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