Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site philabs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!godot!harvard!seismo!cmcl2!philabs!jah
From: jah@philabs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.origins
Subject: Re: Question on scientific creationism theory and The Flood
Message-ID: <204@philabs.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 2-Jan-85 13:51:57 EST
Article-I.D.: philabs.204
Posted: Wed Jan  2 13:51:57 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 5-Jan-85 01:41:48 EST
References: <418@mhuxt.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Philips Labs, Briarcliff Manor, NY
Lines: 38

> 
> 
>     Several times, in the last year or so, I've heard statements about
> flood hydrodynamics, and a (generally bogus sounding) arguement about
> hydrological sorting during the flood as a mechanism to explain the ordering
> of fossils in the geological column.  This leads me to believe that
> creationists generally support the idea of  a worldwide flood.  However,
> this seems to be in direct conflict with what has been stated on the net
> as the 'scientific creationism' theory.
>     What conflict?  Well, the theory, as it was stated, allowed for a
> period of time before the ordinary laws of physics were put into effect
> during which 'God' created the earth, tweaked the level of radiation
> in rocks which He wanted to appear old, and all of the other things which
> he would have had to do to make the world seem so much older than 10K years.
> After this period of time, things were supposed to be run according to
> constant physical 'laws'.
>    But, (yes, he's going to ask that embarassing question) WHAT HAPPENED TO
> ALL OF THE WATER?  Enough to cover the highest mountains!  More than the
> oceans contain by quite a lot.  Absolutely stupendous quantities of water
> just missing.  
>    Unless you can come up with an alternative, it looks as though you'll have
> to modify youre theory to include a SECOND period during which this 'God'
> entity you theorize suspended physical law in order to do away with the
> excess water he'd used to drown his creations.                   
>    My, this theory is getting messy.  But at least it explains some of
> the really BIG pieces of evidence.   
>    Yessiree, folks.  It was all done with mirror-cles.
> 
> Jeff Sonntag
> ihnp4!mhuxt!js2j

What about the fossils in the sides of the mountains??  Either the mountains
rose or the water did; cause as far as I know, fish don't fly.  And if they
did, they'd have to hit pretty hard to get into the sides of those mountains
like that.  How much radiation is there in *those* BIG rocks???

Julie Harazduk
philabs!jah