7 assumptions behind the geologic column

Ed Morris said:

I will instead point out a few very obvious facts about the geologic column…I believe the geologic column was the killer argument that first convinced scientists that the earth was old, and in many ways it is still the best, because it is so simple a child can understand it and see what an insurmountable problem it is for the young-earth view. Additionally, it was essentially the final nail in the coffin in my own slow and painful departure (as an adult, not in college as a result of the influence of some godless professor) from my previously-cherished young-earth creationism.

But John Reed, speaking in another context, said:

But let’s examine the steps more closely. You have made several assumptions [when relying on the geologic column to conclude that the earth is billions of years old]:
  1. That there is historical content in the rocks
  2. That there is no other relevant source of historical information
  3. That the position of rocks in the field tells their relative ages
  4. That vertical positions of these formations and the ages of their bounding surfaces are the essence of their history
  5. That the formations were deposited slowly over long periods of time,  providing a representative sample of all those years
  6. That erosion has not removed enough evidence to impede historical reconstruction
  7. That the local column fits in the geological timescale.

None of these assumptions are proven by fieldwork—they are simply the context you absorbed in your [geological] studies. Thus, the timescale is not an empirical conclusion of your study, but the historical template by which you were able to develop interpretations.

Quote sources

  1. Morris, E. (2005). A Nonexpert Review of the Book “Refuting Compromise” by Jonathan Sarfati. Available http://www.noble-minded.org/sarfati_review.html. Last accessed 6th Dec 2014.
  2. Reed, J.K. (2013). Rocks Aren’t Clocks: A Critique of the Geologic Timescale. Creation Book Publishers, Powder Springs, p. 47

Memes from the Bill Nye/Ken Ham debate

Another highlight happened when, after hearing Mr. Nye say more than once that he did not have an answer to a question, Ken replied, “Well, there is a Book . . .” referring to the Bible and the answers it can present to challenging questions. The off-the-cuff phrase “there is a Book” was picked up by countless media outlets and bloggers, and also showed up on a T-shirt.

Quote source

Ham, K. (2014). History of Answers in Genesis. Available https://answersingenesis.org/about/history/. Last accessed 6th Dec 2014

The Christian worldview explained by R.J. Rushdoony

Since God has created man and all things else, and God’s absolute and total government rules providentially in and through all things, moral responsibility is an inescapable part of the constitution of things. There is no neutral, non-moral corner in all of creation. God’s total providence is His absolute wisdom, holiness, and righteousness in action. Man’s life is thus not in a vacuum but in a moral context and continuum. Not even death provides the sinner an escape from this moral universe.

Such a view is not acceptable to paganism and humanism, nor to the neoplatonists in the church. In Deuteronomy 23:12-14 we have a law wherein God requires even an army on the march to practice sanitation where defecation is concerned. The neoplatonist is not averse to state laws on sanitation, but he wants God to remain “spiritual” and above and beyond such matters. He thus turns over a vast area of ultimate responsibility and providence to the state. Biblical law makes such a view heresy…

God is the Lord, and nothing is outside or beyond Him, so that in all things we are face to face with the living God and His government.

Quote source

Rushdoony, R.J. (n.d) Karma vs. Providence. Chalcedon Foundation. Available http://chalcedon.edu/research/articles/karma-vs-providence/. Last accessed 6th Dec 2014

The liberal’s torture of the Establishment Clause

“One nation under God” from the Pledge is at most an affirmation of theism.  But theism is not a religion.  So the occurrence of the word ‘God’ in the pledge does nothing to establsh any religion as the state religion.  Understandably, atheists don’t like that word in the Pledge, but the Establishment Clause gives them no ground for removing it.

Similarly with “In God We Trust” on our currency.  This is more than a bare affirmation (or  presupposition) of the existence of God; it brings in the further notion of trusting God, a notion that is admittedly religious.  But which religion is established by “In God We Trust”? Judaism? Christianity?  Islam?  All three Abrahamic religions have monotheism in common.  Obviously, if Congress were to establish a state religion it would have to be some one particular religion.  But no particular religion has proprietary rights in “In God We Trust.”  So why should we think that the phrase violates the Establishment Clause?

And the same goes for the Ten Commandments as I maintained years ago when I first took to the ‘sphere.  The Decalogue is common to the three Abrahamic religions.  So if a judge posts them in his chambers, which religion is he establishing by so doing?

Once again we see what extremists contemporary iberals are.  The plain sense of the Establishment Clause is that there shall be no state religion.  One has to torture the Clause to extract from it justification to remove all references to God and every last vestige of religion from the public sphere, a sphere that ever expands under liberal fascism while the private sphere contracts.

A pox be upon the shysters of the ACLU and the leftist totalitarians who support them.

Quote source

Vallicella, B. (2013). Theism is not a Religion. Maverick Philosopher. Available http://maverickphilosopher.typepad.com/maverick_philosopher/2013/11/theism-is-not-a-religion-.html. Last accessed 6th Dec 2014

Feminists engaging in violence against women

An associate professor of feminist studies at UC Santa Barbara was sentenced Friday to three years probation, 100 hours community service and 10 hours of anger-management classes after pleading no contest to several charges stemming from a confrontation she had with an anti-abortion group on campus in March.

Mireille Miller-Young faced three charges of grand theft from a person, battery and vandalism based on the March 4 incident, during which prosecutors allege the professor took a protestor’s sign, committed battery on another protester, and then destroyed the sign…

[Judge Brian] Hill ultimately sentenced Miller-Young to serve her community service in conflict-resolution workshops run by the Quaker Church, 10 hours of anger management and $493 in restitution to the Shorts, which was paid in court Friday.

Quote source

Cooper, L. (2014). UCSB Professor Sentenced to Probation, Anger Management in Abortion Confrontation. Noozhawk. Available http://www.noozhawk.com/article/ucsb_professor_sentenced_to_probation_anger_management. Last accessed 6th Dec 2014.

Exposing an evolutionist’s faith in evolution

One evolutionist said: ‘It’s great to look at how evolution has solved mechanical problems.’ [allowing geckos to climb upside down along ceilings] But he never said how evolution, via chance mutations and natural selection, could have produced the complex foot structure [of geckos] as well as the movement pattern needed to use the structure properly. For example, there was no explanation of how half-formed setae and spatulae and an imperfect movement would benefit the animal and thus be selected for. This seems more like blind faith for people who have ruled out a Designer by decree.

But is this legitimate? The researchers commented that designing such a structure is ‘beyond the limits of human technology’, especially finding a material that can be split so finely 1,000 times. If the structure is ‘beyond the limits of human technology’, then it’s reasonable to believe that it was designed by One whose intelligence is beyond our own.

Quote source

Sarfati, J. [2000]. “Great Gecko Glue” in Creation. Volume 23(1), p. 54-55. Available http://creation.com/great-gecko-glue. Last accessed 6th Dec 2014.

Looking beyond the state for good government

For instance, we’re all still eating at restaurants and buying groceries [during the 2013 US Government Shutdown]. Yet, the Food and Drug Administration furloughed 45 percent of its employees. Now 91 percent of seafood, 50 percent of fruits, and 20 percent of vegetables entering the United States are going uninspected by the government. But that doesn’t mean that the food goes uninspected. Private businesses have every reason to want to serve safe food to their customers because getting an unsafe reputation hurts their bottom line. The shutdown has laid off redundant bureaucrats. It didn’t destroy our food safety.

Quote source

Powell, B.J. (2013) All I Am Saying Is Give Shutdown a Chance. The Independent Institute. Available http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=4754. last accessed 29th Nov 2014.