>You're darned right you've posted this several times. It's all you seem to
>have. It's a tiny part of a much larger argument, but I guess if it's all
>you've got it's not surprising you keep using it. It effectively deflects
>dealing with the main issues.
>
NO, NO, NO. TRUTH IS THE MAIN ISSUE. The Bible says that we are not to bear
false witness. We can all make mistakes and transmit erroneous information.
But we begin to bear false witness when these errors are pointed out and we do
nothing about it. That is totally dishonest. I will make the distinction
between opinion and fact. Opinion can not be so categorized but fact can be.
One can not base a theory on falsehood. One cannot serve the Lord with
falsehood. One cannot be honest if spilling out falsehoods.
I am going to continue to point this out until someone corrects it. This ease
with which we christians excuse error on our part is a true scandal. We accuse
the evolutionists of lying but then won't correct our errors when they are
pointed out
We christians are infected with a horrible case of situational ethics here.
It is alright for us to distort the data because we are on God's side. We are
God's children.
Let me give you other examples of equally bad science on the part of christian
apologists. Of course we should excuse these errors also because their motives
are pure, right Jim?
"Accurate satellite measurements across the Atlantic Ocean do not
yield any evidence that the continents are drifting at present."~
Henry M. Morris and John D. Morris, Science, Scripture, and the
Young Earth, (El Cajon: Institute for Creation Research, 1989), P.
20.
They cite a 1983 article, D. E. Thomsen, "Mark III Interferometer
Measures Earth, Sky and Gravity lens", Science News, 123, Jan. 8,
1983, p. 20-21
Why did they not cite the more recent 1986 Scientific
American Article (Nov. 1986), William E. Carter and Douglas S. Robertson,
"Studying the Earth by Very-Long-Baseline Interferometry",
Scientific American Nov. 1986, p. 46-54? see esp. 54. This article shows that
the Atlantic ocean spreading at +1.1 cm/year between Westford, Conn. and
Onsala,Sweden and Wetzell, Germany. I know that they take Scientific
American out there at ICR. Of course that doesn't support their view. But
don't fear, little mistakes like this are not to be bothered with--they
distract from the real issue.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE
"Since the Eocene epoch, supposedly 40 or 50 million years ago,
there have been few, if any, new genera. Indeed some of our modern
species have existed essentially in their present form since that
time."~John W. Klotz, "The Case for Evolution," in Paul A.
Zimmerman, Darwin, Evolution, and Creation, (St. Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 1959), p. 123
Wrong
New genera appear by the bucket load in successive strata since the Eocene.
Here is the number of genera by period in the Cenozoic:
Paleocene 213
Eocene 569
Oligocene 494
Miocene 749
Pliocene 762
Pleistocene 830
Recent 1154
Obviously new genera have arisen since that time and anyone who takes the time
to check would know that. At least 941 new genera have arisen. Klotz is wrong
but its OK, he is a Christian.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE
"Now the geologic column is an idea, not an actual series of rock
layers. Nowhere do we find the complete sequence. Even the walls
of the Grand Canyon included only five of the twelve major systems
(one, five, six and seven, with small portions here and there of
the fourth system, the Devonian."~Henry M. Morris and Gary E.
Parker, What is Creation Science?, (El Cajon: Master Books, 1987),
p. 163
Wrong, it contains 7 Precambrian, Cambrian, Devonian, Mississippian
Pennsylvanian, Permian, Triassic. Morris and Parker are not
counting the precambrian as the 13th system and Cedar Mountain on
the southeast side of the Canyon is made of Triassic Moenkopi and
Shinarump There is also a small outlier of Triassic Moenkopi at
Buggein Tank along the south side of the Canyon. See also H. Glenn
Richards, "Tectonic Evolution of Alaska" AAPG Jan. 1974, p. 79-105
and Charles Shuchert, Paleogeographic Atlas of North America, New
York: John Wiley and Sons, 1955. to see that large areas of alaska
have all the geologic column
Besides all 12 exist in North Dakota in proper order and have been drilled
through by over 80 oil wells (vertical boreholes). There are 23 basins around
the world in which all twelve in proper order exist. These basins are:
The Ghadames basin in Libya
The Beni Mellal basin in Morocco
the Tunisian Basin in Tunisia
The Oman Interior basin in Oman
The Western Desert basin in Egypt
The Adana Basin in Turkey y
The Iskenderun basin in Turkey
The Moesian platform in Bulgaria
The Carpathian basin in Poland
The Baltic basin in the Ussr
The Yeniseiy-Khatanga Basin in the USSR
The Farah basin in Afghanistan
The Helmand basin in Afghanistan
The Yazd-Kerman-Tabas basins in Iran
The Manhai-Subei basin China
The Jiuxi basin Chin
The Tung T'ing - Yuan Shui basin China
The Tarim basin China
The Szechwan basin China
The Yukon-Porcupine Province Alaska USA
The Williston Basin USA Canada
The Tampico Embayment Mexico
The Bogata Basin Columbiaa
Gee, what is 23 basins with the entire geologic column in it when you are
fighting those uniformitarianists.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE
Morris implies that river deltas like the Mississippi can be deposited
rapidly. He writes
"Laboratory evidence that a typical sedimentary deposit may
form quite rapidly is found in the work of Alan Jopling at Harvard,
who made a long series of studies on delta-type deposition in a
laboratory flume and then applied the results to the analysis of a
small delta outwash deposit, supposedly formed about 13,000 years
ago. He conclusion was as follows: "It may be concluded therefore
that the time required for the deposition of the entire delta
deposit amounted to several days....Based on the computed rate of
delta advance and the thickness of individual laminae, the average
time for the deposition of a lamina must have been several
minutes."~Henry M. Morris, Biblical Basis for Modern Science,
(Grand Rapids: Baker Bookhouse, 1984), p. 326
What he doesn't tell you is that the "delta" Jopling is talking about is 20
feet long and 16 inches high. But, hey Caveat Emptor applies in apologetics
also doesn't it?
ANOTHER EXAMPLE
"The mammals are said to have gained dominance only 6,000,000 years
ago."~Paul A. Zimmerman, "The Age of the Earth," in Paul A.
Zimmerman, Darwin, Evolution, and Creation, (St. Louis: Concordia
Publishing House, 1959), p. 166
It is 65 million years ago.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE
"Peking man and Java man, once believed to be in this group, are
now mostly ignored."~Henry M. Morris, Creation and the Modern
Christian, (El Cajon, California: Master Book Publishers, 1985), p.
183
Bull roar. Go look in any anthropology book and you will find them discussed
favorably. They are Homo erectus. But hey we don't want a monkey for our uncle
do we and a few mis-representations shouldn't bother our conscience.
ANOTHER EXAMPLE
"We have no way of knowing with certainty if Neanderthal man
could talk. His brain cavity size was not only equal to but
exceeded that of modern man. However, he reportedly lacked the
frontal lobe, the speech center of our modern brain."John Wiester,
The Genesis Connection, (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers,
1983), p. 180
Neanderthal had a frontal lobe. I can't imagine where he got this idea. In
fact (see Chris Stringer and Clive Gamble, In Search of the Neanderthals, (New
York: Thames and Hudson, 1993), p. 82-83). But the publisher didn't catch it
and no one else will either so don't rock the boat.
All of these guys don't know what they are talking about but since they are
good Christians we will ignore that because the evil evolutionist is out there
and we can criticize ourselves. Don't try to say that Johnson is not a YEC and
therefore better. Wiester is not a YEC either. When Johnson gets his facts
wrong, he should have the grace and humility to fix it. Only then will he be
different from the YECs.
Yeah, Jim, go ahead and defend these falsehoods it seems to be the Christian
thing to do.
glenn
Foundation,Fall and Flood
http://members.gnn.com/GRMorton/dmd.htm