Re: [asa] ICR Acts & Facts Feb 2007

From: Michael Roberts <>
Date: Thu Feb 01 2007 - 18:33:06 EST

Are these two very different?


First from ICR
> IMPACT No. 404 - Water Activity on Mars: Landscapes and Sedimentary
> Strata
> Despite 30 years of accumulating increasingly abundant and unequivocal
> geomorphological evidence, the case for past catastrophic water-related
> activity on Mars has remained controversial until very recently.
> Read it at:
> --------------------------------------------
> Second from a dubious British source

This is not necessarily the case. There is a new theory (in Brit Journal for
creation science 2007 vol 1 , pp 36-57) which argues that the excess water
of the Flood was sucked off by a passing comet which then struck Mars and
the resulting melt on impact caused the rivers but that has now been
evaporated off. That gives the essence of the argument


To unsubscribe, send a message to with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Feb 1 18:34:18 2007

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Feb 01 2007 - 18:34:18 EST