>I spent 15 years in a very intense search looking for " what else *might
>have* happened." I was a professional geoscientist with access to more
>geological data than ANY university has access to.The fact is that the
>majority of detailed geological, seismological and well core data is housed
>in the warehouses of the oil industry. They have more money to spend on
>scientific data collection.
>
>With access to all this data, and attempting every solution I could think of
>I failed to find a single hypothesis which would both explain the data of
>geology AND a global flood. In fact, until I came up with the views I now
>hold, I was unable to geologically support a local flood which would fit the
>physical description of the flood in the Bible.
>
Glenn's approach is the approach I would expect any honest creationist who
has an aptitude for the sciences to take: become a part of the professional
community that has developed the model you question and study the model for
yourself. At the very least you will end up understanding why the model is
formulated as it is. A better result is that you will make contributions
to the field which will be appreciated. It is certainly possible that you
would be able to overturn the model. But to do that you have to establish
credibility, and you won't do that by sitting in a pseudoscience outfit
like ICR and taking rhetorical potshots at the research community. As
Glenn points out, his is not the easy approach. It may shake your faith to
its foundations. But if the foundation of your faith is what it should be:
Jesus Christ, then I submit that what gets shaken away is not significant
anyway.
Bill Hamilton | Vehicle Systems Research
GM R&D Center | Warren, MI 48090-9055
810 986 1474 (voice) | 810 986 3003 (FAX)
hamilton@gmr.com (office) | whamilto@mich.com (home)