Re: evolution-digest V1 #930

Glenn R. Morton (
Mon, 01 Jun 1998 20:01:31 -0500

At 02:19 PM 6/1/98 +0100, Gary Collins wrote:

I wrote:
>> Timing is obviously the major hurdle I have to jump over especially since
>> everyone (old earther theistic evolutionists and progressive creationists
>> also) are young-earthers when it comes to the creation of man. But I would
>> suggest that all of those recent creation views violate observational data
>> and thus are wrong.
Gary replied:
>I suppose it depends just how recent 'recent is.

Well on a 5 million year scale which is the time that hominids have been on
earth, even 100,000 years is recent. And most christians want to believe
that mankind was created less than 40,000 years ago. Thus for the most
part, most christians are young-earth when it comes to mankind.

> As Sherlock Holmes said, (something to the effect)
>> when all other options have been eliminated, what is left, no matter how
>> unlikely, it is probably the truth.
>Didn't he rather say, 'MUST be the truth'!?

I stand corrected. I don't read much fiction.
>I rather like your theory though, unorthodox as it may be, and hope that
>data can be found to support it. In terms of it's ability to explain things
>I think it scores rather highly. I feel that it really *ought* to be true!

The strength of my view is precisely what you mention above. There is very
little science that it can't incorporate (the MHC data which contradicts
all Christians views) is the only thing that goes against it.
The downside is that Christians must alter a traditional belief of the
recency of Adam. Most appear unwilling to do this.


Adam, Apes and Anthropology
Foundation, Fall and Flood
& lots of creation/evolution information