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