Posted: Dec 07, 2014 11:58 am
The evolution of creationism: How creationism has evolved over the years from a geological perspective
I have just come across an interesting article that might well produce some discussion. It contains pearls such as the following:-
“Particularly compelling was Charles Lyell’s argument that the cinder cones of southern France were too fragile to have survived a global f lood. Deep valleys were incised into hard lava f lows that could be traced back to their volcanic source in the cinder cones. Thus, the valleys must have been carved after the cinder cones formed. Lyell reasoned that Noah’s Flood could not have carved the valleys because any flood capable of carving valleys into solid rock would have swept away the loose cinders that formed the volcanic cones.”
And;
“And yet, the geological case for a global flood that creationists offer as an alternative to evolution was discredited before Darwin set foot aboard the Beagle.”
And;
“Geologists assess theories by how well they fit data, and creationists evaluate facts by how well they fit their theories.”
And in conclusion;
“How many creationists today know that modern creationism arose from abandoning faith that the study of nature would reveal God’s grand design for the world?”
The evolution of creationism pdf
Well worth a read methinks.
In response to creationists posting lists containing historical examples of scientists that they claim to be of their own persuasion and insist that they are also creationists in an attempt at a fallacious appeal to authority I often claim that this is an anachronism, as in those times there were no creationists in the way that we use that term today. Modern creationism, as in someone who denies modern science cannot apply to an historical figure as it only appeared in it's modern form relatively recently. Applying the modern term creationist to those scientists who also happened to be religious and that believed in christianity and the biblical creation mythology I say is an anachronism.
This article really confirms this observation very well I thought.
Comments?...
I have just come across an interesting article that might well produce some discussion. It contains pearls such as the following:-
“Particularly compelling was Charles Lyell’s argument that the cinder cones of southern France were too fragile to have survived a global f lood. Deep valleys were incised into hard lava f lows that could be traced back to their volcanic source in the cinder cones. Thus, the valleys must have been carved after the cinder cones formed. Lyell reasoned that Noah’s Flood could not have carved the valleys because any flood capable of carving valleys into solid rock would have swept away the loose cinders that formed the volcanic cones.”
And;
“And yet, the geological case for a global flood that creationists offer as an alternative to evolution was discredited before Darwin set foot aboard the Beagle.”
And;
“Geologists assess theories by how well they fit data, and creationists evaluate facts by how well they fit their theories.”
And in conclusion;
“How many creationists today know that modern creationism arose from abandoning faith that the study of nature would reveal God’s grand design for the world?”
The evolution of creationism pdf
Well worth a read methinks.
In response to creationists posting lists containing historical examples of scientists that they claim to be of their own persuasion and insist that they are also creationists in an attempt at a fallacious appeal to authority I often claim that this is an anachronism, as in those times there were no creationists in the way that we use that term today. Modern creationism, as in someone who denies modern science cannot apply to an historical figure as it only appeared in it's modern form relatively recently. Applying the modern term creationist to those scientists who also happened to be religious and that believed in christianity and the biblical creation mythology I say is an anachronism.
This article really confirms this observation very well I thought.
Comments?...