Creation scientists

[Alan]

If I do, I will be left in the darkness I have chosen, as all who reject truth in favor of personal preferences are.

That may be true in some instances, but geology, genetics, biology, astronomy, etc will not make a person fall off a cliff. It's simply a matter of difference of opinion based on an individuals beliefs. 

[Texas Conservative]

That may be true in some instances, but geology, genetics, biology, astronomy, etc will not make a person fall off a cliff. It's simply a matter of difference of opinion based on an individuals beliefs.

People believe in "the Science."  So I wouldn't say that is entirely correct.  That's not the fault of geology, genetics, biology or astronomy, but your average uninformed atheist may still put their priests of science on a pedestal and religionize science like they did during Covid.

[Amo]

That may be true in some instances, but geology, genetics, biology, astronomy, etc will not make a person fall off a cliff. It's simply a matter of difference of opinion based on an individuals beliefs.

No sir. Throw a rock into a still pond, and watch the ripples. The decisions and choices we make, have far more reach and lasting effect, than can presently be observed. Not that we cannot already see the degrading and immoral effects of compromising the authority of the word of God, as other sources seek to take the place of it.

[Alan]

People believe in "the Science."  So I wouldn't say that is entirely correct.  That's not the fault of geology, genetics, biology or astronomy, but your average uninformed atheist may still put their priests of science on a pedestal and religionize science like they did during Covid.

That's a common occurrence, people don't want to believe in one thing so they tend to cling to another, without ever trying to understand what it is that they believe. 

[Alan]

No sir. Throw a rock into a still pond, and watch the ripples. The decisions and choices we make, have far more reach and lasting effect, than can presently be observed. Not that we cannot already see the degrading and immoral effects of compromising the authority of the word of God, as other sources seek to take the place of it.

I disagree, people are turning molehills into mountains that basically mean zip in the bigger picture. 

[Amo]

I disagree, people are turning molehills into mountains that basically mean zip in the bigger picture.

No sir. Government mandates regarding faulty scientific claims effecting the lives of countless millions, are not molehills. Nor are fear mongering politics regarding faulty scientific theory or observation, also effecting the lives of countless millions who are either deceived by such, or forced into going along with the faulty policies put in place to address these created crisis. Nor is it a trifling matter when anyone believes that which turns out to be false , as so very many supposedly "scientific" claims have been throughout history. To the contrary, both those who speak such lies and those who believe them, are in danger.

Mat 12:36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. 37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

[Alan]

No sir. Government mandates regarding faulty scientific claims effecting the lives of countless millions, are not molehills. Nor are fear mongering politics regarding faulty scientific theory or observation, also effecting the lives of countless millions who are either deceived by such, or forced into going along with the faulty policies put in place to address these created crisis. Nor is it a trifling matter when anyone believes that which turns out to be false , as so very many supposedly "scientific" claims have been throughout history. To the contrary, both those who speak such lies and those who believe them, are in danger.

Mat 12:36 But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. 37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned.

That's the line in the sand you have drawn, I do not personally believe we are held to any kind of standard when it comes to deciphering historic biblical accounts, especially ones that have parallel accounts in other religions that predate biblical accounts as we know them. 

What science has discovered is very real, what might not be very accurate is the way some interpret the creation account. 

[Hobie]

That's the line in the sand you have drawn, I do not personally believe we are held to any kind of standard when it comes to deciphering historic biblical accounts, especially ones that have parallel accounts in other religions that predate biblical accounts as we know them.

What science has discovered is very real, what might not be very accurate is the way some interpret the creation account.

So if Creation is supported by evidence it must be ignored, but unsupported theories are OK to be taught as fact. Talk about the issues it brings up to say nothing of indoctrination being given to the young minds..

[4WD]

So if Creation is supported by evidence it must be ignored, but unsupported theories are OK to be taught as fact. Talk about the issues it brings up to say nothing of indoctrination being given to the young minds..

There is no actual scientific evidence that the universe or the earth is only thousands of years old.

[Amo]

That's the line in the sand you have drawn, I do not personally believe we are held to any kind of standard when it comes to deciphering historic biblical accounts, especially ones that have parallel accounts in other religions that predate biblical accounts as we know them.

What science has discovered is very real, what might not be very accurate is the way some interpret the creation account.

While I disagree with your above statement, it is not even related to what I was addressing in the post you were responding to. I was referring to the false politicized scientific claims concerning Covid, vaccine, and Climate change related mandates. People are told to follow the very shaky sciences so called, related to these issues and more, which scientists themselves do not yet agree upon either.

Millions are seriously effected by these mandates built upon basically unverified highly debated "science", by politicians and or religious leaders who have prematurely chosen a side on the issues. Who also staunchly support forced compliance to personally, institutionally, and nationally harmful mandates based upon faulty science largely concerning the unknown.

This is apart from our long standing debate regarding deep time evolution being taught as scientific fact. Which of course, if it be false, has also had serious negative effects upon countless millions. Not to mention historical negative effects we already know it has had. 

[Amo]

There is no actual scientific evidence that the universe or the earth is only thousands of years old.

No there is not, saving the very large amount of evidence which confirms biblical accounts, thereby boosting faith in the bibles testimony. Just like there is no actual scientific evidence that the universe is millions of years old, which is not built upon certain presumptions about the past and or original conditions which cannot be known from this point in history. Presumptions to the effect, that we may be able to understand the unseen or recorded past, by presuming we can extrapolate observations relating to the present. But the holy scriptures warn of the dangers and delusional conclusions such would lead to, and quite frankly have lead to.

2Pe 3:2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour: 3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men. 8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. 11 Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness, 12 Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat? 13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

[4WD]

No there is not, saving the very large amount of evidence which confirms biblical accounts, thereby boosting faith in the bibles testimony.

There is no lack of evidence confirming biblical truth. However, that evidence is not typically scientific evidence, but rather historical evidence.

Just like there is no actual scientific evidence that the universe is millions of years old, which is not built upon certain presumptions about the past and or original conditions which cannot be known from this point in history. Presumptions to the effect, that we may be able to understand the unseen or recorded past, by presuming we can extrapolate observations relating to the present.

There is a preponderance of actual scientific evidence that the universe is billions of years old. You just do not accept it. But that is not surprising, since you have no idea what it is and what it means. And the real pity is that you are determined to keep it that way.  That you actually make ignorance about such things a test of fellowship for faithful believers in God is abhorrent.

But the holy scriptures warn of the dangers and delusional conclusions such would lead to, and quite frankly have lead to.

There is absolutely nothing in 2 Peter 3 that says that the ignorance you display about such things is needful, useful or a requirement for God's people.

[Amo]

There is no lack of evidence confirming biblical truth. However, that evidence is not typically scientific evidence, but rather historical evidence.

Yes, there is a very large amount of historical scientific evidence which confirms biblical accounts such as the flood. As in mass fossil graveyards all over the earth highly suggestive of at least one extinction level event which included the distribution of dead things all over the earth by water. This is scientific as well as historical evidence. To mention just one type of evidence which may qualify as historical and scientific at the same time. Being an event which obviously occurred in the past, leaving much physical evidence to be examined and our tested as well.

There is a preponderance of actual scientific evidence that the universe is billions of years old. You just do not accept it. But that is not surprising, since you have no idea what it is and what it means. And the real pity is that you are determined to keep it that way.  That you actually make ignorance about such things a test of fellowship for faithful believers in God is abhorrent.

Your faulty accusation above is built upon the same kind of faulty presumptions which you take for granted, concerning the theories you ascribe to as "scientific" facts. You presume, the presumptions the scientists you have chosen to believe make, are correct. Such will never amount to actual scientific evidence though.

You sir, have no idea what exactly I understand or comprehend or not. Though you presume that you do. People can believe whatever they wish about the God of holy scripture, or simply God, or no God at all if they wish. I do not demand ignorance of any kind regarding such, save holy scripture itself if they are unaware of its testimony. Disagreeing with you or the scientists whom you believe, is not demanding ignorance from anyone. To the contrary, those who demand all that disagree with them are necessarily ignorant for doing so, are demanding the same. As you are.

I do not think you are ignorant at all concerning what the scientists you ascribe to believe and or teach. I simply disagree with their views and therefore yours as well. You are the one continually subscribing ignorance to those who believe as I do, in disagreement with your chosen views. My claim is that your views contradict what the scriptures plainly state, not that you are ignorant regarding what you have chosen to believe. To the contrary, you obviously know it well.

The scriptures themselves do however, claim willing ignorance upon those who take certain views regarding past events described in the bible, which it seems to me your views align with. Do you not believe that scientists can accurately predict or extrapolate events of the past, based upon that which they can now observe around them? Yes, most if not all of the dating  methods used today, are dependent upon presumptions concerning what can be observed around us at present, and the past. While scripture conclusively states that this is a mistake, because the world that was before our present world, was most obviously very different from the world now.

These biblical truths are not hard to understand, and it is not ignorance to believe there testimony. Even though strangely enough, you contest that we cannot even know what holy scripture right in front of our faces means, while easily understanding exactly what happened according to you billions of years ago. Go figure.

There is absolutely nothing in 2 Peter 3 that says that the ignorance you display about such things is needful, useful or a requirement for God's people.

Yes, you do constantly state that I am ignorant, yet the scriptures are more specific about a certain group of people that are actually ignorant.

2 Pe 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. 5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:

Peter says that the original world which God created perished by way of a flood, which no doubt refers to the flood of the book of Genesis. Which book also states several times over, the global extent of that destruction. I do not deny this to be true, I believe this testimony, do you? No doubt you do not believe the above quoted scriptures can be rightly understood at present, or that it does not mean what I and so many others believe it does. As ignorant as we are in your eyes of course. Please do then, explain just what you do think it means. Thank you.

[4WD]

Yes, there is a very large amount of historical scientific evidence which confirms biblical accounts such as the flood.

There is scientific evidence of floods in many parts of the earth.  There is no scientific evidence of a single global flood.

As in mass fossil graveyards all over the earth highly suggestive of at least one extinction level event which included the distribution of dead things all over the earth by water.

There is no scientific evidence of such an extinction level event a few thousand years ago, the biblical dating of the flood of Noah.

Your faulty accusation above is built upon the same kind of faulty presumptions which you take for granted, concerning the theories you ascribe to as "scientific" facts. You presume, the presumptions the scientists you have chosen to believe make, are correct. Such will never amount to actual scientific evidence though.

Given your lack of knowledge and understanding of all things scientific, you must forgive me if I don't agree with what you think amounts actual scientific evidence.

You sir, have no idea what exactly I understand or comprehend or not. Though you presume that you do.

That is true.  All I can go on is what you post here.  And all such clearly indicates that  your understanding and comprehension of all things scientific is minimal at best.

I do not think you are ignorant at all concerning what the scientists you ascribe to believe and or teach. I simply disagree with their views and therefore yours as well. You are the one continually subscribing ignorance to those who believe as I do, in disagreement with your chosen views.

No I do not subscribe ignorance to those who believe as you do. I do subscribe ignorance to those who try to claim that science in any way supports that belief.

My claim is that your views contradict what the scriptures plainly state, not that you are ignorant regarding what you have chosen to believe.

Your claim of what the scriptures plainly state is the real contention here; that and your belief that there is any scientific support for that claim.

The scriptures themselves do however, claim willing ignorance upon those who take certain views regarding past events described in the bible, which it seems to me your views align with. Do you not believe that scientists can accurately predict or extrapolate events of the past, based upon that which they can now observe around them? Yes, most if not all of the dating  methods used today, are dependent upon presumptions concerning what can be observed around us at present, and the past. While scripture conclusively states that this is a mistake, because the world that was before our present world, was most obviously very different from the world now.

No, the world that was before our present world (before about 5000 BC) was not obviously different from the world now. There is no scientific information and data that supports such an idea.

Peter says that the original world which God created perished by way of a flood, which no doubt refers to the flood of the book of Genesis. Which book also states several times over, the global extent of that destruction.

And here we see one of the problems.  The book of Genesis does not even once state the global extent of the flood.  That idea comes only from your interpretation of the Hebrew word "erets". The idea of a global earth was not even a concept to the ancient Hebrew.

Speaking of 2 Peter 3:6, you said.

I do not deny this to be true, I believe this testimony, do you? No doubt you do not believe the above quoted scriptures can be rightly understood at present, or that it does not mean what I and so many others believe it does. As ignorant as we are in your eyes of course. Please do then, explain just what you do think it means. Thank you.

I don't doubt it to be true either. I certainly believe Peter's testimony.  I do not believe it actually says what you say it does.  I do not believe Peter's reference to "the world" translates to "the global earth".  And I certainly do not think that Peter's statement that "the world perished" translates to "the global earth ceased to exist".

And I am also positive that there is no scientific support for what you believe.

[Amo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pVTl1YvtPFI

Good one about dinosaurs.

[Amo]

There is scientific evidence of floods in many parts of the earth.  There is no scientific evidence of a single global flood.

Two can play this game. There is scientific evidence of a global flood all over the world, and many other smaller ones since then as well. You simply deny or refuse to acknowledge any evidence which contradicts your chosen narrative.

There is no scientific evidence of such an extinction level event a few thousand years ago, the biblical dating of the flood of Noah.

Yes there is. It is all over the world. You simply ignore it for the reason already stated.

Given your lack of knowledge and understanding of all things scientific, you must forgive me if I don't agree with what you think amounts actual scientific evidence.

No problem, you are forgiven. Given your proclivity to arrogance concerning the topic at hand, you must forgive me for not agreeing with your false claims that there is no evidence for a global flood. The many scientists who see the same evidence I do, and believe as I do, are not one but inferior in knowledge or learning as yourself or those "scientists" you ascribe to.

That is true.  All I can go on is what you post here.  And all such clearly indicates that  your understanding and comprehension of all things scientific is minimal at best.

Yes, I understand your arrogance concerning the subject at hand. Since you have demonstrated it many times over, in repeating the likes of the above. As I have stated in response before, insults are no argument at all, simply a sign of the lack thereof.

No I do not subscribe ignorance to those who believe as you do. I do subscribe ignorance to those who try to claim that science in any way supports that belief.

You're right, you do not subscribe ignorance to me or any other I reckon. I used the wrong word or auto spelling did it. I meant ascribe, not subscribe. The problem with your above statement, is that what I believe is in agreement with many others whom I am quite sure are more educated than yourself regarding science in general, let alone more specific fields. You are of course free to be arrogant enough to consider them all ignorant for not agreeing with you. Such is however, no argument, just an arrogant claim.

Your claim of what the scriptures plainly state is the real contention here; that and your belief that there is any scientific support for that claim.

The scriptures do in fact plainly and exactly state, what I claim they state. You just believe they do not mean exactly what they plainly state. Shall I quote them again, and we can examine who really is demonstrating comprehension problems? The scriptures do not state what you believe anywhere at all. Plainly, or otherwise. Nor will you ever attempt to explain how exactly they mean what you believe. As I have asked of you many times.

No, the world that was before our present world (before about 5000 BC) was not obviously different from the world now. There is no scientific information and data that supports such an idea.

Yes, there is everywhere, you simply deny it as already stated. You simply refuse the biblical time narrative in favor of the deep time narratives of your chosen prophets, whom you place above those of the scriptures. Not one of whom ever even begins to state what you believe anywhere in scripture at all. All Scientists that I know of acknowledge a very different world in the past, they disagree upon how long that past extends.

And here we see one of the problems.  The book of Genesis does not even once state the global extent of the flood.  That idea comes only from your interpretation of the Hebrew word "erets". The idea of a global earth was not even a concept to the ancient Hebrew.

And now we shall address your comprehension issues by examining what the scripture plainly state, which you refuse to acknowledge.

Gen 6:5 And GOD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart. 7 And the LORD said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth; both man, and beast, and the creeping thing, and the fowls of the air; for it repenteth me that I have made them............
12 And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.
13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth..............
17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die..........
Gen 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth............
Gen 7:17 And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up above the earth. 18 And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. 19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. 20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered. 21 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: 22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. 23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
Gen 7:24  And the waters prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days.............
Gen 8:20  And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. 21 And the LORD smelled a sweet savour; and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done. 22 While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.................
Gen 9:9 And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you; 10 And with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth. 11 And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth. 12 And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations: 13 I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth. 14 And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud: 15 And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh. 16 And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth. 17 And God said unto Noah, This is the token of the covenant, which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth.

2Pe 2:5 And spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood upon the world of the ungodly;

2Pe 3:5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: 6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

You will have to forgive me of course, if I do not think I am the one between us, that has comprehension issues.

I don't doubt it to be true either. I certainly believe Peter's testimony.  I do not believe it actually says what you say it does.  I do not believe Peter's reference to "the world" translates to "the global earth".  And I certainly do not think that Peter's statement that "the world perished" translates to "the global earth ceased to exist".

No brother. Peter says exactly what I believe he meant. This is the plain and simple fact right in front of your face. It is not about what I say he said, it is about exactly what he said, according to every translator I know of. Those you know of as well apparently, since I have asked you to please present any translation which writes it differently, and you have not. Peter doesn't say what I say he said, he says what every translator ever, has translated what he said. Again, this is a comprehension problem on your part, not mine. It is there in writing for all to see. You just choose not to believe what it plainly states. Giving another interpretation than any translator has ever given it.

And I am also positive that there is no scientific support for what you believe.

As I and many others are positive that you are wrong. None of whom are ignorant because they disagree with you.

[Alan]

Amo, we've been through this countless times. There is not a single scientist outside of religious bias that would ever counter the theory of evolution or the age of the Earth. No secular geologists have ever agreed that there was once a flood that covered the entire Earth or that the continents were connected within the last 10,000 years. These are blatantly absurd claims manifested by religious zealots in an attempt to fill the holes in their faith. 
Your veneration toward a literal, word for word, English translation of the Genesis account is an example of ignorance. 
I appreciate your faith, your ignorance, not so much. 

[Texas Conservative]

There is not a single scientist outside of religious bias that would ever counter the theory of evolution or the age of the Earth.

There is not a single scientist that doesn't have a religious bias.  With this line of thinking, only those who identify as secular/agnostic/atheist can have their opinions/papers/evidence looked at. 

No secular geologists have ever agreed that there was once a flood that covered the entire Earth or that the continents were connected within the last 10,000 years.

Once again, dangerous, faulty thinking. 

These are blatantly absurd claims manifested by religious zealots in an attempt to fill the holes in their faith.
Your veneration toward a literal, word for word, English translation of the Genesis account is an example of ignorance.
I appreciate your faith, your ignorance, not so much.

I think this is a bit of a stretch to refer to people as religious zealots because they disagree with you.

[4WD]

There is not a single scientist that doesn't have a religious bias. 

But that may or may not have anything at all to do with their not countering the standard science of the issue at hand.

With this line of thinking, only those who identify as secular/agnostic/atheist can have their opinions/papers/evidence looked at.

That is not true.

I think this is a bit of a stretch to refer to people as religious zealots because they disagree with you.

I could be wrong, but I don't think he was referring to those as religious zealots because they disagree with him. He identified specifically who he was referring to.  It was those who he felt "were attempting to fill the holes in their faith".

[Amo]

Amo, we've been through this countless times. There is not a single scientist outside of religious bias that would ever counter the theory of evolution or the age of the Earth. No secular geologists have ever agreed that there was once a flood that covered the entire Earth or that the continents were connected within the last 10,000 years. These are blatantly absurd claims manifested by religious zealots in an attempt to fill the holes in their faith.
Your veneration toward a literal, word for word, English translation of the Genesis account is an example of ignorance.
I appreciate your faith, your ignorance, not so much.

Yes, neither ignorance or arrogance are traits to be appreciated. Neither of us appreciates the one we conclude the other manifests. In any case, looks like I found one of those scientists you said there never has been.

https://answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2009/02/18/evolutionist-turned-creationist/

Quoted article below from link above.

Evolutionist Turned Creationist

Over the years, I have met many people who turned from being an evolutionist to believing in God's Word in Genesis and becoming a biblical creationist (and for many non-Christians, becoming Christians through God using "creation evangelism"). One such former evolutionist—a geotechnical expert—visited the Creation Museum this week.

We're discovering that many businessmen who take business trips by plane across the country are stopping by our Cincinnati metropolitan area for a few hours to visit the Creation Museum, and then they return to the airport (or get a rental car) and continue on their journey. That was the case of ministry friend Dr. Bill Kane who visited on Monday while in Kentucky and Tennessee for business and some pleasure.

Dr. Kane has a fascinating testimony. He has a PhD in civil engineering from Virginia Tech University—that's where one of the pioneers of the modern creationist movement, Dr. Henry Morris, taught in the 1960s (as the head of the same civil engineering department Dr. Kane attended). As an expert in rock mechanics and someone who conducts geotechnical research (most of it while as a thorough-going evolutionist and non-Christian in his professional life), Dr. Kane had heard of Dr. Morris's classic 1961 book The Genesis Flood on Flood geology.

Even back in the 1970s as a non-Christian, he was trying to get a copy of the book so that he could find out for himself what this intriguing-sounding text about geology was all about (he heard something vague about it—perhaps at Virginia Tech). Finally, in the mid 1990s, he found a copy, and as he slowly became a creationist and gave up evolution and long ages (this is a man who is a professional geotechnical researcher), he also became a Christian (in 1997).

Dr. Kane is now an on-fire creationist and an avid AiG booster. As he travels the world, he plainly sees the effects of the global Flood around the globe (occurring about 4,400 years ago). He now rejects the time line of an earth millions of years old (though he taught such things at a few universities over the years). While he is not involved in geologic lecturing and research on a campus today, he is out in the field practicing geotechnology (e.g., helping avoid landslides along the Pacific coast).

Dr. Kane also teaches courses on creation and apologetics at his church in central California and holds a Bible study where AiG DVDs are shown. In fact, the day that Mark Looy of our staff visited him in his office last December, a shipment of AiG DVDs arrived in his lobby as they were speaking (it included our co-produced DVD on global warming, which he thought was excellent).

[Amo]

Amo, we've been through this countless times. There is not a single scientist outside of religious bias that would ever counter the theory of evolution or the age of the Earth. No secular geologists have ever agreed that there was once a flood that covered the entire Earth or that the continents were connected within the last 10,000 years. These are blatantly absurd claims manifested by religious zealots in an attempt to fill the holes in their faith.
Your veneration toward a literal, word for word, English translation of the Genesis account is an example of ignorance.
I appreciate your faith, your ignorance, not so much.

The following video also appears to contradict your testimony.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owDOD7WZvEw

[Amo]

https://www.wayoflife.org/database/from_evolution_to_creation_lumsden.html

Oops. Another link about another converted scientist.

[Amo]

https://creation.com/jon-ahlquist

Oops, another one.

[Amo]

https://thenewamerican.com/us/tech/over-1-000-scientists-openly-dissent-from-evolution-theory/

Over 1,000 Scientists Openly Dissent From Evolution Theory

[Amo]

https://www.discovery.org/a/2732/

Ranks of Scientists Doubting Darwin�'s Theory on the Rise

[Amo]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FxhF6HREEw

Let's not forget the flood expert that was covered by the evidence.

[4WD]

https://thenewamerican.com/us/tech/over-1-000-scientists-openly-dissent-from-evolution-theory/

Over 1,000 Scientists Openly Dissent From Evolution Theory

That is all very interesting, but I am not sure what it proves. You want to see significance in the fact that there are over 1,000 scientists dissenting.  But for every dissenting scientist there are probably 10 or 20 scientists who advocate for it.  So the question must be asked is why the number of 1,000 dissenters is significant and an order of magnitude larger number of advocators not.

The real problem in all of this is that neither you nor I have the requisite technical knowledge to make a rational decision about the credibility of either the dissenter or the advocator.

Finally, I will state one more time here that I neither advocate for nor dissent from biological evolution.  I am convinced that if God chose to make any form of evolution a part of His creation, He would have had no trouble doing

[4WD]

https://www.discovery.org/a/2732/

Ranks of Scientists Doubting Darwin�'s Theory on the Rise

Is there a difference between Darwin's theory and modern evolutionary theory?

https://www.discovery.org/a/2732/

Ranks of Scientists Doubting Darwin�'s Theory on the Rise

There was nothing in that article that would support your  ideas about it. It only suggested that the current Darwinian approach was inadequate.  There was no alternative theory presented.

[4WD]

If I do, I will be left in the darkness I have chosen, as all who reject truth in favor of personal preferences are.

Who is to say that what you think about such things are anything more than personal preference also?

[4WD]

Yes, I know you have very little faith, concerning many things which God's word plainly states.

Not true at all.  I have very little faith in your interpretation of what is stated plainly in God's word.

[Amo]

https://www.livescience.com/space/cosmology/james-webb-telescope-confirms-there-is-something-seriously-wrong-with-our-understanding-of-the-universe

Article below from link above.

James Webb telescope confirms there is something seriously wrong with our understanding of the universe

Depending on where we look, the universe is expanding at different rates. Now, scientists using the James Webb and Hubble space telescopes have confirmed that the observation is not down to a measurement error.

Astronomers have used the James Webb and Hubble space telescopes to confirm one of the most troubling conundrums in all of physics — that the universe appears to be expanding at bafflingly different speeds depending on where we look.

This problem, known as the Hubble Tension, has the potential to alter or even upend cosmology altogether. In 2019, measurements by the Hubble Space Telescope confirmed the puzzle was real; in 2023, even more precise measurements from the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) cemented the discrepancy.

Now, a triple-check by both telescopes working together appears to have put the possibility of any measurement error to bed for good. The study, published February 6 in the Astrophysical Journal Letters, suggests that there may be something seriously wrong with our understanding of the universe.

"With measurement errors negated, what remains is the real and exciting possibility we have misunderstood the universe," lead study author Adam Riess, professor of physics and astronomy at Johns Hopkins University, said in a statement.

Reiss, Saul Perlmutter and Brian P. Schmidt won the 2011 Nobel Prize in physics for their 1998 discovery of dark energy, the mysterious force behind the universe's accelerating expansion.

Currently, there are two "gold-standard" methods for figuring out the Hubble constant, a value that describes the expansion rate of the universe. The first involves poring over tiny fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) — an ancient relic of the universe's first light produced just 380,000 years after the Big Bang.

Between 2009 and 2013, astronomers mapped out this microwave fuzz using the European Space Agency's Planck satellite to infer a Hubble constant of roughly 46,200 mph per million light-years, or roughly 67 kilometers per second per megaparsec (km/s/Mpc).

The second method uses pulsating stars called Cepheid variables. Cepheid stars are dying, and their outer layers of helium gas grow and shrink as they absorb and release the star's radiation, making them periodically flicker like distant signal lamps.

As Cepheids get brighter, they pulsate more slowly, giving astronomers a means to measure their absolute brightness. By comparing this brightness to their observed brightness, astronomers can chain Cepheids into a "cosmic distance ladder" to peer ever deeper into the universe's past. With this ladder in place, astronomers can find a precise number for its expansion from how the Cepheids' light has been stretched out, or red-shifted.

[4WD]

https://www.livescience.com/space/cosmology/james-webb-telescope-confirms-there-is-something-seriously-wrong-with-our-understanding-of-the-universe

Article below from link above.

So what is your point? The Hubble Constant as measured by data from the Hubble Telescope has been confirmed by data as measured by the James Webb Space Telescope.

All of this has only confirmed with greater accuracy the age of the universe even older than previously thought.

[Alan]

Amo, people that have turned to Christianity fall right into that same category of religious bias, it isn't some revelation about actual science but rather fideism to support their new-found beliefs. 

[Alan]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FxhF6HREEw

Let's not forget the flood expert that was covered by the evidence.

Only historical in evidence in many countries has no record of a flood, they have history that predates the supposed global flood, and history afterward to modern day. That just does not coincide with the global flood concept. 

[Alan]

So if Creation is supported by evidence it must be ignored, but unsupported theories are OK to be taught as fact. Talk about the issues it brings up to say nothing of indoctrination being given to the young minds..

What is being taught to our youth is based on evidence and facts, this is what we have been debating about for years. There is zero evidence for many of Genesis creation accounts.