What's most amusing about creationists is not the "big lie" approach that they often take, but the approach to propaganda that mingles some aspects of truth freely with lies. So it is with the "Creation Moment" extolling evidence for a tropical arctic as proof of the veracity of "Biblical geology."
http://www.creationmoments.com/radio/transcripts/tropical-arctic
The act of mixing truth with lies also makes them more dangerous than they normally are, for they can come off as educated and reasonable when they cite mainstream sources of information rather than any publication from among the collective back-patting of creationist circles. There really was a tropical arctic, and in fact during the age of dinosaurs and the early age of mammals the earth was truly much hotter than it is today, what geologist Donald Prothero referred to as the "Greenhouse of the Dinosaurs."
The article asserts that this means that earth's temperature was much more uniform than it is today (that seems rather likely), and that on this both the Bible and geology agree. Shameless. If you want to make that claim, surely one is obliged to provide the necessary references from Scripture? No matter how badly this person interprets whatever verses he believes back this claim up (and believe me, I have read every word in the Bible at least twice and nowhere was I given the same impression as the author gets), he is at least obliged to mention them.
What's more, the author latches on to the assertion of science that Alaska experienced a massive flood, holding it triumphantly up as proof of the veracity of the Genesis account. He (or she) declares that it is clear now that geology must be reorganized to conform with the history of the Bible.
Except it doesn't follow that because there was a localized flood at some point in the history of Alaska ergo the worldwide Flood of Noah is a reality.
The warmth of previous ages, warmth that allowed the dinosaurs to inhabit parts of what is now the far north, even Antarctica, speaks to the great length of earth history and the movements of the continents over millions of years, along with the greater concentrations of carbon and methane in the environment. Bad arguments do not the truth of creationism validate.
http://www.creationmoments.com/radio/transcripts/tropical-arctic
The act of mixing truth with lies also makes them more dangerous than they normally are, for they can come off as educated and reasonable when they cite mainstream sources of information rather than any publication from among the collective back-patting of creationist circles. There really was a tropical arctic, and in fact during the age of dinosaurs and the early age of mammals the earth was truly much hotter than it is today, what geologist Donald Prothero referred to as the "Greenhouse of the Dinosaurs."
The article asserts that this means that earth's temperature was much more uniform than it is today (that seems rather likely), and that on this both the Bible and geology agree. Shameless. If you want to make that claim, surely one is obliged to provide the necessary references from Scripture? No matter how badly this person interprets whatever verses he believes back this claim up (and believe me, I have read every word in the Bible at least twice and nowhere was I given the same impression as the author gets), he is at least obliged to mention them.
What's more, the author latches on to the assertion of science that Alaska experienced a massive flood, holding it triumphantly up as proof of the veracity of the Genesis account. He (or she) declares that it is clear now that geology must be reorganized to conform with the history of the Bible.
Except it doesn't follow that because there was a localized flood at some point in the history of Alaska ergo the worldwide Flood of Noah is a reality.
The warmth of previous ages, warmth that allowed the dinosaurs to inhabit parts of what is now the far north, even Antarctica, speaks to the great length of earth history and the movements of the continents over millions of years, along with the greater concentrations of carbon and methane in the environment. Bad arguments do not the truth of creationism validate.
Comments
Post a Comment