Replies

"Whatever happens next, we have just seen that major paradigm shifts are still possible in science. Kuhnians rejoice. Darwinians beware.

I still don't see what this has to do with Genesis."

Nothing whatever. This is one hypothesis, only. Now that it is published, it will undergo serious discussion among global geologists.

One man's writings do not necessarily always pan out. This author sees it one way, which is different from traditional theories, but even if he is correct, it does nothing about Genesis. It's just a different explanation for the 4.? billion year history of the planet.

Paradigm shifts happen in science all the time. There's nothing unusual about them. New ideas are posited. Some succeed in convincing others; some do not.

The secondary author here seems to suggest that because this person has written an article proposing a new theory of the formation and history of the Earth, the next step may be the acceptance of the YEC concept. Nothing could be further from the truth. Indeed, what is proposed by this scientist is that we may have to take another look at the early history of the planet, along with some of our theories about island chain formation. In no way is he suggesting that this all happened not that long ago. He's talking about the same 4.? billion year history, not some instant creation by a supernatural entity.

This is an interesting theory, to be sure, and I am certain it will be much-discussed over the next few years. Perhaps it will become the new theory of the formation of this planet. Perhaps not. It will not, however, get replaced by some YEC fantasy.