Chilling Secular Ice Age Theories

When secularists ridicule biblical creation science Ice Age models, you may get a variety of answers. That is, if they have anything other than, "Because atheism". Uniformitarian views require billions of years of gradual processes so Darwin's magic can happen, but they fail to explain observed evidence.

Your typical misotheist will insist that creation science Ice Age models are wrong because they are wrong, but secularists cannot explain any ice age.
Upsala glacier photographed from the International Space Station, Image credit: NASA
(Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents)
In fact, the idea of an ice age was resisted by secularists for many years after it was first proposed. It was viewed as a threat to uniformitarianism, but they later incorporated it into their speculations because they couldn't ignore the evidence. However, they still have no idea how it happened; conjectures are conflicting and contrary to data. So, since they can't explain even one ice age, why not fifty? That's science. Use the fundamentally flawed Milankovitch Theory, because that's science, too. Never mind that biblical creation science models use the Genesis Flood and have plausible explanations.
The lawyer Charles Lyell published his three-volume book Principles of Geology from 1830 to 1833. In it he advocated that all past geological processes were the same as what we observe today, and rejected any geological impact of Noah’s Flood described in the Bible. His uniformitarian philosophy, summarized as ‘the present is the key to the past’, means that everything in geology is ‘slow and gradual’. It powerfully influenced most scientists. Soon after this, however, came the ‘discovery’ of the Ice Age, popularized by an 1840 book by the famous Swiss-American biologist/geologist Louis Agassiz.

You can read the rest of this really cool article by skating over to "Secular scientific problems with the Ice Age".

Comments