Whilst i am no longer a Christian I am allowed to make respectful comments.
It seems to me that the various schisms in the Christian religion are doctrinal. This is exacerbated by the various translations of the bible which have been moulded by doctrinal differences amongst early translators...
Awesome. Now that you have have re-established that fish swimming closer to the bottom of the ocean are MORE LIKELY to be fossilised, now provide evidence that:
A.) That ONLY those fish that swim near the bottom will be fossilised
And therefore
B.) Scientists would assume that any fossils...
Alright so we have established that those creatures who live closest to the seafloor are more likely to be fossilised. That's cool. That is logical.
However that does not address my objections to your two assertions.
This is very commonly seen when creationists repeatedly spout the common misconceptions about evolution (eg. we came from monkeys) when they have been told repeatedly that, that is not what ToE says.
This can also be seen with their insistence on presenting apologetics when they have been PRATT...
I understand the words you are saying which is why i have responded to the specific points you have made.
I am also a bit confused because you talked about aberrations, but this post does not address the issues i raised with your aberration argument.
Do you disagree with what i said?
I...
No fossil deposits do not reproduce. I am not sure where you got that impression from.
But you will note that i said "self-replicating" not replicable.
And this is where the junk yard analogy fails.
It does not have a mechanism for self replication, and genetic mutation for selection...
Now that i have clarified your position, i can answer these questions.
Agree
Disagree. Because aberrations are less likely to be fossilised (because aberrations by their very nature are less likely to occur therefore less likely to be the individual that gets fossilised).
Disagree. Because...
That's the impression that i get. But it makes no sense, so i am double checking that that is what he is meaning before answering the last two questions.
That would change the meaning of what you said.
What i am trying to figure out is if you mean:
A.) That the actual process of fossilisation requires a set of circumstances specific enough that the formation of a fossil is an anomaly?
or
B.) That the individuals who have been fossilised are...
Agree.
I currently disagree. Because i do not understand why being an aberrant member of a species increases the likelihood of being fossilised.
I can not answer these question until you clarify question 2.
Well everyone, here's the spot you can share all your Pokemon GO stuff.
Today whilst tracking down a Zubat near a truck, the driver got all uppity because he thought i was taking a photo of his truck.
My dog getting bailed up by a Geodude