More Plain Truth about Planation Surfaces

By -
Ever notice how some mountains are not pointy on top, but look like a giant sander came down and flattened them out? Those are planation surfaces. They span large areas in many cases. Geologists reckon that huge amounts of sediment has been removed from the mountains, but secular scientists have no idea how — and why it is not happening today.
Flat mountains are planation surfaces, and secular geologists cannot effectively explain them.
Cape Breton Highlands National Park
Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons / Dr. Wilson (CC BY-SA 3.0)
Geomorphology (the way the land gets shaped) of planation surfaces is very pronounced up in Canada, eh? Cypress Hills have a very big and very flat plateau, and they provide useful information about the Genesis Flood. Uniformitarian geologists say that something "looks old", but that is not science, that is opinion. After all, they have nothing with which to compare something and choose "young" or "old". Hint: the earth is young.
During the Recessive Stage of the Flood the mountains rose up and the valleys sank. This caused huge quantities of rock and dirt to wash into the new oceans of the world. The magnitude of this, such as the estimated thickness of sediment eroded, is largely undisputed among geologists of all persuasions. For example, it is accepted that erosion has removed about 6,000 m (20,000 ft) of rock from the Appalachian Mountains of the eastern USA. They are therefore said to ‘look old’—because the conventional (uniformitarian) notion is that it happened gradually, over millions of years, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
To read the rest, click on "Testimony to the Flood — A remarkable planation surface in Canada". You may also like to see "Geologists Puzzled by Planation Surfaces".

Popular posts from this blog

Evolution and the New Atheo-Fascism

By -
Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen A large difficulty in researching and writing this article is that of definitions. It is important to have precise definitions when people can understand words and concepts in different ways 1 , and this article involves words with various meanings and connotations. There has been a noticeable increase in vitriol from the so-called "new" atheists (often followers of Dawkins, Harris, Dennett, Hitchens, Shermer, Nye, Krauss and others) and from evolutionists toward Christians and creationists. (I am making distinctions here because not all evolutionists are atheists, and not all Christians are creationists.) Some of us speculate that adherents of the religion of atheism 2 ,which has evolution as one of its cornerstones, feel threatened because evolution's flaws are exposed by Intelligent Design and creation science. This battle is not simply intellectual, but also spiritual. From a biblical Christian perspective, atheists realize that God e
Read more

Discerning Fake Science

By -
Image
Unfortunately, I have to keep gnawing on this bone: scientists are people, too. They make mistakes and have biases. As such, they are not the impartial arbiters of truth and science that many people believe. Many want to do science, others manipulate data for their own agendas. Since nobody is a blank slate and everyone has some kind of bias, it follows that nobody is completely impartial. Try to present creation science materials to atheists and other evolutionists, they often cry, "But that's biased! Those liars for Jesus are trying to convince us of their views!" Brilliant, Sherlock! Doesn't everyone want to present an argument to convince others of their point of view? Also, the ad hominem  is entirely irrational — not only from it being a logical fallacy, but also because biblical creationists serve a holy God who requires righteousness and hates lying. To say that we are lying to get others to believe in God is utterly vacuous. As mentioned several times before,
Read more

Misotheists Dehumanizing Christians and Creationists

By -
Image
by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Making fun of an institution through satire and parody can be found throughout millennia to illustrate perceived absurdities of belief systems. These are used for various targets, but the most common seem to be political or religious.  C. Richard Dawkins ridiculing Ray Comfort, image credits: Flickr / David Shankbone ( public domain ), modified with FotoSketcher So why attack individuals instead of ideas ? It seems like practically everyone does it. Just ask the uncool kids in school. This is far beyond satire or persuasion . A quote commonly (but probably erroneously) attributed to Socrates is, "When the debate is over, slander becomes the tool of the loser". This child sees a useful principle in that statement. Although it is common to encounter proponents of atheistic naturalism ridiculing biblical creationists in rallies, books, videos, and so on, it is greatly intensified on social(ist) media. With the option of anonymity, attacks increase with
Read more