RE: Gen 1:1 and Concordism

From: Dick Fischer (
Date: Mon Feb 18 2002 - 19:30:51 EST

  • Next message: george murphy: "Re: Genesis One and Concordism (was a lot of other things previously)"

    Glenn wrote:

    >Dick, As I documented, conifers are NOT among the first land life forms.

    The reason I chose "conifers" was to reference a plant type with which my
    readers (most of them not geologists) could identify. I hope nobody
    thought pine and fir trees, suitable for Christmas decorations, "walked"
    out of the water unto land before anything swam in the ocean.

    Seed-bearing plants date to the Devonian (417 mya - 354 mya). This comes
    from Historical Atlas of the Earth: "In the early Devonian only a few plant
    species such as ground-creepers, could survive on land, and they were tied
    to wet habitats. By the late Devonian lowlands were covered by large
    forests, as plants developed new methods of reproduction using seeds."

    Here is another quote: "The earliest fossil of a vascular plant dates from
    the Late Silurian (443 mya - 417 mya) in Wales. Once established on land,
    plants evolved very rapidly in the Devonian period. By the Late Devonian
    these were recognizable forests."

    >Conifers do not appear until the Carboniferous which is about 300 myr ago.

    Your geological education has been demonstrated in abundance on this
    listerv over the years. You won't get any challenges from me on geological
    matters. That's your domain.

    >Simply repeating the false claim, this time from your book, does nothing
    >to make the claim true.

    Here is where you degenerate from a statement of geological fact into a
    personal attack. The word "false" could imply an intentional
    misleading. By berating me, you can also impugn my method of apology,
    thereby elevating yours to a higher degree of plausibility. Also, this
    tendency to go for the kill whenever you see blood is what makes you
    difficult to engage. You could be a wonderful resource for those of us who
    are mere pedestrians in a NASCAR world.

    >Cite a single paleontology article in which conifers are found in the
    >upper Ordovician (which is older than the Silurian) which is where fish
    >are first found.

    Here again is what I wrote: "Just as primitive sea creatures preceded
    modern fish, likewise, sea vegetation begat land vegetation, and all date
    initially to the same period, the Ordovician."

    My point is that primitive flora precedes primitive fauna, both in the
    fossil record and the Genesis record. Animals need plants to eat, plants
    can survive without animals. Land-based trees bearing seeds precede what
    we would today call "fish," i. e. carp, trout, salmon, etc. Although
    uncomely denizens of the deep frolicked in the briny sea before our green,
    leafy friends ventured onto land.

    It is possible that the third Genesis "day" overlaps the fifth Genesis
    "day." Some find that technique useful, but maybe overlapping is not
    required. Someone more articulate than I may be able to make a better case
    of it, but that is my best effort based upon limited knowledge.

    BTW, for those who want to dig into this, here is a useful web

    Dick Fischer - The Origins Solution -
    "The answer we should have known about 150 years ago"

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 18 2002 - 19:39:06 EST