> Bill Payne has joined the ASA chat line. Be prepared for a plethora of
> huff and puff arguing for a 'Young Earth'.
Well, good evening CG, and thank you for the introduction.
> One of his favourite topics is coal beds. Every one he has seen supports the idea of a > young earth,
No CG, they all support the allochthonous (transported by water rather
than an in situ swamp formation, or autochthonous) model of coal
formation.
> even though every state geological survey in which coal occurs adheres to the old > earth understanding.
It is my considered opinion that just because the government tells us
something is "X", we are not therefore scripturally bound to accept "X"
as being true. Peter certainly didn't stop preaching just because the
authorities told him to cease and desist (Acts 5:29). Niemoller and
Bonhoeffer fought for the Jews even though the Nazi State had declared
them a scourge. The US Supreme Court notwithstanding, unborn children
are not subhuman and therefore should be protected (cf Luke 1:44 - human
emotion of joy). Governments are composed of humans and subject to
making bad decisions which, I believe, citizens (especially the
Christian citizens) have a moral duty and responsibility to
resist/correct.
> Bill draws upon Ph.D. (PennS) research by Steve Austin, who was a young
> earther before he started the research and still was when he finished. His
> study was on a single bed of coal - #11 - in western Kentucky.
I think you actually mean the Kentucky #12.
> But the
> abstract of Austin's thesis has inferential evidence for old age, such
> as how about bed #10, #9, #8,#7, etc. which occur in vertical sequence.
You can grind your axe that way if you like, but stragraphic succession
can be interpreted within Austin's Floating Mat Model with no strain on
the data.
> My recommendation is that ASA 'chaters' should resist the temptation of
> responding to Bill's commentaries and questions. When you answer one, he
> will come back with another or change the subject.
To the best of my knowledge, I have never avioded responding to the hard
questions our fellow geologists have put to me. To the contrary, I have
freely admitted when another's post poses a seemingly insurmountable
problem for the model I am trying to build. I have taken the time to
respond point-by-point to posts, rather than picking out the points
which might be easy for me to counter.
> If you decide to reason with a personal message to him, be prepared to
> have him put on the ASA chat line - an action I view as irresponsible
An action I also view as irresponsible, and one which I was unaware that
I had committed. If I posted one of your messages to the ACG line, I
assure you that it was inadvertent, and I beg your forgiveness.
> because the objective is a continuance of controversy, confusion, and
> conflict.
This is news to me. I thought the objective was to create a forum where
ideas could be placed on the table and analyzed to sort those which have
merit from those which don't.
> The objective of science is SOLVE PROBLEMS, not generate and perpetuate problems.
> REMEMBER - no response and silence quickly terminates a continuance.
No comment.
> Recently a polling of Affil.Christ.Geologists was conducted amongst
> members who have an e-mail address. A simple question was asked.
> IS THE EARTH VERY YOUNG? or IS THE EARTH VERY OLD?
> The results are below. 50 out of 82 responded 'old', one said 'young' and
> one made 'no committment'. The one who made no committment was asked seven
> times, and still refused. I would be pained to identify the indiviual.
That would be me. There is also someone in the ACG group (I would be
pained to identify the indiviual) of whom I asked several times to
please tell me whether the wine Jesus created at the wedding in Cana
(John 2:1-11) would have appeared, using scientific analytical methods,
to be young (ie, created minutes ago) or old (ie, created gradually over
months or years by uniformitarian processes). This same unnamed
individual, who categorically states that the earth is very old, refused
to answer my question about the age of the wine. Am I missing something,
or is there something wrong with this picture?
The ACG was the first chat group I have participated in, and I made some
inexcusable mistakes. Three times I publically confessed my offenses and
asked for the group's and/or offended individual's forgiveness. I'll try
to do better here.
May God richly bless each one of you,
Bill