From: David F Siemens
I must disagree with Allen's claim, for YEC only accept those areas of physics which fit their purpose. For example, I understand that the contemporary work in quantum physics explains radioactivity and the reason why nuclear disintegration is describable in terms of half-lives very precisely. As a result, the various measurements of age via radioactive breakdown are accurate within small error. But YEC reject this entire area of physics, even though it is confirmed in the operation of every nuclear reactor.
No YEC or Creationary Catastrophist rejects physics and they understand radioactivity as well as anyone. What is rejected is radiometric dating which is based on certain assumptions not related to physics. The assumption that rocks are closed systems for mother and daughter isotopes is known to be invalid. The assumption that all daughter isotopes are radiogenetic is also invalid. And, one must first assume that rocks are old enough for the decay of radioactive isotopes to have occurred in measurable quantities.
I contend that I do not have the option of deciding which of God's physical laws I will accept because they agree with what I want to believe, and which I will reject. This is why I was forced to jettison the YEC view I had been taught.
Flood Catastrophists do not reject any physical laws.
My respect for scripture also forced me to reject day-age interpretations of Genesis 1.
The list of other scientific matters rejected by YEC is, unfortunately, more extensive-- (A) the source and cooking of petroleum deposits, (B) the amount of vegetable material in coal, (C) massive halite deposits that are incompatible with deposition by a recent Flood, (D) the size of the universe (absorption might explain dimming Cepheid variables and novae, but can't produce the Doppler shift), (E) the magnetic pattern of rocks on either side of the mid-ocean ridges, etc. Either God misleads or YEC lie.
Points A,B,C and E have all been explained to some degree by Flood Catastrophists. They are not the overwhelming problems as envisioned by some.
I disagree with my YEC friends that the unverse is as young as the Creation week. I agree that point D, is a problem for YECs. Some cosmologies are being proposed and explored, but I don't find them very convincing. The origins of the universe and Flood Catastrophism are mutually exclusive issues. I focus on Flood Catastrophism and let others hash out the origins of the universe.
Allen
Member MENSA
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 11 2001 - 01:19:10 EST