Ron Osborn Wrote: Hi Sean. Similar to my question to Shane, …

Comment on Adventist Review examines LSU conflict by Sean Pitman, M.D..

Ron Osborn Wrote:

Hi Sean. Similar to my question to Shane, it would be helpful to us if you can clarify what exactly you mean by “go after”. I certainly felt like you were “going after” me in a way that was dishonest if not malicious when you started posting my private correspondence to you on Educate Truth last year without informing me you were doing so and quoting me selectively and out of context after I had explicitly informed you I was writing to you personally and not for internet debate.

Hi Ron,

As I explained to you at the time, I didn’t realize at first that you intended your letters to me to be private and they were very quickly removed from EdTruth as soon as this was made clear.

Also, I never took anything you said out of context nor did I maliciously “go after” you in any sort of personal way. I simply disagreed with your ideas – big difference.

This is not the case with Louie Bishop vs. LSU. LSU is actually threatening Louie with many different things – to include expulsion from LSU, permanent negative comments on his transcript, negative comments on letters of recommendation, etc.

These very same threats have been made against many other students over the years at LSU. I’ve personally spoken with many of them. Now, I’m sure there are many students who feel very at home at LSU because their personal liberal philosophies are very much in line with that of LSU. However, for those students who actually believe in the stated SDA doctrinal positions of the Church organization, LSU can be a very difficult place to be – rather like a hostile mission field.

I don’t know about you, but I’m incredulous that any school that thinks to take on the name “SDA” can be so strongly opposed to SDA doctrinal positions while at the same time acting like it is in full support – and intimidate any student who thinks to work toward increased transparency as to what is really taking place behind closed doors in the classrooms.

Why this need to suppress what is truly happening at LSU? Why all this secrecy and attempts to cover up the truth of the fact that most LSU science professors, and even religion professors, support a theistic evolutionary view on origins? If it is so obviously true and necessary, why not be proud of it and present what is really going on in public LSU advertisements and PR campaigns?

Surely parents and SDA Church members at large deserve to know the unvarnished truth as to what is really being taught at our own schools and universities. It is time for full transparency. Anything less is robbery of both parents and students . . . and the Church.

Sean Pitman

Sean Pitman, M.D. Also Commented

Adventist Review examines LSU conflict

But this gives one pause for reflection. If the trees being killed are all pre-flood trees – then we should see a large group that are over 1600 years old at the time that they are uprooted. The fact that the 700 year number shows up layer after layer – implies that the catestrophic event happened after the world wide flood killed the pre-flood trees.
That means these are very likely post-flood 700 year old trees being wiped out by a sequence of catestrophic events. So it is likely a localized (North America only) event that happens 700 years after the flood.
in Christ,

This is correct. Speciment Ridge is made up of Tertiary sediments and is therefore a post-Flood formation.

Sean Pitman

Adventist Review examines LSU conflict

Nic Samojluk says:
April 3, 2010


I greatly appreciate the time you have taken to answer point by point the objections presented by David Jacobson. Your answers make a lot of sense. They do build my trust in the historicity of Noah’s Flood story as recorded in the Bible.

As I read the comments which are posted above, I have been wondering. How come none of the LSU science and theology teachers step up to defend what the university has been doing on this issue.

How should we interpret this deafening silence on their part? I wish someone would organize a public debate over this issue with these science teachers having an opportunity to present a defense of what they are doing. It would be akin to what Elijah did with those who were opposed to the prophet’s strong held beliefs.

Hi Nic,

Very few, even among young-life creationists, want to get involved in a public debate on this issue because it would threaten those theistic evolutionists at LSU and at other schools and cause an even bigger ruckus within the SDA Church. This is why not too many want to be publicly associated with efforts like They don’t want to be that politically incorrect in their associations…

Sean Pitman

Adventist Review examines LSU conflict

So, let anyone who is thinking of calling for a purge of the SDA educational system, first study the evidence carefully, and even try to take a look first hand. (Specimen Ridge is on public land.) I think you will come to appreciate that there can be good people, even devout people, who conclude that to be honest, they have to accept that the age of the earth must be greater than 6000 years.

— David Jacobson

Hi David,

I think your information on Specimen Ridge is just a bit outdated. What might seem obvious at first approximation, even after what seems to be careful investigation, often turns out later to be mistaken.

There are many problems with the in situ hypothesis, or the notion that the trees in the layers at Specimen Ridge actually grew there over generations of forests one on top of the other.

1. Many of the layers of “soil” are not at the base of the trees, but are often half-way up the trees.

2. The “soil” shows no sign of decay from top to bottom as would be expected in a normal forest setting. Also, the soil is water sorted, course to fine.

3. Tree-ring analysis of trees in different layers match – indicating that they grew at or near the same time.

4. Chemical analysis of the volcanic sedimentary material in the different levels indicates that this material was produced, in all of the levels, with in a 3-month period of time.

5. No remains of animal bones, skins, eggs, trackways, burrows, or other trace fossils have been identified in any of the layers.

6. The tops of the trees are cleanly cut off by the next layer, showing no evidence of decay or bioturbation and degeneration as would be expected if a new forest actually required extensive periods of time to produce the next higher layer.

7. The pine needs and leaves do not consistently match the trees which are associated with them. In other words, mats of leaves will be found associated with pine trees and mats of pine needs are found in association with deciduous trees.

8. While intact roots do remain, these largely consist of smaller roots. The larger roots, along with the branches and bark of these trees, have been broken off.

These features and others discussed on my website, are far more consistent with a sudden catastrophic formation of these layers and transport of the vertical trees within them…

For further information on this topic see:

I’ll give you one thing though… At least you’re not claiming to be something you’re not. You’re not taking money from an organization while directly undermining what that organization is paying you to do at the same time. This is admirable. LSU should follow your example and have those teachers who believe like you do to go and teach elsewhere for those of like mind who are more than willing to pay them for their views…

Sean Pitman

Recent Comments by Sean Pitman, M.D.

After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!

The Flood
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…

The Flood
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…

Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?

Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.

Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).

Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.