Re: Coal

Glenn Morton (grmorton@waymark.net)
Thu, 23 Oct 1997 19:39:37 -0500

At 12:14 PM 10/23/97 EDT, John W. Burgeson wrote:
>Glenn wrote, in part
>
>"please explain today three things about coal.
>
>1.How a single flood could deposit the huge quantities of
>coal we see. ... "
>
>Just a quibble, Glenn. If we accept an "old earth," and most everyone
>here does, is it not possible that there were many such floods before the
>one of Noah? If so, the question above does not seem to be relevant. It
>seems relevant ONLY if one wishes to argue against a YEC position.

Absolutely. If Bill believes in an old earth, and a global flood, then my
note may have been misdirected. But there are several reasons that I believe
that Bill is a young earth.

1. The probabilities are with it. 99.99% of all global flood advocates
today beleive that the vast majority of the sediments were deposited in a 1
year catastrophe. There was a short period in the early 1800s where men like
Buckland believed in an old earth and a global flood where only one or two
layers were the flood. But the fact that none of the Tertiary strata could
be traced all over the earth, caused this view to collapse.

2. Bill cited Wyatt, as an authority, I would strongly suspect that Bill is
a young-earth person. Not many old earth people believe Wyatt.

3. Bill wrote: "Many YEC scientists are working to
develop a working model congruent with scripture. My opinion is that in
these "last days" a model supported by empirical data will emerge. The
YEC position will then be at least plausible, if not compelling, to an
unbiased inquirer."

Which statement practically admits that he is a young earth creationist.

If Bill wishes to correct my impression, I would be delighted.

glenn

Foundation, Fall and Flood
http://www.isource.net/~grmorton/dmd.htm