Replies

"Coal: Evidence for a Young Earth"

Assuming this is all factual (I'm not the most scientifically-literate person), couldn't it instead read

"Coal: Forms Faster Than Once Thought"

instead of trying to use it as the/a basis for trying to prove a young Earth theory. And I couldn't help but notice that in the Conclusion the first thing that's written is: "The answer can be found in the Biblical account of Noah's Flood"

This is Evidence, not biblical quotation. You did not think there was any on that site.

It is Evidence, not conclusion. However, if you read the piece you would see that the formation of Coal and it's various details lend much more to the Flood theory than the old earth, Macroevolution theory. It also calls into question the process of aging levels of sediment (artifacts and vegetation passing through "ages"), a fundamental aspect of old earth theory. This evidence meets the Scientific procedure and cannot be off-handily disregarded because a Christian is using it.

Thus if the old earth theory is called into question you must ask what other explanation do we have for the type of sedimentation and fossil records that we have. That is were the Flood theory comes into play as a scientific explanation. Not to mention it's place in not only the Bible but in the history of many cultures and societies.

***********************************************************************

It is common knowledge among honest evolutionists today that Darwin's concept of gradualism via natural selection is no longer accepted in the realm of academia to explain the fossil record. Allow me to briefly exemplify by letting the following evolutionists speak for themselves:

[Stanley, Steven M., 'Macroevolution: Pattern and Process' (San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Co., 1979), 332p.]

The known fossil record fails to document a single example of phyletic evolution accomplishing a major morphologic transition and hence offers no evidence that the gradualistic model can be valid. (p.39)

[Raup, David M., "Evolution and the Fossil Record," 'Science,' vol. 213 (July 17, 1981)]

So, the geological time scale and the basic facts of biological change over time are totally independent of evolution theory. (p.289)

[Ridley, Mark, "Who Doubts Evolution?" 'New Scientist,' vol.90 (June 25, 1981), pp.830-832. Ridley was in the Department of Zoology at Oxford University.]

In any case, no real evolutionist, whether gradualistic or punctuationist, uses the fossil record as evidence in favor of the theory of evolution as opposed to special creation....(p.831)

This being the case, the Bible alone provides the only satisfactory (and scientifically acceptable) historical explanation for the myriad of lifeforms catastrophically encased in water-deposited, sedimentary rock found at all altitudes and on all continents--a global Flood! In Genesis 6:17, the LORD warns of this hydraulic cataclysm which would overtake all terrestrial life on the planet (except for those on the Ark), eventually burying, preserving, and ultimately fossilizing a great many of them in the sediments according to their respective ecological elevations.

"And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and everything that is in the earth shall die." (Gen.6:17; read also Gen.7:17-24 and 2 Peter 3:3-6)

Thus, though the word "fossil" is not used in the Bible, the Scriptures do record their cause, a prediction of creation-science which can be verified by observation and study.

Sincerely,

David V. Bassett, M.S

. CEM Staff Writer