On Fri, 05 Jan 2001 10:38:11 -0600 James Mahaffy <mahaffy@mtcnet.net>
writes:
> I have also run across references to Creation Ex Nihilo, which I think
> has a popular and technical journal. I know little about the
journal(s)
> other than glancing at some of the articles on a web page:
> http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/bios/c_wieland.asp
>
> It appears that one or both might be published by Carl Wieland. I
> assume neither is peer reviewed and I sense from a glance at the
> articles that there is a lot of variation in quality. Perhaps a little
> like the old Bible Science News letter.
I have subscribed to the Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal for the
last year and very much enjoyed it. The "Editorial Team" consists of:
Dr. Pierre Jeristrom (co-ordinator), Dr. Don Batten, Dr. Jonathan
Sarfati, Dr. Tas Walker, and Dr. Carl Wieland. There is also the
"Creation Ex Nihilo" magazine, which is a colorful, popular-level
magazine. My impression is that both are head and shoulders above "the
old Bible Science News letter."
I think that the articles in the Technical Journal are peer-reviewed. My
general impression is that the Journal is quite professional. In the
latest issue, I particularly enjoyed the exchange of letters in response
to an article on "A Biblically-based cratering theory" by Danny Faulkner;
the paper "Age determination of coastal submarine placer, Val'cumey,
northern Siberia" by Alexander V. Lalomov and Serguei E. Tabolitch; and
the paper "Paleokarst - a riddle inside confusion" by Emil Silvestru.
Two book reviews were included on Halton Arp's books: _Quasars,
Redshifts and Controversies_ and _Seeing Red: Redshifts, Cosmology and
Academic Science_.
As an example of why I find this Journal refreshing, I seem to remember
seeing on this list a statement to the effect that paleokarst proves long
ages. From the "Summary and conclusion" of the article on "Paleokarst"
in the Journal:
"From the Proterozoic to Mesozoic, all paleokarst features seem to have
been reduced to local minor surface features.
During the Mesozoic, it is claimed that major karst features formed only
in some parts of Europe (namely Yugoslavia). The other regions of the
earth, even when karstification conditions were much better than today,
seem to have produced nothing but bauxite ore deposits in minor surface
karst features.
Similarly, the Tertiary produced little, if any, aerial paleokarst, even
though karstification conditions were supposedly good enough and long
enough to generate a complex and widely developed surface and subsurface
karst.
The Quaternary, the shortest era according to evolutionary geology, has
managed to make up for it all. In this 'short' period, karstification
processes have been able to generate the grandiose karst features we see
all over the world today, from the equatorial to polar regions.
It is clear that there must have been a major qualitative change in the
gnensis of landforms, especially karst landforms, at the end of the
Tertiary.
A logical inference from this change is that true karstification
processes, like the ones we are witnessing today (which after all are the
ones that inspired the very idea of karstification), only occurred in the
Quaternary. All previous karst-like features represent protokarst
(incipient or incomplete karst) or pseudokarst." (from Silvestru, Emil,
Paleokarst - a riddle inside confusion, CEN Tech. J., v 14(3): pp100-108,
2000)
The paper contains 37 references, only one of which appears to be from a
creationist source (another CEN Tech. J. article). Silvestru has a
Masters and Ph.D from Babes-Bolyai University of Cluj, Transylvania,
Romania, where he has worked as an associate professor in karst
sedimentology. "A world authority on the geology of caves, he has
published 26 scientific papers, six abroad. He was until recently the
head scientist at the first speleological institute in the world, the
Emil Racovitza Speleological Institute founded in Cluj, Romania in 1920."
Comments anyone?
Bill Payne
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jan 05 2001 - 23:03:31 EST