No, it is not a foul. You are the one that asserted that they were the
same. I did not assert that they were different. I was noting that your
assertion is without proof.
You had written:
>If evolution is a universal fact, then
>why do blue-green algae still look the same today as they did in the
>preCambrian? How do you explain stasis over a billion years when
>evolution was rampant, leading up to the Cambiran Explosion?
Thus since you were the first to make the assertion, it is you who must back
up your statement first.
I wrote:
>> Are you suggesting that if a sandstone lies underneath a sand, a shale, a
>> limestone another sand and another shale, that it is only guessable that
>> Sandstone A was deposited first? Are you suggesting that we can't tell that
>> the difference between Sandstone A being deposited first or last? To
>> deposit it last requires that someone or something lift up the top 5 layers
>> and put Sandstone A underneath them. I would contend that this is not a
>> guessable sequence of historical events!
>
>Agreed. The Law of Superposition is fairly straightforward. However,
>the rate and means of deposition are not evident and we can't rewind the
>tape to see how they were deposited. In the case of coal seams, as I've
>said before, the observations don't match the uniformatarian model of a
>swamp deposit.
But this means that your statement that geological history is not guessable
is not correct. From the law of superposition, I can then go on to prove
that rocks with trilobites and no mammals are deposited earlier than rocks
with mammals and no trilobites. Thus, I can prove that trilobites were
buried earlier than mammals and apparently they disappeared from the earth
before the mammals. This also is not a guessable event. If the law of
superposition allows me to determine the geological sequence of events, then
it allows me to determine a biological sequence of events. We haven't yet
built up to the rates, but this sequence is not guessable. We will get to
coal later. Would you agree that trilobites are not found with mammals? If
you don't please cite an article from outside of the creationist literature.
glenn
Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm