1. I have watched the controversy between geologists who believe in
creation versus those who do not. I have seen "creation geologists"
give experimental proof in a laboratory that the formation of coal,
oil, etc. formation do not require an evolutionary explanation. I
have seen experimental proof that geologic striations (?) do not
need evolutionary explanations in that they can be duplicated in a
laboratory in a matter of minutes. In short, 2 of the reasons I
have told (by evolutionists) that evolution is true have been shot
down by experimental proof. Being an engineer, I place more faith
in experiments than in theories. In fact, if Steve wishes to
disprove Ohm's Law, I say, prove your theory in a laboratory and I
will believe you.
2. I am intelligent enough to know that when 2 "experts" disagree
on their theories, and have scientific proof to back up their
theories, and have a logical sequence to their extraction of theory
from available data, then there is a fundamental difference in the
underlying presuppositions. Until incontrovertible proof, repeatable
in laboratory situations, is presented in support of either theory,
they remain that: theories, not facts. Both evolution and creation
lie within this category since neither is repeatable by human
3. My primary rejection of evolution has little to do with geology,
however. Having studied (graduate level) nuclear physics as part of
my education program, I have seen that there are serious problems
with the underlying presuppositions founding radiometric dating. I
may not be a geologist, but the assumption that the decay rate of a
radioisotope is a constant and has held constant since the foundation
of the universe doesn't wash with experimental fact.
4. I also reject the uniformitarian (pardon my spelling) theory of
the origin of the universe based on vector calculus, a field I am
well acquainted with since I have working with electromagnetic fields
for over 20 years.
Although I have stated that I do not wish to debate these issues
until later, after I have had time to refresh my information with
current literature (I reconciled my position about 15 years ago),
these are the gist of my rejection of evolutionary theory. In
summary, I find incontrovertible proof that there are flaws in the
currently held theory (or at least, in the theory 15 years ago) of
evolution, that there are alternative interpretations of the
existence of incontrovertible facts (i.e., fossils) which are
scientifically feasible, and that experimental proofs have tended to
support "scientific creationism" while discrediting evolution.
In these areas, I am qualified, by means of training and simple
intelligence, to judge. And I will speak about what I believe.
William M. Frix
Assistant Professor, Electrical Engineering
John Brown University
Siloam Springs, AR 72761
Phone: (501) 524-7466
FAX: (501) 524-7499