> So, if you present a theory of the Flood as a hypothesis to explain geology
> and Paul Arveson presents the theory of secular geology, what is to prevent
> me from presenting a theory that all the rocks were deposited by tiny elves
> which change air into silica, feldspars and lime?
I have no sympathy with apparent age arguments, but there is a
difference between "Flood apparent age" & "Elf apparent age" - the
former is part of a coherent theological program (namely, that Bible is
a completely accurate historical chronicle) & the latter isn't (unless
you want to develop a more detailed theory of elves!) I don't think the
former is _good_ theology (it concentrates entirely on a narrow view of
Scripture rather than on the real God & God's relationship with the
world) but that's another matter.