Re: Full disclosure (was Grand Canyon Tears America Apart )

From: George Murphy <>
Date: Thu Jan 22 2004 - 11:50:55 EST

Michael Roberts wrote:
> George
> My point is a simple one, despite apparent similarities YEC ideas of today
> have no roots in the pre-1800 period, as those "geologists" were using
> Genesis in a different way which was far more tentative. In the late 17th
> Century Ray etc used the Flood as an explanation of strata more as an
> inference of the best bit from the evidence available rather than something
> to be held on to dogmatically as if their faith would collapse if they did
> not accept it.
> There are simply no candidates in the past who are comparable in the science
> to YEC, except McCready Price and a few like Fairholme in the 1830s whom
> Mortenson of AIG claimed were "scientists".
> Just because before 1700 it was possible to accept "special creation and a
> Young earth" - no evidence to contrary, it does not mean that those people
> approached the natural world in the same cavalier way as do YECs.

Michael -
        I am not arguing with you, nor was I trying to explore the history of geological
science. My only point was that one would have to go back quite a way to find a period
in which YEC was not considered marginal by scientists (aka natural philosophers).

George L. Murphy
Received on Thu Jan 22 11:59:09 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Jan 22 2004 - 11:59:10 EST