Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 exptools 1/6/84; site ihuxr.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!ihuxr!lew From: lew@ihuxr.UUCP (Lew Mammel, Jr.) Newsgroups: net.misc Subject: Creationism considered falsifiable Message-ID: <957@ihuxr.UUCP> Date: Tue, 6-Mar-84 15:32:57 EST Article-I.D.: ihuxr.957 Posted: Tue Mar 6 15:32:57 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 7-Mar-84 07:47:54 EST Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Naperville, IL Lines: 22 I disagree that creationism is unfalsifiable. It is true that many appeals are made to divine initiation of events, but these are supposed to have developed according to natural laws. I refer of course to the Flood. As a matter of fact, in the 1700's geological strata were widely held to be a record of Noah's Flood. Closer scrutiny of the geology showed this view to be untenable. By 1820 Lyell was able to remark concerning the diluvialists (creationists), "We have fairly driven them out of the Mosaic record." I quoted the whole letter of his which contains this remark in a net posting some time ago. I would comment that the diluvialists were scientific in their views since they modified their model to try to accommodate the accumulating evidence. This usually meant adding more floods and catastrophes to account for obviously distinct episodes of rock formation. Today's creationists simply gloss the entire issue of geological strata with wildly implausible assertions about their formation (cf. Morris, SCIENTIFIC CREATIONISM, chapter V) Lew Mammel, Jr. ihnp4!ihuxr!lew