1/6/00
Allen,
You wrote;
>-----Original Message-----
>From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu]On
>Behalf Of Allen Roy
>Sent: Saturday, January 06, 2001 6:10 PM
>To: asa@calvin.edu
>Subject: Re: Creation Ex Nihilio and other journals
>YEC's,
>beginning with Price, have recognized the fallacy of allowing
>naturalism any
>part in scientific interpretation of the geologic sciences. This is where
>the true difference between Evolutionists and Creationists lies.
>Naturalism
>leads to Evolutionism. Creation leads to Creationism.
>
But creationists use naturalism when it suits them. They almost always come
up with some naturalistic mechanism for a global flood--i.e. a vapor canopy,
continents sinking, runaway continental drift, meteor impact, the collapse
of an ice canopy. They never, ever simply say, "God produced a miraculous
flood".
They always allow that t the laws of physics would be the same during the
flood, with water pushing big blocks of rock around and eroding things as
normal floods do. They assume that the laws of bouyancy were in place
allowing the ark to float. They assume that the laws of life applied in that
if terrestrial animals are covered with water they will drown. They assume
that there was a naturalistic reason for the lack of a rainbow before the
flood--i.e. it never rained. They assume
>Allen
>Member MENSA
>
glenn
see http://www.flash.net/~mortongr/dmd.htm
for lots of creation/evolution information
anthropology/geology/paleontology/theology\
personal stories of struggle
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Jan 06 2001 - 14:40:49 EST