Seeking for the truth

© 2004 - 2009 seeking-god.co.uk

The standard geological column:
 

The standard geological column below is what you will find in the textbooks.

It reflects what geologists find in the field.

 

There are recognised patterns in the rock sequences throughout the world. For example, the Carboniferous is well known for it's coal, the Permian and Triassic for it's red beds, and the Upper Cretaceous for it's Chalk.

The different periods in the geological column are given names which are derived from:

1) The geographical region where rocks of that period are well exposed, eg the Permian period is named after Perm - a province in Russia.

or 2) After it's typical deposits, eg the Carboniferous period for its coal beds.

or 3) After ancient peoples, eg the Ordovician period after the Ordovices, and the Silurian period after the Silures.

 

Every layer will not be found together as seen in the diagram - there will be missing ones.

Also, every period marked on the diagram will not have it's own coloured stratum out in the real world! That is because many of the periods were set according to the type of fossils found in them, eg The Silurian-Devonian boundary is defined at the first appearance of the fossil: Monograptus uniformis in amongst limestones and calcareous shales, as seen at Suchomasty near Prague.

 

Certain fossils are found in certain layers, and so there is a generally recognised succession. (But as more and more fossils are found, there are now numerous ones which are in the 'wrong' layers).

This succession is often taken to show evolution, but this is not the only answer.

 

Naming certain periods according to the type of fossils found in them will create errors of judgement. For example the fossils of the mammal-like reptile, Lystrosaurus, were used as important index fossils, (wherever this fossil was found, it was assumed to indicate the Early Triassic period throughout much of the southern hemisphere).

But Lystrosaurus has now been discovered in the Permian period in Zambia. [1]

This means that, for all the times the Lystrosaurus bearing rocks were used as a dating tool, it can no longer automatically be assumed to be Early Triassic. Which then put's a question mark over the date given to the other fossils near the Lystrosaurus fossil. (Important, for example, if they had been mammals). [2]

 

When the geologic column was still being worked out (in the mid 19th century), Herbert Spencer a Victorian philosopher commented on the folly of setting time periods according to fossils found. He called his essay; 'Illogical Geology'. [3] (He was an atheist and an enthusiastic supporter of Darwinism).

Specifically, he questioned the practice of using particular fossils as supposed time-markers for the global correlation of strata. He also wondered why this procedure was not put in doubt when fossils were frequently found in the 'wrong' strata.
 

So the standard geological column reflects what geologists find in the field, but unfortunately many people interpret the evidence in a way that supports Evolution, and they see this as the only answer.

Evolution is often accepted without question by the general public, but in our articles we seek to show an alternative view - one that is a viable alternative.
 

 

 

 

 

[1] King, G.M. and Jenkins, I. 'The dicynodont Lystrosaurus from the Upper Permian of Zambia: evolutionary and stratigraphical implications, Palaeontology'. 40(1):149-156, 1997.

[2] 'The fossil record: becoming more random all the time' by John Woodmorappe. First published in 'TJ' (formerly Technical Journal) 14(1):110-116 December 1999-February 2000

[3] Spencer, H. 'Illogical geology' in: 'The Works of Herbert Spencer', 13:192-210, Proff and Company, Osnabrilck, Germany, 1859 (reprinted 1966).

Back to menu