Re: ICR; June 2005

--- Carol or John Burgeson <burgytwo@juno.com> wrote:

> The Impact article (#384) by Humphries is
> interesting. Fourteen natural
> phenomena are discussed, all of which conflict with
> the "billions of
> years" theory. These are presented in a way that --
> if even one cannot be
> refuted, the earth MUST be young. ICR will no doubt
> have these up on
> their web site shortly; for reference, here they
> are:

Are they still using these disproven arguments?
Sigh... At least YEC'ers are consistent in their
teachings of bad science.
 
> 1 Galaxies wind up "too fast."
> 2 Too few supernova remnants
> 3 Comets disintegrate too quickly. The Oort cloud is
> unobserved.
> 4 Not enough mud on the sea floor
> 5 Not enough sodium in the sea
> 6 The earth's magnetic field is decaying too fast
> 7 Many strata are too tightly bent
> 8 Biological material decays too fast
> 9 Fossil radioactivity shortens geologic "ages" to a
> few years
> 10 Too much helium in minerals
> 11 Too much carbon in deep geologic strata
> 12 Not enough Stone Age skeletons
> 13 Agriculture is too recent
> 14 History is too short
>
> My expectation is that this list of 14 will be
> expanded as the countdown
> to 11/5/05 continues. Kill 13 of them; the one
> remaining will still be
> used to "prove" a young earth.
>
> Finally, an article titled "Did Jesus Teach Recent
> Creation." Henry
> argues three points, as follows:
>
> 1. The Bible nowhere allows for long ages
> 2 The Bible explicitly states how and when creation
> took place
> 3 Jesus recognized that men and women existed from
> the start.
>
> Burgy
>
>
>
>
>
Received on Fri Jun 10 12:52:23 2005