Friday, July 27, 2007
Update from the Creation Geology Conference
There was roughly 50 people who showed up for this event; the first ever of it's kind, and a long time coming. It is being hosted at Cedarville University in Cedarville, Ohio.
The purpose of the conference is for Creation Geologists to bounce ideas off of other professionals; this is intended to be the place for model proposal and building where experts can critique your work and ideas.
Andrew Snelling drew the long straw and got to go first, giving us an update on his work cataloging and tabulating Radiohalo populations in various rock types, including various metamorphic rocks. This is a continuation of research from multiple researchers being carried out for literally decades, starting with Dr. Robert Gentry
Lee Spencer then presented a model for fossil distribution during a global flood related to biomes; that is, biological zonation and its possible relationship to why we find fossils where we do in the fossil record.
John Whitmore then attempted to address some of the claims made by old-earthers regarding reef formation and the possibility (as well as the methods) for rapid reef formation in a post-flood world.
I then gave my first paper which basically showed the research that was carried out in Glen Rose on two flumes at the Creation Evidence museum. This was encouraging, as John Whitmore and Ray Strom (a fellow Canadian who was also present) had been carrying out research on the coconino sandstones and sand dunes as I had been, and we were able to share our findings. Ray had some fantastic hi-definition video of sand dunes in California growing right before the camera on a very windy day. It was very enlightening and put more nails in the coffin of the "sand dune" interpretation for the coconino crossbeds.
After an awesome lunch here at the University, Peter Macleod, all the way from Ireland, presented a paper on a flood model he calls Tectonic wedge resonance. Kudos to him as I wouldn't be brave enough to attempt to put together a flood model, and his had many intriguing aspects to it.
John Woodmorappe then gave a paper examining formations called "hard grounds" which are sometimes cited as a supposed evidence for time gaps in the geolog record. It was a fascinating talk and Kurt Wise had some input from a separate study he was carrying out in California which may be related. Discussion on "burrows" and "bore holes" from organisms was interesting.
Ian Taylor gave a paper on the historicity of the old earth; which is a fascinating and important subject, as most people simply assume that the old earth theory was founded in good science. It was not; it was birthed out of religious motivation, and Ian showed some of the intriguing history behind all of this.
John Whitmore then introduced a new geology program Cedarville university to help fill the demand for Creation Geology researchers; this has been a growing need for decades and we look forward to the program being implimented.
Marcus Ross delivered a paper co-authored with David DeWitt and Steve Deckard on educational studies they had carried out on the effectiveness on biblical education in changing world views. This prompted considerable discussion.
After a break for supper, about 30 or so people joined John Whitmore and John Woodmorappe at a limestone ledge to examine hardgrounds and for people to collect the fantastic fossils found in abundance here. This particular limestone layers is an excellent testament to the global flood of Noah, spreading over multiple states as well as multiple provinces in Canada. In fact, this is the same layer that outcrops near my home where I fossil collect all the time.
The conference will continue for another two days.
Why oh why has it taken you Darwinists so long to come to the point and summarize your brilliant theory in such a compact statement?! We could have saved many years and hundreds if not thousands of man-hours in debate over this obvious error on our part if you had just come to the point sooner.
Bob, I know that the technical aspects of your comment have surely appeared in pee-r review, but you may have to write a book for the general public as the issues you present may just be too complicated for our simple minds. You are obviously the product of some high-falutin university somewhere (i'd guess Harvard, or perhaps Oxford?) where you must have studied with the best Evolutionists.
You should publish your autobiography! In fact, I'm sure Hollywood would be interested in your story... how did you become so wise?
Research Papers Writing