I attended LSU back in the early 1970’s I …

Comment on Former LSU student letter reveals professor’s agenda by Allen Roy.

I attended LSU back in the early 1970’s I remember the same professors (Guy especially) expressing doubts about the creation account and using extra reading books which claimed that the Genesis account was myth based on ancient Middle East pagan myths. This was presented in a way that it was enlightening, a better understanding than the traditional, backward views of the old SDAs. At the time, I was puzzled why this would be taught, but didn’t say anything. Now I can see where all that was leading. Happily, I wasn’t taken in [edit].

Recent Comments by Allen Roy

Jay Gallimore comments on evolution conflict
24 hour day

By definition an hour is 1/24th of the time of one rotation of the planet.

It doesn’t matter how fast the planet is rotating, an hour is always 1/24 of the rotation time.

If you had two planets side by side (planet A and Planet B) and one (planet B) was rotating twice as fast as the other, each planet would still have 24 hours per day/rotation. The difference is that an hour on planet B, when measured by time based on planet A, would be 1/2 the length of time as an hour on planet A. But still, Each planet would have 24 hour days. What matters here is which planet do you live on.

A minute is 1/60 of an hour and a second is 1/60 of a minute. Our Measurements of time is based on the rotation of the planet. The second is based on the minute and the minute is based on the hour and the hour is based on the rotation of the planet. Time is not based on the second or some fraction there of. Nuclear clocks have been set up to try to have a basis to measure time across the universe based on the second. Still even then it is an measurement at only approximates the time of 1/60 of 1/60 of 1/24 of 1 rotation of the planet.

So to saying that the days of the creation week were 24 hours long is really a redundancy. A hour is 1/24 of a day.

As for physics AiG has an excellent summary and explanation found here:

“Do creationists believe in weird science?”

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab2/do-creationists-believe-in-weird-physics


Dr. Ervin Taylor: ‘A truly heroic crusade’
@Taylor. What utter nonsense! He hasn’t a clue what creationism is about, not to mention science!!


Dr. Ervin Taylor: ‘A truly heroic crusade’
Taylor wrote: “He must reject all of the mainline conclusions of 99.9% of all those scientists who are involved in all isotopic dating methods, and all other types of dating methods including dendrochronology, varve dating, ice core dating, stable isotope studies of ocean cores, and on and on.”

This is pure Argumentum ad Populum. This logical fallacy is common among naturalists when faced with opposition which they are incapable of comprehending.