Kevin Wampler <wam### [at] uwashingtonedu> wrote:
> It's also worth noting that in this particular case there isn't an 
> accepted scientific (as in real scientific, not creation-scientific) 
> explanation as to why trilobites went extinct either, so it's probably 
> not the best example of a question to stump creationists on.

  Science doesn't really need an explanation of why they went extint.
(It would, of course, be very *interesting* to know the exact reason,
but it's not really a *necessity* to know it to support any scientific
theory.) Apparently 250 million years ago something happened that killed
tons of species, including all species of trilobites. During millions of
years extintion events happen. It is a known fact, however, that they did.

  Creationists, on the other hand, do have a stronger need to explain what
killed them because they claim that it happened just some thousands of years
ago. From the tens of thousands of different species of trilobites not even
one survived to this day. What exactly killed them?

  Creationists also claim that dating methods are unreliable and give random
results. They would have to, however, explain why all dating methods give
*consistently* the same result: Trilobites went extint significantly earlier
than dinosaurs (250 vs. 65 million years). Even if we accepted that the dating
methods are unreliable in determining the exact age of the fossils, the fact
that they *consistently* give the result that trilobite fossils are older than
dinosaur fossils is a strong indicative that trilobites died way before
dinosaurs did.

  So at which point did they go extint, and why?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message