Evolutionists usually argue the famous bunny-in-the-Cambrian. They say finding something like this would falsify evolution, and they usually demand that as creationists we should provide examples like this or similar.
In fact if the fossil order was not created by evolution, then you can't break the order even if evolution is false, so it isn't a genuine falsification.
But also when the evolutionist requests we find a mammal or a dino in say the Cambrian in order to prove they both existed at the same time, we as creationists can only answer that red-herring if we are arguing that both the Cambrian and say Cretaceous, are different eras.
If we DON'T argue they are different eras, and we argue that both are flood layers laid down in the same year and therefore contemporaneous, then we only have to show that you can find a mammal or dino in any flood layer, no matter what the layer is.
So if we find a dino in the Cretaceous and a trilobite in the Cambrian, it follows that because we argue both layers are caused by the flood, that both have been found contemporaneously.
Conclusion; it is a red-herring to say we must show the dino and trilobite in the same Cambrian layer, to prove they lived contemporaneously, because we see most layers as being contemporaneous. so the request begs the question, because it asks us to take on an assumpton of evolution, that the layers are eons.
So basically in my experience a lot of evolutionists just aren't smart enough to see that different theories have different starting assumptions and you can't conflate them. For example if one person argues for Jane the Ripper and another for Jack the Ripper, the Jack-theorist cannot request that we prove Jane had a penis, because under the Jane-theory the Ripper would not be a male.
(I must have had to say this to one or two evolutionists I know, for about ten years and they still don't get it.)
