Piltdown Superman

Critics of Genesis Flood geology base their complaints on uniformitarian processes, and most seem unwilling to consider what creationary scientists have to present. I have even seen some owlhoots that claim that there are no models for Flood geology, while at the same time refusing to examine models that have been presented. Essentially, biblical creationists are wrong because evolution. After all, Darwin's philosophies require deep time, and scoffers don't cotton to evidence for the recent creation and the global Flood. They just "know" that biblical creationists are wrong. No logic nor education needed. Credit: NASA (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) I reckon the best way to test a model is to see if it can deal with observed data. Australia is, according to Ray Comfort, an island off the coast of New Zealand. (Well, I  think that's funny.) Although an island, it is the smallest continent, "small" being relative, because it'

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  Many times, biblical creationists will post something about the Genesis Flood, then professing atheists get all fired up. Professing Christians who believe in an old Earth (especially theistic evolutionists) often saddle up and with misotheists against creationists. Their antics are vexatious. Often, self-appointed defenders of materialistic science comment on social(ist) media with personal insults, attacks on God and the Bible, etc. Occasionally they will form a posse comitatus  for a trolling raid. Creation science (and especially the Flood) are threats to deep time. The Man Made Mad by Fear / Gustave Courbet, 1844 We often get remarks that science has refuted the Flood. These owlhoots often find links that supports their preconceptions, post them, and pretend that they are "gotchas" to creation science Flood geology. What is omitted is the speculative nature of uniformitarian geology as well its problems. Years ago, the Bearded Buddha himself put

Defenders of deep time, especially on social(ist) media, despise any discussion of the global Genesis Flood. Many refuse to examine evidence for it, clutching their pearls and crying that there is no reason to consider the evidence because there was no Flood. Because atheism. (One may justifiably wonder if these owlhoots have always been anti-science and anti-thought.) Uniformitarian geology cannot adequately explain many observed facts without making excuses for recalcitrant data, but creation science Flood geology does a better job — especially with an accurate geological model. Coward's Falls, Flickr / Cowboy Bob Sorensen  ( CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 ) Using extensive data, geologist Dr. Tim Clarey and others from the Institute for Creation Research made a map of the Flood effects. If evidences creationists used to support the Genesis Flood were one-off anomalies, they could arguably be easier to ignore or dismiss. Instead, geological features of the Flood stages span continents. Creatio

It is usually evident when an area has undergone a flood. Water has marked trees and buildings, debris has been moved, and so on. Obviously, the larger the flood, the more telltale signs. When creation science geologists discuss the Genesis Flood that happened a few thousand years ago, they point out amazing amounts of erosion all over the world. From the New York State Education Department. Kaateskill. Internet. Available from http://www.nysm.nysed.gov/research-collections/geology/resources/kaaterskill ; accessed May 2, 2010 (usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Up here in my neck of the woods near the Catskill Mountains, we have planation surfaces (large, flat areas on mountains) such as nearby Kaaterskill. There is also an escarpment (sharp incline) that covers three counties, and you can hike a good part of it . Planation surfaces, escarpments, and I may as well add those stand-alone lumps called inselbergs are baffling to uniformitarian geologists because t

The words paradise and Hawaii have often been used in the same sentence, although Hawaii is a series of islands, not just one. The "Big Island" is named Hawaii, though most travel is to O'ahu. And no, it's not just off the coast of California, that's just an effect map makers use. Amazing how we're living in a wrecked world; something that gorgeous came out of the Genesis Flood, so we cannot rightly imagine the pre-Flood world. Waikiki image credit: Pixabay / chopie80 For people interested in geology, however, the Big Island has the volcanoes Mauna Loa and Mauna Kea. Mauna Loa is active, too, letting loose with lava now and then. The Hawaiian islands came from volcanoes, but these volcanoes are different from most of the rest on Earth. Uniformitarian geologists give an age to the islands and their positioning in the millions of years (assuming that the plate tectonic rate was the same in the distant past as it is today). Biblical creationists have a F

If someone is going to make a movie about a Bible topic, it would make sense to actually use the original account. Sure, some embellishments to fill out the characters is reasonable and expected to make a story interesting and entertaining, and it has been done without doing violence to the source material 1 , 2 . Several biblical movies have been reasonably close to the original narratives, such as The Bible, King of Kings, Passion of the Christ, The Ten Commandments, Jesus of Nazareth and so on. (What if someone did The Diary of Anne Frank: Times Square Hooker Years ?) Darren Aronofsky's Noah is proudly anti-biblical. It's better if movie makers actually have some respect for the subject! Russell Crowe in Noah - photo by Niko Tavernise, Paramount Pictures-AP The Noah  movie has been panned by Christians and non-Christians alike from reading scripts and actual viewing 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 12 , though naturally some people liked it 13 , 14 but their

There were several views of geology floating around in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, including multiple catastrophes, the Genesis Flood, and gradual processes. James Hutton made headway in what is now called uniformitarianism with views that reject the biblical account of creation and the Flood, and has been called the father of modern geology. Charles Lyell took the reigns and galloped forward with his Deistic views which sought to remove God from geological science, and his polemic influenced Charles Darwin. Image credit: Pixabay / tpsdave Lyell was educated as a lawyer, and Darwin's education was in theology. These "great scientists" promoted anti-God polemics that influenced far too many people. Although it's tempting to make lawyer jokes, it is a fact that lawyers are trained to get their point across. (Did you ever notice that in American courts, lawyers are not sworn to tell the truth?) In the spirit of evolutionism and uniformitarianism, Cha

When reading creation science publications, you are likely to see the expression "Flood model" in geology. (Regular readers have seen it here.) The way I figure it, this is a sort of general expression because there are actually several models of the Genesis Flood processes, but most are in agreement over the main points. Credit: RGBstock / Aureliy Movila Geologists of the biblical creation persuasion agree that the Genesis Flood actually happened, and it happened a few thousand years ago. Their models are far more effective at describing what is observed in geomorphology and other areas than secular uniformitarian dogma. Flood geologists have their hypotheses and models. However, when scientists do science stuff, they disagree on details. Was there a post-Flood boundary? If so, where? How does it compare to other boundaries? Why do secular scientists shy away from the unique continental shelf and slope? Models are run up the flag pole to see if anyone salutes them.

Two mainly American things going on with the word hoodoo.  In one sense, it loosely refers to folk magic or eerie stuff happening. In "Born on the Bayou", Creedence Clearwater Revival (guys who were from California) mentioned the old hound dog "chasin' down a hoodoo". The other use of the word is the hoodoos of Bryce Canyon, which is not really a canyon, but the edge of a high plateau. So we have one word with differing meanings, and a canyon that's not a canyon. Weird. Bryce Canyon National Park / National Park Service Weird stuff aside, this is about geology. More specifically, how the hoodoos were the result of geologic processes. Uniformitarian views do not give an adequate explanation of how those pillars were made, but Genesis Flood geology gives a more complete picture of how they really  formed. The visitor overlooks at Bryce Canyon, Utah, provide a breathtaking spectacle of row upon row of towering columns painted pink, red, white, and or

It should come as no surprise that not only are rocks exposed at the Grand Canyon, but the layers as well. Geological questions are raised, so the inability of secularists to give plausible answers to what is observed exposes their faulty presuppositions as well. Coconino Sandstone (center) / Image credit: US Department of Agriculture Forestry Service (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) When dealing with a claim, it is often helpful to examine what would be expected if it were true. We can also ask about things that are missing. Uniformitarian (slow and gradual processes over deep time) geology has many holes in the stories told about what is observed.  If Genesis Flood geology models are true, there are certain things we would expect to find, and creationists have to deal with holes in the theories as well. However, Flood geology is far more plausible in describing observed evidence in the Grand Canyon. As you look across Grand Canyon, observe the layers on both walls.

Can you imagine a cowboy riding along and stopping to get a gander at the huge Lake Missoula, and watch the ice dam burst? Except it wasn't called Montana then, and there probably weren't nobody there at all, let alone, cowboys.  Image credit: US National Park Service This was way, way back near the end of the Ice Age. The way it's figured, a glacier blocked up the North Fork River and Glacial Lake Missoula was formed. Then the dam burst, and areas in what are now Montana, Idaho, Washington and Oregon were affected by the massive torrent. Secular geologists had been debating about that flood for a long time, even speculating that there were several, but they seem to be coming around to the view that there was only one flood there. This was a smaller picture of what we can imagine about the Genesis Flood, which was far more catastrophic and violent, what with the fountains of the deep bursting forth, volcanoes, and that sort of thing. Still, it's impressive. (Also

While it is useful to see the geology of the Grand Canyon and such in North America, head over to Australia for some fascinating things. If you go way south to Melbourne, you are on your way to the southernmost state of 'Straya, which is Tasmania. Head east, and you can find New Zealand. But not today. Tassie has a thousand islands, the main one is comparable in size to Switzerland or West Virginia, but far less populous. Most of the others are tiny and unpopulated, or have special uses. Tasmania and southeast coast of Australia / Visible Earth, Jacques Descloitres / NASA / GSFC (Usage does not imply endorsement of site contents) Secular geologists draw from their deep-time worldview to explain geological features, but many of those are tendentious and have serious weaknesses. They also tend to ignore interpretations of data that are not according to their uniformitarian beliefs. Creation scientists also operate from their worldview and interpret data based on the biblical narrati

Some secular geologists are claiming that the Coconino Sandstone refutes Genesis Flood geology because there is no way that it could have been formed under water. Interestingly, geologists hang their hats on uniformitarian geology despite the numerous problems with their own hypotheses. So, what's going on? Coconino Sandstone (center) / Image credit: US Department of Agriculture Forestry Service The problem is that the geologists only gave superficial examinations before they came up with their myths. Once again, creationists have to do the heavy lifting and refute their refutations. When creationists suggest that a worldwide Flood deposited all the layers in the Grand Canyon, secular geologists laugh. “That can’t be,” they say, “because one of the canyon’s major layers was formed in a desert over millions of years. It’s filled with fossilized sand dunes, which are windblown deposits that have hardened into stone. You can’t deposit desert sands during a global flood!” Th

As most of us who pay attention to these things know, the concept that slow and gradual processes over a long periods of time is foundational to secular geology. This is called uniformitarianism, but creation scientists have successfully used catastrophism to confound many secular geologic views. Mt. St. Helens erupted in 1980 and provided evidence supporting the Genesis Flood and creation science. Credit: Unsplash / Jarred Decker Keep in mind that Mt. St. Helens was one of the smaller volcanoes. During the Genesis Flood, there was a great deal more volcanic activity, storms, tsunamis, and so forth happening all over the world. Creationists have been using geological evidence from the main eruption of Mt. St. Helens to demonstrate that rock layers could be laid down quickly instead of over millions of years. Now some secular geologists admit to catastrophic processes to some extent. Other observed information supports other creation science hypotheses and models. In addition,

Although there is abundant global evidence for the Flood, the British Isles are an area that warrant special study. Uniformitarian assumptions keep leading researchers on dusty trails to dead ends and wrong destinations. Great Britain was completely submerged at one time during the Genesis Flood, but uniformitarian geologists refuse to accept this, and often will often refuse to examine the evidence. For example, Siccar Point in Scotland does not have much information about it because of uniformitarian assumptions; this is the same kind of bad science that has held back research in biology (such as "junk" DNA) and other areas because they think they have things all figured out. FreeImages / Ben Nevis via Carn Mor Dearg Arete / biscuits17 Radiometric dating is no account because of the bad assumptions involved (knowing the beginning "parent" quantities, the decay rates, and the ending "daughter" amounts). Further, those decay rates have been show

In a previous post , Doctors Steve Austin and John Morris referenced a technical paper that they had published. After almost thirty years, the material is still relevant. Pike's Peak from Garden of the Gods / Library of Congress / PD Problems in uniformitarian geology discussed have not been satisfactorily explained. Instead, the Genesis Flood model explains what is plainly observed than evolutionary dogma. In last month’s edition of  Acts & Facts , I mentioned studies that Dr. Steve Austin and I presented in a technical paper demonstrating that the deformations in sedimentary strata at two sites better fit with the biblical Flood than with evolution’s long ages of deposition. We featured the first project site, the Split Mountain Formation in southern California, in that issue. Now we will examine geological evidence from the second site, the Ute Pass Fault in Colorado. Location and General Features The Rocky Mountains of Colorado were formed by “large revers

Seems like most people who have television, internet, and even newspapers have heard of the Grand Canyon. That place has been a tourist destination as well as a hotbed of geological research. If your travel plans do not allow for this one, there is another canyon that seems overlooked by many people. This is the Palo Duro Canyon, down Texas way. On a map, it's in the Texas Panhandle (it sort of looks like a top hat). This canyon causes problems for uniformitarian geological dogma. Credit: Freeimages /  Deborah Finnell You would rightly recollect that uniformitarianism is based on long ages, and "the present is the key to the past". This view precludes the Genesis Flood, which far better explains much of what is seen in geology — as we have seen here numerous times. If secularists weren't so afflicted with pusillanimity and had the courage to drop deep time presuppositions, they'd see how well Flood geology explains their observations. Actually, I'm bein

Using basic scientific knowledge and doing some thinking, we can see that uniformitarian geology (present processes are the key to the past) does not explain many of the landforms or the huge landslides that we see with our own eyes. Using the Genesis Flood as a model, those geological features that are perplexing to secularists make a great deal more sense. Case in point, the transportation of hard rock boulders. Credit: Freeimages / Benjamin Earwicker Some sidewinders get on the prod and indulge in prejudicial conjecture and ad hominem attacks. They try to dismiss the deep time-defying Flood geology, saying it never happened and that there is no evidence of the Flood. Assertions do not create facts. Twitter posts are public domain, and this one is also used under Fair Use provisions for educational purposes You're showing your bigotry and lack of education, old son. How about doing some research before showing yourself a fool again? And I don't mean reading

The Genesis Flood is extremely important in creation science, and there are Flood models postulated to correspond with observational evidence. Of course, biblical creationists disagree on details and put forward differing models, but agree that the Word of God is of primary importance. People tend to have a superficial knowledge of the Flood, thinking it was only  40 days and nights. No, the waters were on the earth for 150 days. There was much more happening than rain, and creationists are interested in paleontology, geology, and volcanism. Havre Volcano, original image: NASA / Jeff Schmaltz LANCE / EOSDIS MODIS Rapid Response Team, GSFC (usage does not imply endorsement) Submitted for your approval are two short articles. First, biblical creationists reject the stories of multiple ice ages that secularists tell because there is no real evidence for them, but there is abundant evidence for one Ice Age. The global Flood of Noah's day involved catastrophic geological processes, inc