RE: Report on the YEC seminar in Durango, 9-2003

From: Glenn Morton (
Date: Wed Sep 24 2003 - 07:06:49 EDT

  • Next message: Ted Davis: "Re: Creationists Running for School Board"

    >-----Original Message-----
    >From: []
    >Sent: Tuesday, September 23, 2003 10:07 PM

    >> Bill, you can't solve each of these problems with no thought for the
    >> other problems. Your claim to solve the coal quantity problem rings
    >> very hollow in light of the other evidences of pre-flood life forms.
    >> Thus, until you face this issue, it is a waste of our time to discuss
    >These problems need to be solved one at the time. I would rather dig
    >deep into one area instead of spreading thin over all of the objections
    >you can raise. Although I don't expect you to admit it, coal is one rung
    >of your ladder which is, IMO, now missing. And if the evidence for the
    >origin of coal can be so badly misinterpreted, that does raise the
    >possibility for other errors or oversights that underlie other objections
    >that you raise.

    No, it is not missing from my list. You had written:

    "Pre-flood trees grew in swamps, and peat collected in those swamps. If we
    assume that a swamp flora would have matured in 30 years (which should be
    reasonable for the hollow or pithy-core lycopods), and assume 1,600 years
    from creation until the flood, 1600/30 = 59 generations of peat collected in
    swamps, ripped up by the flood, re-deposited, buried and coalified. There
    was more than enough biomass to form all of the coal we have today."

    Where is the calculation? You assume that every thirty years every tree dies
    and is converted 100% into peat. That process decays the plant and much is
    then lost. One can't assume every tree dies every 30 years. That is not the
    way plant-life works. You can't assume a perfect world in order to solve
    your problem. You haven't said how much of the planet was occupied by these
    peat generating swamps. You also ignore the fact that if peat was ripped up
    by the turbulent flood, the peat would be dispersed, not collected together
    (another perfect world assumption on your part). If your scenario is correct
    we should find peat dispersed throughout all the geologic column in tiny
    chunks, not in great sheets.

    You have to assume a perfectly contrived world for ripped up peat to remain
    in tact and redeposited during a flood that eroded enough crystalline rock
    to deposit 75,000 feet of dirt in some areas of the earth.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Wed Sep 24 2003 - 07:07:22 EDT