Looks like you are using an old version of Internet Explorer - Please update your browser
Baumgardner’s model is elegant, but contains many problems. The most serious seems to be assuming plate tectonics has been proven and too much uniformitarianism.
Taken together, the features of the Columbia River basalts suggest that they were mostly extruded and emplaced during the Late Abative Phase of the Recessive Stage of the Flood.
For creationists, the rocks and their associated ‘glacial diagnostic features’ can be explained very easily. They are the result of gigantic submarine landslides in a warm ocean in the Genesis Flood.
Michael Oard’s first contribution in this forum lays out a valid criticism of uniformitarian plate tectonics—namely the quantity and character of the sediments in the deep ocean trenches.
Catastrophic plate tectonics seems to be sped-up plate tectonics, a paradigm assumed too quickly and with many uniformitarian assumptions.
Uniformitarian scientists derive many more ‘annual layers’ in the Greenland ice cores than creationists because of their assumed old age time scale.
A farmer digging a snowmobile course accidentally unearthed one of the most remarkably-preserved plant fossil localities in the world.
More information is provided from the ocean floor on the uniformitarian assumptions that undergird his belief in plate tectonics.
We are being bombarded by numerous scientific reports describing the discovery of ‘living’ organisms or parts of organisms in ‘old’ rocks.
It is the Greenland Ice Sheet that exhibits annual cycles of one or more of the variables down an ice core.
Perhaps the most challenging aspect of the theory of evolution is the apparent consistency of its corollary, the long-age geological system.
For over 20 years, Lucy or Australopithecus afarensis has been considered one of our first ‘ancestors’, mainly because it supposedly walked upright.
A group of young-Earth researchers called RATE (Radioisotopes and the Age of The Earth) are investigating radioactive dating methods and developing alternative young-Earth explanations.
Have you ever wondered about those stone ‘tools’ that evolutionists discover?
Creationists are well aware that rocks are often dated by the fossils they contain.
Such a dramatic extension back in time for the eukaryotic cell raises even more questions for evolutionists regarding the evolution of life.
This bias against the plate tectonics paradigm has developed after examining the paradigm for 25 years. I find many serious problems with it that I have recently catalogued.
“Land of the Mammoth” on the Discovery Channel was a sequel to the show of last March in which mammoth researchers dug out what they thought was a frozen carcass encased in a block of icy mud.
For creationists, these reports of 'Early Paleolithic tools' raise questions that need further research.
What if the redshift of starlight is unrelated to the Doppler effect, i.e. the principle that relative motion changes the observed frequency of the light emitted from a light source?
Mammoth remains have puzzled scientists and laymen for hundreds of years.
A century ago, a shock went through the scientific community when a whaling crew reported finding fossil wood on the Antarctic Peninsula.
It would be great if we could know the actual three-dimensional distribution of the fossils in the earth. This would go a long way towards understanding their deposition during the Flood.
Evolutionary astronomers have great trouble accounting for the origin of the moon. There have generally been three competing hypotheses, but they all have serious physical problems.
No results found in .