Welcome to the home of The Question Evolution Project. Presenting information demonstrating that there is no truth in minerals-to-man evolution, and presenting evidence for special creation. —Established by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

Friday, April 2, 2021

Plants Under Ice Fluster Evolutionists

Although it was not planned, a spate of articles have a common element where secularists have been faced with evidence that is recalcitrant to fish-to-philosopher evolution or deep time views. We have two articles for your perusal that have the same effect. This time, plants in extremely cold places.

Secular scientists are continually astonished when discoveries do not fit their worldview. However, what is discovered fits creation science models.
Greenland north coast image credit: NASA / Michael Studinger

Have you ever been working with your team on a project, then lose some of what you were working on, only to find it about fifty years later? Sure you have, it happens to all of us. Drilling down under Greenland ice, a core sample was taken and then analyzed after it was found many years later. As purveyors of clickbait might say, "The results will shock you!" Well, the results did shock the scientists.

How did that dirt get in there under the ice sheets? In fact, it appears that the ice sheets were gone for a spell and plants grew. Greenland is a mighty big place, so such a thing was not an anomaly. Although your typical village atheist has great faith in dating methods, a thinking person might get uncomfortable when learning that the results were off a thousand percent. So, secularists, take the noon stage to Spin City, and be sure to ignore how your paradigm does not fit the facts, but also ignore how the Genesis Flood models from creation scientists fit the evidence quite well.

Plant materials in an ice core cannot be a million years old. They look like they were buried in the recent past.

A rediscovered ice core dug in 1966 is shocking scientists. A mile under the Greenland ice sheet—which is supposed to be 2.6 million Darwin Years old—twigs and leaves of modern plants have been found. This discovery has ramifications for geological dating and also for climate change politics. PhysOrg 15 March 2021 describes the stunned reaction of scientists from the University of Vermont.

To read the rest, skate over to "Recent Plants Found Under Greenland Ice". Remember, we have one more to consider. How cool is that?

In a research expedition that could be made into an exciting movie, fossils were found beneath the ice. Big plant fossils and other things. Scientist are bewildered because (say it all together) the evidence doesn't fit the narrative. Also, such plants shouldn't exist at that time according to evolutionary assumptions. Once again, biblical creationists are not shocked by the information. Pleasantly surprised, sure, since discoveries continually confirm recent creation and the Genesis Flood, but also falsify evolution. Again.

They found more diversity of plant species than had been known before from wood specimens. They say, “the diversity of entire-margined (or smooth-edged) leaves in the Paleocene forests was unexpected.” They also found differences between the east and west sides of the Antarctic Peninsula. The closest living analogues are found in the Patagonian forests of South America.

The presence of temperate forests in what today is the coldest part of the world means that earth has experienced dramatic climate change in the past. Secular scientists have this all worked out on their timeline, with names for the climate changes:

You can read the rest of this very interesting article at "Was Antarctica Once a Land of Forests?"


Unknown said...

No where did andrew say this was proof of a young earth. In fact its not surprising the earth 2 million years was much warmer than today.

Piltdown Superman said...

Nobody claims that Andrew Christ said it was proof of a young earth. What was discovered, as these articles demonstrate, is that the deep-time paradigm is fundamentally flawed — and you conveniently ignored the bulk of the material.