Creationists using Mt. St. Helens to support the 6 day theory (from ATSNN), page 1
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 0 times
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 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 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.

Claim CH581
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 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.
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



EVOLUTION - Did YOU Know?
  Posted 19 days ago with 24 member flags
"I was raised an atheist"- Professor František Vyskočil
  Posted 9 days ago with 6 member flags
The meaning or point of existence or life
  Posted 12 days ago with 2 member flags
Sand Castles and Science
  Posted 11 days ago with 2 member flags