Coprolites - a Falsification of the YEC Hypothesis

[WinAce]

Coprolites: a Falsification of Young-Earth Creationism

General background information on the formation of fossilized dung, i.e. coprolites, can be found here and here.

King Coprolite

The technical name for a specimen of fossilized faeces is a coprolite. This particular coprolite comes from Late Cretaceous rocks in Saskatchewan, Canada, dating from between 65 and 74 Ma. It measures 44 cm long by 13 cm wide and 16 cm deep, and has a volume of more than two litres: and that's only a dry measure. When fresh and wet, it could have been even bigger. The coprolite is full of small, crushed bone fragments, strong evidence that the animal that produced it was a carnivore.

Only a dinosaur could have produced such a large specimen: the only suitable candidate known to have lived at the time was the fearsome, six-tonne predator Tyrannosaurus rex. The faeces could have been produced by another animal that has not been discovered, but if so, it would have to have been as large and carnivorous as T. rex. So the link between T. rex and the coprolite makes sense.

Exhibit A. Undigested Fish Scales (Carboniferous, 345 mya). Shark coprolite from Scotland.

Carnivore-related coprolites containing bits and pieces of animals can be found throughout the geological layers - these are but a few examples. Since the geologic column was supposedly laid down by a flood, and carnivory supposedly began only post-flood, how do YECs explain the fact that pre-carnivore strata contains fossilized evidence of carnivory?

But wait, kids, that's not all! Not only are carnivore-produced coprolites found throughout the geologic column, but ones that unambiguously and completely falsify the flood are also. Allow me to explain.



Exhibit B. Eocene Epoch (around 50 mya) turtle coprolite from Madagascar.

How do we know this wasn't deposited in the flood? Look at it. See the cracks? What do they remind you of? That's right, dog poop. Dog poop that's been out in the air a long while, dried out and cracked. Something it can't do when it's underwater.

For these turtle-fouled Eocene rocks and younger rocks which lie above them, these facts require that they are at least post flood. One can follow the Eocene rocks from Madagascar around Africa and Eurasia and across to India. In the Ocean the link is unbroken.. The thickness of the rocks equal in age or younger (Post Paleocene) offshore India reaches 15 kilometers in thickness (see Curiale et al, AAPG86(2002):4:636). Thus the young-earth creationist, if he/she decides that the sediments I am speaking of are post-flood, must then account for 15 kilometers of post flood sediments offshore India. This is 50,000 feet of sediment. The young-earth creationist must ask himself how it is possible to non-catastrophically erode and deposit that much sediment within the past few thousand years. Clearly this is a difficulty. On the other hand if the young-earth creationist thinks that the sediments are flood sediments, they must explain how the turtles found dry land in the middle of the flood, so that lots of feces could be deposited and then have the time to dry out.
And that is the real poop on the Global Flood.
- Glenn Morton

Dried and cracked coprolites are found throughout the geologic layers, not just Eocene rocks. Needless to say, this puts a damper on any claims the layers were wholesale deposited by a flood...

[Edit - oh, this is now the biology forum? Shucks. So are geological discussions off-limits here?]

[Socrates]

So the juvenile non-scientist WinAce has learnt a new word. But actually coprolites are good evidence FOR the Flood! How many droppings would last thousands of years in the open? No, they would need to be BURIED rapidly by water-borne sediments, and then soaked through with minerals to preserve the structure. It is possible to have buried dried poop. Also, there are other ways that poop can crack, and while Morton is completely full of poop he's no expert in coprology.

WinAce further shows his crass ignorance:

• Since the geologic column was supposedly laid down by a flood, and carnivory supposedly began only post-flood, how do YECs explain the fact that pre-carnivore strata contains fossilized evidence of carnivory?

Most YECs regard the FALL as the big discontinuity and where animals first became carnivorous. HUMANS were permitted to eat meat only after the Flood, but this is not when animals first ate meat.

[tgamble]

Today @ 07:26 AM post located here
Socrates:

So the juvenile non-scientist WinAce has learnt a new word. But actually coprolites are good evidence FOR the Flood! How many droppings would last thousands of years in the open? No, they would need to be BURIED rapidly by water-borne sediments, and then soaked through with minerals to preserve the structure. It is possible to have buried dried poop.

Not in the middle of a flood it isn't! ROTFL!

Also, there are other ways that poop can crack, and while Morton is completely full of poop he's no expert in coprology.

Neither are you.

As usual, you can't refute the facts so you resort to insults.

[Dee Dee Warren]

I am not sure where to put this thread... I think the archeology one is actually where it goes. I will get this clarifed and let you know.

[Dee Dee Warren]

Some fine poop pics you posted.

[Butters]

Hmm... Isn't this the kind of thing that could be experemented with? Couldn't you lay out some dung and let it air dry. And cover some with water, and see what happens? I see a government grant lurking out there!

[Sauron]

04-10-2003 @ 04:11 AM post located here
Dee Dee Warren:

I am not sure where to put this thread... I think the archeology one is actually where it goes. I will get this clarifed and let you know.

Archaeology is the study of artifacts and civilizations from past human habitations.

This belongs in Biology, since it has nothing to do with human beings.

[Sauron]

04-09-2003 @ 11:26 PM post located here
Socrates:

So the juvenile non-scientist WinAce has learnt a new word. But actually coprolites are good evidence FOR the Flood! How many droppings would last thousands of years in the open?

Any of them. ALL of them. Put droppings out in the dry sandy areas of a desert or semi-arid region, and they'll last quite awhile. Once the moisture has been sucked out and they're dessicated, then being covered by sand or rocks isn't a problem.

In short - your objection to the "longevity of poop" is groundless.

[WinAce]

Technically, it doesn't even matter if they're dried or not. You don't have dung from terrestrial animals laid down at all when they've all drowned from a flood. The drying just adds a nice touch.

I'm waiting for that explanation of how non-dry dung can crack, also.

Also, the first part of my post was intended for those YECs who claim no carnivory before the end of the flood to keep the lions from eating 1 of every herbivore on the ark.

[Dr.GH]

I was away last week for some field work in the Colorado Desert. My colleagues had rather a better time than I did. This included the recovery of a human coprolite. It was from a location that I have previously dated to about 1,200 years ago by a C14 date on a buried charcoal sample. I haven't seen the sample yet, but, I was told that there were fish scales, and undigested seeds that could be seen. A very exciting source of data. We will also date the sample.

I also would observe that there are recovered insect 'coprolites' called frass that can be recovered from archaeological sites. The oldest frass examples I have personally recoverd are about 7,000 years old from Southern California.

[Rusty T]

Also, the first part of my post was intended for those YECs who claim no carnivory before the end of the flood to keep the lions from eating 1 of every herbivore on the ark.

Of course you're forgetting the turtle fodder that the Bible failed to mention, but surely must have been there, because the B-I-B-L-E (yes, it's the book for me) can't be wrong.

tizzi

[TheFiveSolas]

Butters wrote:

Hmm... Isn't this the kind of thing that could be experemented with? Couldn't you lay out some dung and let it air dry. And cover some with water, and see what happens? I see a government grant lurking out there!

I always knew most government grants went to • Edited by a Moderator •

[Socrates]

Tizzidale:

• Of course you're forgetting the turtle fodder that the Bible failed to mention, but surely must have been there, because the B-I-B-L-E (yes, it's the book for me) can't be wrong.

You're right, it can't be wrong, because Christ affirmed that Scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35), and He proved His credentials by rising from the dead.

But as Francis Schaeffer pointed out, the Bible is true truth, not exhaustive truth. So it is perfectly reasonable to postulate plausible explanations where the Bible is silent, as long as they are not treated dogmatically. It's up to biblioskeptics to disprove these explanations of precisely how Noah took care of carnivores.

[Rusty T]

Heck, why turtle fodder? God has a propensity for conjuring multiplicities of frogs. Why not frog fodder? Or maybe God had the lions drink protein shakes?

tizzi

[Socrates]

tizzidale:

• Heck, why turtle fodder?

Actually, my bad -- it should have been tortoises. Indeed giant tortoises have been used as a source of fresh meat for oceanvoyages, since they can last for a long time without being fed or watered. And carnivores will catch and eat tortoises and scoop out the meat between the carapce and plastron.

Also, the ancients knew how to preserve meat by drying, salting or with honey.

That's the trouble with bibliosceptics --- they haven't a clue of how ingenious people have been on ocean voyages and farms, well before modern high-tech equipment.