There is a MAJOR issue that seems to be totally …

Comment on PUC Professor: The Noachian Flood was just a local flood? by Steve Leddy.

There is a MAJOR issue that seems to be totally ignored by these progressive thinkers and teachers – the evidence they present is horribly slanted.

When I went to Union College I too was faced with a science teacher who promoted ideas that seemed contrary to the biblical model (actually Prof. Ness is far more rational and balanced and I would be happy for him to teach my kids). My professor seemed to favor the students who dismissed the literal creation story and even marked me wrong on a test with an added comment about my ignorance when I stated that I had faith in the Bible over what science claims. To be fair, one of the evolutionist students could possibly have been his grader.

What I haven’t heard from these (I believe well meaning) science professors is that the “scientific evidence” for a non-global flood and macro-evolution is so biased that it is unreliable. Of course the preponderance of the evidence points against a biblical model. It would make no sense if that were not the case based on the preconceived notions of those that present the “evidence” and the methods and interpretive tools they use to view the world. If 99%+ of the scientists instead believed in a literal creation week that happened thousands of years ago then the overwhelming weight of evidence would point that direction.

We saw scientific bias used to try to prove the inferiority of many races to justify seizing land, persecution and slavery. They believed these races were lesser so they sought biological proof and published findings that supported their prejudices. We see tobacco companies, oil companies, and many others employing scientists to filter evidence and create “sound reasoning” based on biases that favor their companies. Lawyers for both the prosecution and the defense bring expert scientists to show their arguments are correct.

Macro-evolution is a theory and a faith with thousands of biased scientists using billions of dollars to prove this is the origin of life. So, when the experiment shows a different result they will retest because those findings can’t be right. When evidence points towards a young earth the test must have contaminated. When dating tests reveal wide dating differences from the same sample, the one that comes closest to what they expected must be the accurate test and the rest are faulty.

Again, the “evidence of origins” would be dramatically different if the same number of scientists and resources had been employed with a bias towards creationism.

These professors in our universities did not themselves create the evidence they are sharing; they are looking at the work of a biased scientific community. But when it is shared with statements like, “there is room for diversity,” I ask how diverse is the scientific community? How much time, effort and resources do they spend exploring the possibilities of other origin theories? How do they treat scientists, professors and teachers who teach creationism? From what I have seen and heard the scientific community is much more dogmatic about macro-evolution than Adventists about creationism. My academy aged kids have all been exposed to the theory of evolution, but in state run schools like I attended creationism is not allowed to be taught.

I stand on the Bible’s account of the flood and creation first on faith then on evidence. Just as the vast majority of the scientific community stands on their beliefs first on faith then on evidence.

Professors seeking to share a balanced scientific view need to realize there is no such thing.

God bless!

Recent Comments by Steve Leddy

Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism
If one does not believe in a literal seven-day model then we give tremendous credence to non-Sabbath keeping Christians who argue that the seventh-day Sabbath was intended for the Jews. Keeping any “seventh-day” would still be honoring creation since it is no longer a weekly anniversary; rather it is a random memorial of the act of creation.

I have a graduating Academy senior and two more teens in Academy. I have told them each starting last year that they can choose Adventist college/university to attend excluding La Sierra.