Skip to main content

Creationists and the Ice Age(s)

One of the newer features on the Answers in Genesis website purports to explain the phenomena of ice ages (or, in their view, the single ice age allowed by their reading of Scripture). Just like any good creationist argument, they see a gap in the understanding of modern science and rush to fill it in a perfect "God of the Gaps" moment.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/ee2/ice-age

Pointing out that so-called "secular" science doesn't have a good mechanism to explain the "on-off" switch of repeated ice ages, the creationists throw the Bible as a wedge to get into the door, positing that the aftermath of the Flood is a good mechanism to explain the single ice age that they accept as having occurred. The Flood, as one might expect, put a lot of moisture into the air which allowed for the formation of great glaciers, and the tectonic shifts that accompanied the aftermath of the Flood served as the actual trigger for an ice age, which conveniently exposed land bridges and allowed for the full migration of the animal survivors.

While critical of an evolutionary understanding of earth's geologic past (multiple ice ages are said to rely on an old earth and ultimately reinforce each other without evidence), this article demonstrates the same sort of reliance. The Flood story is taken as true, without evidence, and used to base the author's understanding of why an ice age would occur. There is no evidence of a Noachian deluge, and to use that as evidence for what follows is unsupportable. The second baseless assumption is a delightful piece of mental gymnastics; tectonic activity occurred at a very rapid pace, far faster than today, in order to allow for animal migration after the Flood to all continents. Then the rapid movement of the continents put them where they are at today. There is similarly no evidence that tectonic activity, the motion of the continents, was ever any faster than it is today, a pace that makes even the term "glacial" seem speedy by comparison.

The two assumptions needed in the creationist mindset to trigger an ice age are thus baseless and they are left with nothing. The creationists at Answers in Genesis display their usual mental contortions and basic lack of scientific understanding as they continue to carve out an alternative reality from whole cloth.

Comments

  1. These folks are willfully ignorant of the vast literature that exists about the causes and timings of the ice ages, both the most modern and those throughout the past billion or so years. As someone once said...there are none so blind as those who will not see. This level of self-delusion would be comical if it weren't behind some of the nastiest political activities in the country today.

    ReplyDelete
  2. How come Australia got all the cool kangaroos and kola bears and the rest of the world didn't?

    ReplyDelete
  3. This post and the above two comments are a delight for me to read that this point in the evening (2259, to run against the suspected false time stamp).

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Today I Am Ashamed of My Alma Mater

Over a week ago, my alma mater, Clarion University of Pennsylvania, released what it touted as a "bold" and "ambitious" workforce plan for the next several years. The backlash was both strong and immediate, forcing the University Administration, currently headed by President Karen Whitney, to release a " Frequently Asked Questions " for its plan. The outrage on social media, as well as a MoveOn.org petition with several thousand signatures, doubtless have already channeled the displeasure of the community, alumni, and students with the plan. The University is accepting public feedback, but this seems to be only a political window-dressing for a plan that Whitney herself was  quoted  as saying "...is 95-98% a done deal." For over a week I debated over what form a blog on the topic would take, and while I realize that what I have to say here is little different from what I and others have already stated elsewhere, I feel the need to address thi...

How I Left Creationism

There is a discussion going on right now in the science community about whether or not we should debate creationists: it is a debate within a debate, if you will. There are good arguments on both sides, but I have to think that we should debate creationists, and we should do it as often as we can stand it. Why do I think this? Last week, I saw that Michael Shermer posted a link to a story of a woman who argued this very point. As a former creationist, it was going to debates between Shermer and Kent Hovind that began to convince her of the legitimacy of evolution and of science. I too was once a creationist. Without ever having read anything about it, without it ever having been mentioned in class (I never heard a word about evolution in high school), I was ready to pounce at the merest mention of the topic as false and godless, two of the favorite creationist talking-points. I look back at this self in amazement, at how ignorant and proud of that ignorance I was, how I failed to ...

What Creationists Don't Understand

There are quite a number of concepts that one could successfully argue that creationists fail to understand; whether this is out of a simple lack of knowledge or willful ignorance is hard to say and certainly can't be generalized to every creationist. Some, the everyday creationist, I would like to think simply haven't been exposed to the evidence. Others, the holders of Ph.D's in various fields, especially in the sciences, who happily reject evolutionary theory are willfully ignorant (John Whitmore comes to mind). But I think there is one idea that creationists of all stripes simply fail to understand; evolution is based on solid, visible evidence. Evolution is not some tenant of a "science religion" that descended down to Darwin from on high, it is an explanatory framework based on quite a lot of facts and mountains of evidence. It is evidence that leads to the conclusions of evolution, that life changes over time and, given the long history of the earth, all ...