pauluc: I find it astonishing that you would believe …

Comment on Scientists and the Temptation to Bias Results by Bob Helm.

pauluc:

I find it astonishing that you would believe that more than 5000 feet of geological column including limestone and a couple of eolian depositions would be placed there in one year.

I have also been to the Grand Canyon, and while I did not go all the way down, I have hiked a good portion of the Bright Angel Trail. Honestly, I was not astonished at all by the thought that more than 5000 feet of geologic column could be set in place in one year. In fact, that entire canyon practically screamed “catastrophe” at me. Have you ever observed the effects of a local flash flood? Let’s carry that a step further. I have also camped in the bottom of another great canyon – the Grand Coulee in the American state of Washington. There in eastern Washington are a whole series of canyons that everyone now agrees are the result of a regional flood during the ice age – a much larger catastrophe than a local flash flood, but still far removed from a worldwide flood. Paul, the Grand Coulee is a mile wide and 900 feet deep – carved through solid basalt, perhaps in a few days. A huge amount of sediment was removed from that region, and some of it was deposited downstream in layered deposits similar to what one observes at the Grand Canyon, but on a smaller scale. In light of these facts, I fail to grasp how you could imagine a flood of worldwide proportions not depositing 5000 feet of sediment in certain areas. We aren’t talking about a big rainstorm! We are talking about a tectonic event so violent that it split the single antediluvian supercontinent up into today’s seven continents. How could a tectonic event of that magnitude fail to deposit 5000 feet of sediment? It boggles my mind that you find that astonishing!

As far as the Coconino Sandstone is concerned, I realize that majority opinion labels it as eolian, but there is also a minority opinion (not just in flood geology) that it resulted from an underwater sand wave. Since both opinions exist in geology – having been published in peer reviewed journals, and since none of us were alive to observe its deposition, don’t dig your heels in too hard in defense of its eolian origin.

Bob Helm Also Commented

Scientists and the Temptation to Bias Results
@Sharon: I don’t completely agree Sharon. The faith of the fideist is still saving faith that lays hold of Jesus as a personal Savior. And it is possible to have this kind of faith even without believing in a recent creation. Remember – Jesus said that even faith the size of a mustard seed counts. The problem is that Christianity loses its appeal when the rug of evidence is pulled out from under it. For the fideist and the theistic evolutionist, evangelizing intelligent, thinking people is a hopeless task. Without apologetics, evangelism is dead. It is interesting that every denomination that has bought into neo-orthodoxy (fideism) and/or theistic evolution is dying. It cannot be otherwise!


Scientists and the Temptation to Bias Results
@Sean Pitman: I agree. Scientific revolutions have often occurred because one person or a small group of people doubted the consensus of the scientific community and set out to falsify it.


Scientists and the Temptation to Bias Results
@pauluc: A few more points. Be aware that not all the rocks visible at the Grand Canyon were laid down by the flood. I believe that the Precambrian rocks in the inner canyon, below the Great Unconformity, are pre-flood and probably pre-creation week. I also believe that the Great Unconformity marks the onset of the flood.


Recent Comments by Bob Helm

Dr. Walter Veith and the anti-vaccine arguments of Dr. Geert Vanden Bossche
I believe in good medicine and am thankful to God for the Moderna vaccine. Walter Veith deserves to be ignored, and not just on this issue.


Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
@Carlos: Far from being outdated, I would say that Sean’s arguments are cutting edge. As for the assertion that scientists don’t use Darwin’s model for evolution, that is correct – because Darwin had no knowledge of Mendelian genetics. The original Darwinian model was replaced by the Neo-darwinian Synthesis about 1940, which claims that evolution takes place as natural selection acts on random mutations. Although this model still dominates biology today, it is facing increasingly serious problems, which Sean has touched on.


Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
@Sean Pitman: OK, I see it now. Sorry – I missed it earlier.


Complex Organisms are Degenerating – Rapidly
Sean, Dr. John Sanford, who was an important contributor to the development of GMOs, has written a book on this issue entitled, “Genetic Entropy.” I don’t see him quoted anywhere in your article, and I’m wondering if you are familiar with his work. It is noteworthy that Dr. Sanford has abandoned Darwinism and adopted creationism/intelligent design, not originally for religious reasons, but because of this problem.


Evolution from Space?
Sean, once again I urge you to publish your material in book form, preferably with a non-Adventist publisher. You have such wonderful material, but the Educate Truth audience is so small.