths indicate that these pieces of mantle rock were originally under temperature and pressure conditions corresponding to a depth of 60-80 kilometers.8 Furthermore, there is no geophysical evidence below these lava flows of a magma chamber in which the xenoliths could have been stored for an extended period and become equilibrated with their host magma during transport from the mantle to the earth's surface.
The alkali basalts hosting the mantle xenoliths erupted at a temperature estimated to have been between 1200ºC and 1290ºC.9 Furthermore, FTIR measurements of the visible clinopyroxene crystals (phenocrysts) in the basalts show no evidence of hydroxyl (OH) incorporated in them. This, together with the absence of amphibole, indicates that the basalts were undersaturated in water, making the basaltic magma which transported the mantle xenoliths an effective "sink" (or potential receiver) for hydrogen. An environment thus existed in which the mantle xenoliths could have become progressively dehydrated during magma ascent, and in proportion to the rate of ascent.
Profiles of FTIR measurements across individual grains in the mantle xenoliths revealed that the water distribution in the pyroxene grains was homogeneous, in contrast to the olivine grains where their rims were hydroxyl depleted.10 In total, thirty olivine grains were studied, and all olivine grains larger than 0.8 mm across had hydroxyl-depleted rims. Additionally, profile measurements were repeated on two of the olivine grains while crystallographically oriented, because it is known that hydrogen diffusion in olivine is related to its crystal structure. These measurements confirmed that the rims of the olivine grains in the mantle xenoliths were hydroxyl-depleted. This indicates that this olivine was dehydrating in the water-undersaturated host basalt magma as the mantle xenoliths were engulfed by it and transported up from 60-80 kilometers depth to the earth's surface.
Calculating a Rapid Ascent Rate
Using experimentally-determined diffusion coefficients for hydration of olivine,11 water diffusion profiles were calculated for all three crystallographic axes of an olivine grain at a temperature of 1245±45ºC for various durations, with an initial water content of ~312 weight parts per million (wt ppm) and a final water content of 0 wt ppm at its rim. Thus it was possible to approximate the ascent rate of the mantle xenoliths and, by extension, their host basalt. The calculated ascent rates ranged from 1.9 hours at 1290ºC to 3.4 hours at 1245ºC and 6.3 hours at 1200ºC. Furthermore, FTIR analyses across cracks in the olivine grains did not exhibit any perturbations of the hydrogen profiles, so hydrogen diffusion from the grain rims occurred predominantly prior to the cracking of the grains near the earth's surface or after the eruption of the host basalt. Therefore, these mantle xenoliths must have reached the earth's surface in a matter of only several hours.
Assuming a depth of origin for the xenoliths of 60-80 kilometers, the corresponding ascent rate is 6±3 meters per second (13.5±6.5 miles per hour). Because these xenoliths are denser than the host magma, this estimate gives a minimum ascent rate for the host alkali basalt magma. That equates to this basalt magma only taking between two and eight hours to travel from the upper mantle to erupt at the earth's surface. Such a rapid ascent to the earth's surface is consistent with the freshness of these xenoliths and is similar to the ascent rate of four meters per second determined for volatile-rich kimberlite magmas containing diamonds.
Conclusions
Any claim that the eruptions of basalt lava flows are a timescale problem for the Genesis Flood on a young earth can now be easily dismissed. If it only takes basalt magmas between two and eight hours to travel from their upper mantle sources to erupt through volcanoes at the earth's surface, then many basalt volcanic eruptions could have easily occurred during the Flood year. Furthermore, the volume and scale of the basalt lavas found in the geologic record, such as the so-called flood basalts of the Deccan and Siberian Traps,12 testify to the global catastrophism operating in the Flood year, in contrast to today's occasional, small, and relatively insignificant basalt eruptions.
The bigger question is how so much of the upper mantle rock partially melted quickly enough to generate those enormous volumes of flood basalts. However, during the Flood year the pre-Flood ocean floor ruptured into plates that sank into the mantle via thermal runaway subduction, the resulting mantle-wide convective flow generating huge mantle plumes and rapid melting of enormous volumes of upper mantle rock beneath the mid-ocean rift zones.13 Thus catastrophic plate tectonics during the Flood is the only viable explanation for the many basalt flows found in the earth's rock record. And this new experimental evidence confirms the rapid ascent and eruption of basalt lavas, consistent with the Biblical framework of earth history.


References
  1. Hall, A. 1996. Igneous petrology, 2nd ed. Harlow, England: Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.
  2. Kelley, S. P., and J.-A. Wartho. 2000. Rapid kimberlite ascent and significance of Ar-Ar ages in xenolith phlogopites. Science
  3. Bell, D. et al. 2003. Hydroxide in olivine: A quantitative determination of the absolute amount and calibration of the IR spectrum. Journal of Geophysical Research 108 doi: 10.1029/2001JB000679.
  4. Hirth, G., and D. L. Kohlsedt. 1996. Water in the oceanic upper mantle: implications for rheology, melt extraction and the evolution of the lithosphere. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 144:93-108. Regenauer-Lieb, K., et al. 2001. The initiation of subduction: Criticality by addition of water? Science 294:578-580.
  5. Ingrin, J., and H. Skogby. 2000. Hydrogen in nominally anhydrous upper-mantle minerals: Concentration levels and implications. European Journal of Mineralogy 12:543-570.
  6. Demouchy, S. et al. 2006. Rapid magma ascent recorded by water diffusion profiles in mantle olivine. Geology 34:429-432.
  7. Skewes, M. A., and C. R. Stern. 1979. Petrology and geochemistry of alkali basalts and ultramafic inclusions from the Pali-Aike Volcanic Field in southern Chile and the origin of the Patagonian Plateau lavas. Journal of Volcanology and Geothermal Research
  8. Stern, C. R. et al. 1999. Evidence from mantle xenoliths for relatively thin (less than 100 km) continental lithosphere below the Phanerozoic crust of southernmost South America. Lithos 48:217-235.
  9. D'Orazio, M. et al. 2000. The Pali-Aike Volcanic Field, Patagonia: Slab-window magmatism near the tip of South America.Tectonophysics 321:407-427.
  10. Demouchy et al., ref. 6.
  11. Kohlstedt, D. L., and S. J. Mackwell. 1999. Solubility and diffusion of "water" in silicate minerals. In Microscopic properties and processes in minerals, ed. K. Wright and R. Catlow, 539-559. Dortrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
  12. Jerram, D. A., and M. Widdowson. 2005. The anatomy of continental flood basalt provinces: Geological constraints on the processes and products of flood volcanism. Lithos 79:385-405.
  13. Austin, S. A., J. R. Baumgardner, D. R. Humphreys, A. A. Snelling, L. Vardiman, and K. P. Wise. 1994. Catastrophic plate tectonics, In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism, ed. R. E. Walsh, 609-621. Pittsburgh, PA: Creation Science Fellowship. 289:609-611. 6:3-25.
Cite this article: Snelling, A. 2007. The Rapid Ascent of Basalt Magmas. Acts & Facts. 36 (8): 10.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The following article is referenced, albeit with ages that I would disagree with, but if viewed from the standpoint of seeing these formations associated with The One Global Flood the author's assertions are validation of the assertions of Snelling:

The anatomy of Continental Flood Basalt Provinces : geological constraints on the processes and products of flood volcanism.

Jerram, D. A. and Widdowson, M. (2005) 'The anatomy of Continental Flood Basalt Provinces : geological constraints on the processes and products of flood volcanism.',Lithos., 79 (3-4). pp. 385-405.

Abstract


The internal architecture of the immense volumes of eruptive products in Continental Flood Basalt Provinces (CFBPs) provides vital clues, through the constraint of a chrono-stratigraphic framework, to the origins of major intraplate melting events. This work presents close examination of the internal facies architecture and structure, duration of volcanism, epeirogenetic uplift associated with CFBPs, and the potential environmental impacts of three intensely studied CFBPs (the Parana-Etendeka, Deccan Traps and North Atlantic Igneous Province). Such a combination of key volcanological, stratigraphic and chronologic observations can reveal how a CFBP is constructed spatially and temporally to provide crucial geological constraints regarding their development. Using this approach, a typical model can be generated, on the basis of the three selected CFBPs, that describes three main phases of flood basalt volcanism. These phases are recognized in Phanerozoic CFBPs globally. At the inception of CFBP volcanism, relatively low-volume transitional-alkaline eruptions are forcibly erupted into exposed cratonic basement lithologies, sediments, and in some cases, water. Distribution of initial volcanism is strongly controlled by the arrangement of pre-existing topography, the presence of water bodies and local sedimentary systems, but is primarily controlled by existing lithospheric and crustal weaknesses and concurrent regional stress patterns. The main phase of volcanism is typically characterised by a culmination of repeated episodes of large volume tholeiitic flows that predominantly generate large tabular flows and flow fields from a number of spatially restricted eruption sites and fissures. These tabular flows build a thick lava flow stratigraphy in a relatively short period of time (c. 1–5 Ma). With the overall duration of flood volcanism lasting 5–10 Ma (the main phase accounting for less than half the overall eruptive time in each specific case). This main phase or ‘acme’ of volcanism accounts for much of the CFBP eruptive volume, indicating that eruption rates are extremely variable over the whole duration of the CFBP. During the waning phase of flood volcanism, the volume of eruptions rapidly decrease and more widely distributed localised centres of eruption begin to develop. These late-stage eruptions are commonly associated with increasing silica content and highly explosive eruptive products. Posteruptive modification is characterised by continued episodes of regional uplift, associated erosion, and often the persistence of a lower-volume mantle melting anomaly in the offshore parts of those CFBPs at volcanic rifted margins.
Item Type:Article
Keywords:Flood basalt, Mantle melting, CFBP, Etendeka, Deccan, North Atlantic igneous province.
Full text:Full text not available from this repository.
Publisher Web site:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lithos.2004.09.009
Record Created:16 Feb 2007
Last Modified:05 Apr 2010 16:30

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The bottom line is this - The Siberian and Deccan Traps are shown to have been rapidly formed in association with water (Noahic Flood comes to mind) and are NOT evidence of long ages.   Any fossils of any kind, be they foraminifera or fruit or frog, were in the sediments that were interrupted by the fast-moving lava that was extruded in enormous quantities very quickly.  Therefore, there is no chance that actual paleosols will be found but only portions of the flood sediments that may be found, the remains of the original layering displaced by the lava flow.    These were rapidly formed massive lava flows, part of the catastrophic Flood and Post-Flood age.   Some areas of these formations could have rapidly become weathered and able to sustain plant growth and become ordinary soil and perhaps we may see that a glacial lake dike break and associated flood might have captured and buried soil formed shortly after the Flood and before the end of the Ice Age.  Otherwise there is no possible way for actual soil to have had time to form here.

Darwinist geologists appear to "find" paleosols where they do not exist.  The presence of preserved fossils is expected as the large igneous provinces were formed during the same time period as the sedimentary rock layers.   The total time from beginning of the Noahic Flood until the end of the Ice Age is not precisely known, but the formations of the Earth are being examined and understood within a Biblical Geological framework by men such as Walker, Snelling and Baumgardner.   

I am now going back to my task of posting on the fossil record interspersed with a few articles relative to the Creation versus Darwinism theme that is the main topic on this worldview blog and I will not be moved by the complaints of Darwinists about the Traps.  They formed fast, they formed during the dynamic Flood and post-Flood era and surprise, the Darwinists are wrong again!