Re: Mountains

From: Joel Moore <>
Date: Fri Apr 15 2005 - 15:46:18 EDT


Not sure what you're trying to say in your email. First you quote
Baumgardner approvingly, then you say 5 My is outside the scope of the
YEC timetable. So are you saying Baumgardner is right about the earth
being 6000 years old, or do you think he's wrong?

Baumgardner is right that some scientists think uplift in most of the
high mountain ranges (forgot the Sierra Nevada) has happened in last 5
million years. Other current thinking that he doesn't mention is that
there's also evidence that some of the mountains (Himalayas and Sierra
Nevada are the two ranges I know about) were uplifted more like 40 or
50 million years ago and then had another, significant uplift pulse in
the last 2-5 million years. Alternatively, much of the same evidence
can be interpreted to see that as global climate shifted into a more
severe icehouse, cold, glacially-dominated world, erosion increased
2-5 million years ago. This erosion increased the amount of sediment
deposited off-shore from the high mountain ranges. So this deposited
sediment has been read by some to mean the uplift increased, which
caused increased erosion rates, and read by others to mean a change in
climate that cause increased erosion rates.

So back to your email and quotation of Baumgardner, I fail to see how
a debate over how to best read the geologic evidence in order to
ascertain what happened 2-5 million years ago gives Baumgardner reason
to believe in a young earth. Baumgardner misrepresents the
conversations between "theorists" (I'm not sure who he'd be talking
about here) and geomorphologists. I'm also not sure what Baumgardner
is referring to when he writes of the uniformitarian expection. Such
an expectation is not present in the minds of any geologists or earth
scientists that I've interacted with.


On 4/14/05, <> wrote:
> Michael,
> Apparently you didn't comprehend my initial post. Baumgardner (see quoted the authors of "The Origin of Mountains" (Cliff Ollier and Colin Pain) as saying that all the high mountain ranges of the world - including the Himalayas, Alps, Andes and Rockies, rose from plains within the last 5 million years. "In terms of this time scale, these mountain ranges have all undergone several kilometers of vertical uplift since the beginning of the Pliocene about five million years ago." Last time I checked 5 million years was a little beyond the scope of the YEC timetable.
> "This lack of agreement between field observation and uniformitarian expectation has led to conflict among specialists in the ranks of the larger earth science community. Theorists who address these matters, confident that their uniformitarian models are sound, tend to ignore the observational reports or reinterpret them as much as they can to match the predictions of their theories. Geomorphologists who focus on this topic, on the other hand, confident their observations correspond to reality, tend to dismiss the explanations of the theorists as hopelessly out of touch with the real world. However, because of the specialization that typifies most of science today, a sizable fraction of the earth science community is largely oblivious that the uplift history of today's mountains is even an issue at all."
> I suppose we could say you and Glenn have placed yourselves into the oblivious category. This thread began with Stephanie:
> ********************
> teaching evolution & creation science in public schools...
> From: Stephanie Burke <>
> Date: Tue Mar 15 2005 - 13:49:28 EST
> I am interested in soliciting opinions from ASA membership regarding the
> teaching of evolution vs. creation science/creationism in American public
> schools. Some questions to consider...
> As "scientists teaching in the Christian perspective" how do you personally
> handle teaching evolution, which most view as being in direct opposition to
> the origins of life as outlined by the Bible?
> What SHOULD be taught in public schools? Creationism? Evolution? Or a
> combination of both?
> Is there a way to present creationism in a non-biased, non-partisan way which
> will not be misinterpreted by public school administration as forcing certain
> religious views upon students?
> Is it a violation of the First Amendment to teach creationism in
> governmentally funded public schools? Do you view this as an issue of the
> "separation of church and state?"
> Any feedback would be greatly appreciated... thanks...
> ********************************
> It is my opinion that science should be taught unfettered by allergic reactions such as those displayed by you and Glenn. Neither of you comprehended what Baumgardner was saying as he quoted Ollier and Pain; both of you jumped Baumgardner for his YEC views rather than commenting on the work he referenced. Stephanie asked: "Is there a way to present creationism in a non-biased, non-partisan way which will not be misinterpreted by public school administration as forcing certain
> religious views upon students?" The two of you have shown that the answer to Stephanie's question is "NO." Scientific data which supports a model of earth history that lends aid and comfort to creationists is generally ignored or ridiculed.
> Michael, you said "You see Bill my criticisms of YEC are based on extensive knowledge." Not this time Michael; this time your criticisms were based upon willful ignorance.
> Since the paperback version of this book is ~$60 (hardback ~$150), then I doubt I'll be sending you a free copy.
> Bill
> -- "Michael Roberts" <> wrote:
> Send me a free copy and I will read it. As it is I have too any YEC books,
> often annotated for misquotation etc etc.
> I have read most of the Impact series so I am not hopeful; that anything ICR
> produces will be any good.
> You see Bill my criticisms of YEC are based on extensive knowledge.
> Michael
> ___________________________________________________________________
> Speed up your surfing with Juno SpeedBand.
> Now includes pop-up blocker!
> Only $14.95/month -visit to sign up today!
Received on Fri Apr 15 15:48:34 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 15 2005 - 15:48:40 EDT