Geoffrey Horton (
Fri, 17 Jan 1997 17:12:25 -0600

> So, and this is meant not as a smart aleck
> question, but asked out of genuine ignorance - is the question of
> transitional forms one of interpretation - two people look at the same
> and come to different conclusions?

Extra credit points to Janet Rice for asking this key question, whose
answer I leave to those more versed in the debate than I am.

I tried to create a list of arguments presentable by an advocate of a YEC

1) There's an on-going conspiracy among scientists to fraudulently present
an evolutionary view of evidence.
2) God deliberately placed what looks like evidence as a challenge to the
3) The misleading evidence is a result of the distortion of creation by the
4) For whatever reason, most scientists have consistently misread the

Of course, there may be others.

I would rule out (1) and really don't like (2). I suppose (3) is possible,
but if I were to adopt a YEC stance myself, I think you'd have to convince
me that (4) is the case.

P.S. About the title of this thread: What's _unreal_ history?

Yours in Christ,