From: Dick Fischer (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Sep 30 2003 - 12:03:20 EDT
>These illustrate a couple of peculiarities common in YEC (young-earth
>creationism) arguments. By admitting that reversals have occurred,
>Humphreys indirectly admits that other YEC advocates slander conventional
>geologists in denying the existence of reversals. Internal consistency is
>not a concern.
>The second is an example of the unjustified uniformitarianism that is
>popular as a base for YEC arguments. Ironically, the hypocritical and
>illogical accusation of uniformitarianism as inherently atheistic is also
>popular among YEC advocates.
In The Genesis Record, Morris makes his point about the flood ordering the
fossil sequence found in sedimentary rocks. He then says:
Man's perverse and depraved nature has somehow
distorted both into a system of evolution and uniformity.
"Uniformity" can be defined as a projected continuity. It is the
assumption that the rates and processes we see today are the same as in the
past. This is simply the most conservative stance you could take. The
alternative is to assume that something (who knows what?) caused the rates
or processes to change. Since we would not know whether the rates or
processes changed up or down, the "no change" assumption is as
middle-of-the-road as you can get.
The precautions with taking a uniformitarian approach are that you must
have a considerable number of established data points, and that you not try
to extrapolate too far. The important thing to remember, though, is that
what makes uniformity inherently good or bad, from a young earth
creationist's point of view, is directly dependent on who uses it. If they
use it - it's good; if evolutionists use it - it's bad!
Dick Fischer - Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Tue Sep 30 2003 - 12:03:36 EDT