Question

In a series of rock layers, a geologist finds fossilized shellfish and bony fish in layers that are 1.0 m and 1.5 m deep. However, in a layer that is 2.0 m deep, he finds fossils of a lizard-like dinosaur and a fern-like tree.

Which explains his findings?

A.
The ancient sea dried up and became land.

B.
An asteroid hit the area, causing the dinosaur to become extinct.

C.
The continent shifted to a polar region.

D.
The ancient land area was invaded by a sea.

Answer 1

The standard approach to looking at fossils in the geological column is to assume that lower is older. Since the geologic column represents millions of years of Earth's history, then obviously the fossils in each of the layers must be the same age as the layer in which they are found. What is especially interesting is that the fossils do appear to show a progression from the most "simple" of organisms, such as single celled creatures like bacteria, to the most "complex" organisms, such as vertebrates, mammals, and of course humans. This evolutionary progression seems to be clearly demonstrated in that certain kinds of creatures in the upper layers are rarely if ever seen in lower layers. Many of the layers also show a certain specialization. Some layers contain mostly fish fossils while others contain land-dwelling creatures such as dinosaurs. Since each of these layers seems so specialized it is easy to conclude that one type of creature gave rise to the next type of creature over the course of whatever time it took to form the various layers between them. Radiometric dating and many other techniques are used to support the idea that this transformation process took tens and hundreds of millions of years.

For most scientists all of this seems so obvious that it is difficult to question. It goes against human nature to challenge long held ideas of truth. However, science is suppose to do just that - challenge ideas. Why? Because often what seems obvious initially does not turn out to be true. The scientific method is all about testing and retesting theories since no theory is ever proven by science. The scientific method can only disprove theories or increase the power of previous predictions that have yet to be disproved, but it can never absolutely prove anything to be absolutely true. Therefore, the best thing to do in science is to continually question and test previous hypothesis and theories to see if they continue to hold up under scrutiny. So, let's take another look at the available evidence and see if any other possibilities present themselves.

Surprisingly there are quite a few problems with the geologic column itself being a representation of millions of years of Earth's history. Much of the evidence available seems to point more toward the rapid formation of much of the column. Of course popular science disagrees stating that these layers represent millions of years of history and that the fossils they contain are likewise millions of years old. However, there are numerous features of both the fossil record and the geologic column that suggest another interpretation.

Answer 2

hope this helps