 |
|
Topic started on 5-5-2005 @ 11:07 AM by mpeake
|
In an ongoing effort to merge creationism with science, Lloyd Anderson, a retired minister, is attempting to use the geological development of Mount
St. Helens to show that the 6 day creation of the earth is a possibility.
www.msnbc.msn.com
Doris Anderson, a retired registered nurse who pursued a second career as a journalist, translates her husband’s perorations for the everyday
reader in brochures and booklets that explain, in no-nonsense but engaging prose, how he believes the geologic changes at and around Mount St. Helens
— the “7 Wonders” — prove that processes that mainstream scientists insist took millions of years can actually occur in days, or even
hours.
The “second wonder,” for example, was the formation of the Step and Loowit canyons. When you look at Mount St. Helens, Step Canyon, 700 feet deep,
is the long gouge trailing down from the mouth of the crater. According to the emerging philosophy, the canyons took just five months to form,
illustrating, Anderson says, that magnificent formations like the lava-carved Grand Coulee about 300 miles to the east and even the Grand Canyon could
have been formed virtually overnight by a catastrophic event.
Anderson says he could marshal any number of scientific arguments to prove that the biblical global flood happened as it is described in Genesis, from
inaccuracies in radiocarbon dating to gaps in the fossil record to superfine stratification of sedimentary layers around Mount St. Helens.
Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
Wilfred Elders, an emeritus professor of geology at the University of California-Riverside, argues that claims by Anderson are being taken completely
out of context.
“The 7 Wonders Creation Museum is an example of the ‘best’ and the ‘worst’ of the young-Earth creationist movement. It is good in that it
actually reports geological observations. It is bad because it ignores the scientific method in interpreting them.”
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 12:05 PM by HowardRoark
|
I would think that there would be a difference in the rates of erosion for the loose,
volcanic debris of a cinder cone and the harder, consolidated, cementitious sandstone walls of the Grand Canyon.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 01:04 PM by sardion2000
|
These wackos won't give up will they? Why can't they accept that Science and Faith will NEVER peacefully co-exist in a coherent theory. Why do
people take a book of dogma so literally, it's ignorance personified.
[edit on 5-5-2005 by sardion2000]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 01:07 PM by Aelita
|
The can't accept science because they aren't educated.
This whole "canyon in a day" thing is hilarios. Sorry if I sound harsh, but the person who promotes such argument is just dumb.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 01:14 PM by Jakko
|
I understand how such a "news item" could be voted into this section of the site, looking at how a lot of ATSers seem to love reading and replying
to the "religious wacko" stories.
Pretty pathetic.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 01:27 PM by Aelita
|
"Wacko" does not include all religious folks. Not by a long shot.
But yes, we at ATS love making fun of wackos when those come along.
There are also atheist wackos.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 01:28 PM by Roadscholar
|
From related ATS thread: 40 Million year old Cowboy boot found!
 Originally Posted by Roadscholar
The sad thing about this is the lengths and depths that some will go to in order to try to "prove" that the creation story found in the book of
Genesis is meant to be accepted as the completely literal eye-witness account of things that took place before humans even existed, or knew how to
write down what they were seeing.
The biblical account of creation is actually a combination of two different creation stories. One is a priestly attempt to explain the beginning of
things, the world, plants, animals, people. The other was taken from ancient desert campfire legends.
More information about this can be found in these articles by Doug
Linder.
Personally, I find no conflict between the ideas of an omnicient creator and the theories of evolutionary development. In my opinion, science may
simply be discovering the method by which God created.
There is plenty of room for both lines of thought in a rational mind. 
This submission gets a "No" vote for ATSNN from me. The intro paragraph is too short, and I can't tell if the conclusion is a quote or an
opinion.
Also, there are not any supporting links or related ATS threads listed, even though many could be found.
Don't sweat it, though...it still goes in the forum!
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 01:34 PM by James the Lesser
|
So, using that line of non-thought, I can use priests raping alter boys to prove satan, with no actual proof of anything? Wow, I wish I had gone to a
catholic school, so easy to pass. "What is 2+2?" GOD! "Who wrote the Declaration of Ind." GOD! "Good job, here's an A and a gold cross!
Kids, why can't you be more like JTL? he is such a good boy, now come her little boy, little boy, mmmmmmm, little boooooyyy........."
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 01:41 PM by Nygdan
|
Creationists have been trying, unsucessfully, to use the eruption as support for years. Often what happens with creationism is that convincing
arguements, even if ultimately refuted, are simply continuously put forward again
Coal Beds, Creationism, and Mount St. Helens
. According to the emerging philosophy, the canyons took just five months to form, illustrating, Anderson says, that magnificent formations
like the lava-carved Grand Coulee about 300 miles to the east and even the Grand Canyon could have been formed virtually overnight by a catastrophic
event.
The same flood that was supposed to carve the Grand Canyon was also supposed to lay down the miles of sediment (and a few lava flows) from
which the canyon is carved. A single flood cannot do both. Creationists claim that the year of the Flood included several geological events, but that
still stretches credulity.
The Grand Canyon contains some major meanders. Upstream of the Grand Canyon, the San Juan River (around Gooseneck State Park, southeast Utah) has some
of the most extreme meandering imaginable. The canyon is 1,000 feet high, with the river flowing five miles while progressing one mile as the crow
flies (American Southwest n.d.). There is no way a single massive flood could carve this.
Along the Grand Canyon are tributaries, which are as deep as the Grand Canyon itself. These tributaries are roughly perpendicular to the main canyon.
A sudden massive flood would not produce such a pattern.
etc etc
And Claim CH581.1
Also Elephant Stampede at the ICR museum , which is a review of one of these types
of 'museums'.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 01:45 PM by Nygdan
|
Sorry if I sound harsh, but the person who promotes such argument is just dumb.
Agreed, however, some creationists are well educated. Of course, they tend not to promote arguements like that.
Also, why isn't this appropriate for ATSNN? ATS is all about the weird, paranomal and conspiratorial. Well, it doesn't get any weirder and
more paranormal that a 'super mega flood what destroyed eryting 'cept a big wooden boats, wits all the aminals in it', or more conspiratorial than
a political movement masquerading as science and trying to wedge into the wall of seperation between church and state, and eradicate secular society
in exchange for an ecclesiastical one.
Any new related to creationism v evolution is well worthy of ATSNN.
(not that it should make a difference, but this isn't my contribution btw)
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 01:50 PM by James the Lesser
|
Dwayne Gish is my arch nemisis, he doesn't know I exist, but I know him. He got creation/noahs flood taught in Georgia schools until the court said
"Science Class is for science/fact/reality, fairy tales are for church."
He actually TEACHES that the Grand Canyon was made in one flood..... Impossible, but that's what he says......
[edit on 5-5-2005 by James the Lesser]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 02:20 PM by Roadscholar
|
Originally posted by Nygdan
Also, why isn't this appropriate for ATSNN?
In my humble opinion, the story itself is quite worthy, yes. The intro and argument could have used some work, though.
It seems to me that ATSNN.com is set up as a news portal site than any viewer in the world may stumble upon. We want to put our best face forward,
no?
Nothing personal to Mpeake at all...it's a good find and definately ATS topic material. I was hoping that he might make some corrections to the
intro and argument before it got downgraded.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 02:22 PM by Jakko
|
Originally posted by Aelita
"Wacko" does not include all religious folks. Not by a long shot.
But yes, we at ATS love making fun of wackos when those come along.
There are also atheist wackos.
Yes but atheist are usually not target in the ATS news section, because of the general anti-religion/anti-christianity sentiments on ATS.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 02:30 PM by mpeake
|
Originally posted by Roadscholar
Originally posted by Nygdan
Also, why isn't this appropriate for ATSNN?
In my humble opinion, the story itself is quite worthy, yes. The intro and argument could have used some work, though.
It seems to me that ATSNN.com is set up as a news portal site than any viewer in the world may stumble upon. We want to put our best face forward,
no?
Nothing personal to Mpeake at all...it's a good find and definately ATS topic material. I was hoping that he might make some corrections to the
intro and argument before it got downgraded.
no offense taken...I admit it was a bit sloppy, but I was sorta rushed this morning when I posted it, and am just now able to really make some
corections...but since it's here, I'll just leave it as is...
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 02:35 PM by Nygdan
|
Originally posted by Jakko
Yes but atheist are usually not target in the ATS news section, because of the general anti-religion/anti-christianity sentiments on ATS.
Thats bs. There is a wide variety of people that post in ATS, from atheists to hard core religious extremists. The moderates outnumber the
extremists, and I suspect that the actual atheists are outnumbered by the extremists.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 02:52 PM by Jakko
|
Originally posted by NygdanThats bs. There is a wide variety of people that post in ATS, from atheists to hard core religious
extremists. The moderates outnumber the extremists, and I suspect that the actual atheists are outnumbered by the extremists.
Do you understand what I am talking about?
I do not mean atheists in general, I mean news regarding atheist ideas, as opposed to news regarding religious ideas.
This news item targets a Creationist that even most other Creationists do not agree with. What point is there in putting this in the news, other then
to let the average atheist have another go at Creationism?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 04:18 PM by Legalizer
|
Does "athiest news" exist?
The christians around here use their empty faith for everything.
Often giving dead end advice for things they have no qualifications to be giving advice for.
They promote the existane of invisible entities as an explanation for anything that crosses their path.
It really makes this site look lame. "Deny ignorance" is turned into "ignore facts, embrace faith".
People have experience with sleep paralysis and these uneducated nut jobs start spouting stuff about demon attack. People report very obvious symptoms
of mental illness and the fanatics automatically start spouting "prayer is the answer" hogwash. People report the bizarre experiences they have in
organized religions and the zealots automatically go into denial mode.
This is the 21st century, not the 15th century. The earth is round, not flat.
Back on topic, this guy points to a cavern that was made in five months as proof that the world was created in six days, not only can he not
understand science but he can't discern time either.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 04:30 PM by Jakko
|
Originally posted by Legalizer
Does "athiest news" exist?
If you don't understand what I ment with that there's really no point in trying to explain it further.
The christians around here use their empty faith for everything.
Often giving dead end advice for things they have no qualifications to be giving advice for.
They promote the existane of invisible entities as an explanation for anything that crosses their path.
Some do, and some don't. Just like some ATSers see conspiracies in every single fart, and just like the UFO freaks think everything is caused by
aliens. Get used to it.
It really makes this site look lame. "Deny ignorance" is turned into "ignore facts, embrace faith".
Embracing faith does not mean ignoring facts. Once again, some christians act silly sometimes yes, I try not to.
People have experience with sleep paralysis and these uneducated nut jobs start spouting stuff about demon attack. People report very obvious
symptoms of mental illness and the fanatics automatically start spouting "prayer is the answer" hogwash. People report the bizarre experiences they
have in organized religions and the zealots automatically go into denial mode.
Generalising christians to be uneducated nut jobs, fanatics and zealots?
I am sure some christians qualify for those descriptions but not all, and generalising like this is lame.
This is the 21st century, not the 15th century. The earth is round, not flat.
Thanks for sharing that info, your help and contribution to the thread have been amazing.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 04:49 PM by James the Lesser
|
Legalizer, you said anything they don't like they go into denial, and look! Jakko is drowning in that river in Africa.
"Not all christians are like that." I am sure, just like not all Nazi's wanted to kill the Jews, they just weren't very many. When you watch
tv/read newspapers what do you see? Christians running around like chickend screaming the sky is falling when say, science again proves the bible to
be wrong, again. What? Earth isn't sitting on the back of a turtles shell? SKY IS FALLING!!!!! Or "Satan" is the answer. I mean, these are the
people who gave me "special rain" and "special sex" as answers!!!!! Science asks for proof, they use "special". Science PROVES something, they
go around screaming Satan and Sky is Falling.
You see, in science we have the P word, PROOF! In christianity they have the S word, SATAN! Dino fossils? SATAN! Oil? SATAN! Proof you are wrong?
SATAN!
Edit: spelling
[edit on 5-5-2005 by James the Lesser]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 5-5-2005 @ 05:00 PM by Jakko
|
Originally posted by James the Lesser
"Not all christians are like that." I am sure, just like not all Nazi's wanted to kill the Jews, they just weren't very many.
Wow, not sure what to reply James.
Looks like you just flamed yourself.
Can you get warned for that? hahaha
When you watch tv/read newspapers what do you see? Christians running around like chickend screaming the sky is falling when say, science
again proves the bible to be wrong, again.
No James, you only see this when you read the ATS news, as this thread once again shows us.
Quality news services know how to value "special" theories accordingly, may it be religious or non-religious, and ignore this kind of theories.
Of course ignoring this specific theory would spoil the fun of calling religious and christian people uneducated nutjobs, which is probably why it was
voted in in the first place.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
