[asa] Re: [ACG] Palaeontology question

From: Michael Roberts <michael.andrea.r@ukonline.co.uk>
Date: Fri Dec 08 2006 - 16:34:13 EST

I shall make some historical comments.

In the 1680s some including John Ray, Edward Lhwyd and William Hobbs
(possibly Steno) started to suggest geological evidence showing that the
earth was much more than 6000yrs old

Many after 1760 did so, eg William Hamilton at Naples showed this from the
succession;

soil
lava
burnt soil
lava
burnt soil
lava etc
on Vesuvius, pointing to the fact that the volcano was tens of thousands
years old.

Consider de Saussure de Saussure on folds in Mesozoic rocks, round pebbles
in fairly crystalline rocks at Vallorcine (Ordovician) which were thought to
be original created rocks but must have been laid down by water made de
Saussure say it was very old.
(read more in Rudwick's Bursting the Limits of Time)
So by the 1780s the high age of the earth was well-known -including by the
clergy. The controversy was not OE and YE but an old earth - de Luc was
hovering between 5 and 6 figures or an eternal earth which Hutton was
accused of.
In 1795 when Smith started working out the order of strata from a mix of
fossils and straight superposition he was in fact YEC but changed his mind
by 1803 - possibly due to his 3 clergy advisors - one an
evangelical -Townsend.

By 1810 almost every geologist accepted an old earth of either 10s of
thousands or millions. I can find no young earthers after that but the one
exception was George Young who in 1828 published a geology of the Yorkshire
Coast (Jurassic) which he interpreted as flood deposits. Apart from Young
all the "Scriptural geologists " described by Terry Mortenson were plain
incompetent and to Sedgwick, an evangelical, laughably so.

In the 1820s to 40s the Palaeozoic sequence was worked out and some of the
main workers were Sedgwick and Lewis both evangelicals, Conybeare on the
edge of evangelicalism , with the evangelical Ollivant collecting fossils
for Murchison in the Silurian . All were Anglican clergy. And before Ted
tells me off you had Silliman and Hitchcock two fine evangelical geologists.
Perhaps we should look to them for inspiration

 And so this continued until the last few decades when a few have tried to
re-instate a YE view of geology

What they need to do is to overthrow 330 years of old earth geology.

Can anyone hold their breath? Or breath in phlogiston!

Michael

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Mahaffy" <Mahaffy@dordt.edu>
To: "acg" <acg@list.dordt.edu>
Sent: Friday, December 08, 2006 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: [ACG] Palaeontology question

>I will pass it on to Marcus and see if he want to respond or even join
> the group. However,
> I have no question that Marcus's work with mosasaurs has been shared
> with mainstream science.
>
> It might be a different story if like Steve he tried to publish his
> thesis on floating map explaining coal formation.
>
> I hesitate a bit to ask Marcus to communicate with us because this
> grooup in the past did not treat Kurt Wise very well (although he was
> too thin skinned too).
>
> I am again going to bcc this to Marcus but will follow up with a
> personal note when I have more time.
> --
>
> James Mahaffy (mahaffy@dordt.edu) Phone: 712 722-6279
> 498 4th Ave NE
> Biology Department FAX : 712
> 722-1198
> Dordt College, Sioux Center IA 51250-1697
>
>>>> On 12/8/2006 at 11:36 AM, in message
> <E428A318-B74F-4F67-8C30-CACBE7FB22BB@geology.cwu.edu>, Paul Hoskin
> <hoskin@Geology.cwu.EDU> wrote:
>> A genuine question perhaps best answered by Marcus himself:
>>
>> "Is it really possible to be a young Earth creationist and a
>> palaeontologist who contributes in the mainstream?"
>>
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ACG mailing list
>> ACG@list.dordt.edu
>> http://list.dordt.edu/mailman/listinfo/acg
> _______________________________________________
> ACG mailing list
> ACG@list.dordt.edu
> http://list.dordt.edu/mailman/listinfo/acg
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Fri Dec 8 16:36:41 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Dec 08 2006 - 16:36:41 EST