My understanding is that index fossils are the bottom line if there is a
variance with radiometric dating. I could be wrong, however, if you care
to expand on that.
Trust in the LORD with all your heart,
and do not rely on your own insight.. Pr. 3:5
Ron Chitwood
chitw@flash.net
----------
> From: Ed Brayton <cynic@net-link.net>
> To: Ron Chitwood <chitw@flash.net>
> Cc: evolution@calvin.edu
> Subject: Re: Geology
> Date: Friday, April 24, 1998 11:08 AM
>
> Ron Chitwood wrote:
> >
> > >>>Glen Morton said 'Geology is not an "opinion". It is a field of
study
> > with well
> > > established methods of study.'<<<
> >
> > It is in some areas. When a Geologist dates his strata by the fossils
> > found therein while a Paleontologist dates his fossils by the strata
> > they're found in that is known as circuitous reasoning, most definitely
> > expressing an opinion.
>
> Actually, it was me who said that, not Glenn, though I'm sure he would
> agree with it. He does have a PhD in that field, after all. As for index
> fossils, it is true that index fossils are used in the field to identify
> strata, but only tentatively. There are methods that provide double
> checks on it, of course. And, even if you were right about this, that
> still doesn't make it just an "opinion". The use of index fossils is
> based upon many decades of field work correlating fossils and strata and
> this was work was done long before there were any evolutionary
> assumptions to influence it.
>
> Ed