Relative dating biology

19-Dec-2019 23:30

Among these, in addition to those already cited, is Dr.Derek Ager, current president of the British Geological Association.Although he attempts to explain and justify the process as being based on induction from observed field data, he does admit many important problems in this connection.With respect to the geologic column and its development, he says: "Material bodies are finite, and no rock unit is global in extent, yet stratigraphy aims at a global classification."It is a problem not easily solved by the classic methods of stratigraphical paleontology, as obviously we will land ourselves immediately in an impossible circular argument if we say, firstly that a particular lithology is synchronous on the evidence of its fossils, and secondly that the fossils are synchronous on the evidence of the lithology." In another article, Dr.Ager, who is also Head of the Geology Department at Swansea University, notes the problem involved in trying to use minor differences in organisms (that is, what creationists would call horizontal changes, or variations) as time markers.This is where the suspicion of circular reasoning crept in, because it seemed to the layman that the time units were abstracted from the geological column, which has been put together from rock units." "By mid-nineteenth century, the notion of 'universal' rock units had been dropped, but some stratigraphers still imagine a kind of global biozone as 'time units' that are supposed to be ubiquitous." "The theory of dialectic materialism postulates matter as the ultimate reality, not to be questioned.

There are various justifications for this assumption but for almost all contemporary paleontologists it rests upon the acceptance of the evolutionary hypothesis." As mentioned earlier, more and more modern geologists are now recognizing the existence of circular reasoning in their geological methodologies.No wonder the evolutionary system, to outsiders, implies circular reasoning."The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.The evidence for evolution is merely the assumption of evolution.The most extensive recent discussion of the circular reasoning problem in evolutionary geology is the paper by O' Rourke.

There are various justifications for this assumption but for almost all contemporary paleontologists it rests upon the acceptance of the evolutionary hypothesis." As mentioned earlier, more and more modern geologists are now recognizing the existence of circular reasoning in their geological methodologies.

No wonder the evolutionary system, to outsiders, implies circular reasoning.

"The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.

The evidence for evolution is merely the assumption of evolution.

The most extensive recent discussion of the circular reasoning problem in evolutionary geology is the paper by O' Rourke.

"That a known fossil or recent species, or higher taxonomic group, however primitive it might appear, is an actual ancestor of some other species or group, is an assumption scientifically unjustifiable, for science never can simply assume that which it has the responsibility to demonstrate.