Dr.GH

Interesting taphonomy links.

One of the lamer "issues" raisd by creationists is some version of, "Why are there not billions of human fossils?" There are of course 3 reasons:

1) fossilization is rather rare, particularly for land animals,

2) continued preservation of the rock that binds, and protects the fossil is variable,

3) we have recovered only a tiny amount of the existing fossils.

Given point #3, the museum warehouses are full! We severely limit the new acquisitions to high quality material. Just what high quality material is can lead to some intense arguments. Alot of our rejected fossils are given to school teachers.

The surface preservation of bone depends on the local conditions and type of bone. As far as David's other question, it has been answered as well as can be done with out a field trip. My suggestion to David is to go to a Natural History museum and find out about their field trip schedual. (Also try your local college's geology department).

Valentine Pontifex

This would depend on the enviroment.

No one is assuming this. One can tell the difference between a fossilized bone and a bone that has never been fossilized.

Also I supect that you don't realize that it quite normal to find these fossils only partially uncovered. Indeed that is almost always the case for the more complete finds.
[/qb][/quote]
The fossil itself has become a rock itself.
Rocks can last millions of years. Indeed the rocks which bones and other hard body parts form are usually harder than the surrounding rocks.

It was just all this that I can't get my mind around.


By this reasoning it should be impossible to find any rock millions of years old. Since that is false -- we have many rocks that old -- this argument is moot.