Biological Essentialism - The New Book that will Smash the Darwinian Tower of Babel

 

Biological Essentialism tackles Aristotle, UnDarwinism, human nature, worldview, bias, renegade scientists, Dawkins vs. Dawkins, natural kinds, gender confusion and geology among other topics.

This controversial work is fully illustrated with hundreds of graphics and the innovative ideas are well documented with over 500 reference notes.

Biological essentialism holds that there exists Essential Types of Life (ETL's), such as bears and penguins - these are distinct kinds of organisms that do not have a common ancestor and organic variation has limits.

Would you like to learn more about human exceptionalism, the fruit of evolution and the meaning of life?  If so, this book is for you!

Get your copy today:

https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/biological-essentialism-jay-hall/1140135320

Old Yeller and Dating Methods

In 2016, a mummified wolf pup named Zhùr was discovered in the permafrost in the Klondike goldfields near Dawson City, Yukon, Canada.  

Researchers used DNA analysis and radiocarbon dating to determine that the specimen is around 57,000 years old … but is that really true?  David Coppedge (NASA, JPL, Cassini team) rightly questions this old earth fallacy (#OEF):

 

But how could its mother dig a den in permafrost?  If it was not permafrost at the time, how did this warm-blooded mammal become frozen so quickly, and stay frozen for 57,000 years?  It looks just like the other puppy from Siberia that they say was a third of this one’s age.  Is something wrong with the dating methods?

 

Carbon dating have been supported by tree ring data, but even that type of corroboration has limits.  Martha Joukowsky in A Complete Manual of Field Archeology stated that, "Since the dendrochronological sequence extends back only as far as about 5500 B.C., no way exists at present to check radiocarbon dates from 5500 to 10,000 B.C." [1]

 

Such excellent preservation of “Old Yeller” (Zhùr) for 50K+ years seems unreal on the face of it.  In comparison, consider the preservation of Egyptian mummies which are but a few thousand years old.  We have provided evidence that the Ice Age occurred within historical times in Is a Young Earth Possible?  We also make the argument that there was only one Ice Age in YES – Young Earth Science.

 

 

Note:

1) A Complete Manual of Field Archaeology - Tools and Techniques of Field Work for Archaeologists by Martha Joukowsky (Prentice-Hall, 1980), p. 448.

 

** graphic above from cell.com

 

#YES #Zhur #Yukon #Canada #Radiocarbon #Dating #YoungEarth #OldEarth #Archeology #wolf #IceAge #dendrochronology #permafrost #Gold #OldYeller

Biological Essentialism - It's What's for Dinner

What is the opposite of evolution?  It's biological essentialism - this is the view that crabs have always been crabby and frogs have always been froggy and that they do not have a common ancestor.  That is, Essential Types of Life (ETL's) vary within limits.  A mutation in myostatin causes some cattle to have uncontrolled muscle growth.  BYG = Buffalo, Yaks and Gayal.  Thus, we see a wide variety in cattle, but they all compose just one ETL.  Is Big Science wrong on origins?   

 

Have you ever dreamt that you evolved into a more advanced creature than a human?  That's the only place where you might see evolution in the sense of "mega-evolution" (e.g. reptile-to-bird) ... in your dreams.  Can monkeys run the circus?

 

David Gelernter (b. 1955), Computer Science Prof at Yale, is brave enough to question Darwin:

 

Darwinian evolution is a brilliant and beautiful scientific theory. Once it was a daring guess. Today it is basic to the credo that defines the modern worldview. Accepting the theory as settled truth - no more subject to debate than the earth being round or the sky blue or force being mass times acceleration - certifies that you are devoutly orthodox in your scientific views; which in turn is an essential first step towards being taken seriously in any part of modern intellectual life.  But what if Darwin was wrong?

Peter Robinson (UncommonKnowledge) interviewed Gelernter.  David Berlinski, who supports biological essentialism, was also part of the discussion.  Berlinski's pro-ETL stance is clearly seen in his latest book HumanNature.

Now, biological essentialism naturally leads to Young Earth Theory Intelligence (YETI).  That is, there never was an "age of fishes" or "age of dinos" since all basic forms of life existed at the beginning.  This implies that most of the rock deposits were part of a single cataclysmic event which in turn requires a massively condensed timescale. 

 

Have mainstream journals published research that favors a youthful world?  YES! ... check out my blog from October 2020.  In addition, the Philosophical Society of Great Britain (Victoria Institute) published a paper by Dudley Joseph Whitney providing evidence for a young earth in 1933.  Interestingly, in one episode of Doctor Who, Queen Victoria starts an institute (Torchwood).  

      

What are the fruits of Darwinism?  Lenin, the Third Reich and Mao’s Great Leap Forward (~40M deaths) among other tragedies.  Ideas have consequences.  In contrast, Lord Kelvin, who rejected Darwin, said this: "The more thoroughly I conduct scientific research, the more I believe science excludes atheism.  If you think strongly enough you will be forced by science to the belief in God, which is the foundation of all religion"

 

#QueenVictoria #Torchwood #DoctorWho #YoungEarth #YETI #BiologicalEssentialism #ETL #Gelernter #Berlinski #UncommonKnowledge  #HumanNature #Whitney #Big Science

The Choctaw Connection

Have you read Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee?  Are you familiar with the Trail of Tears?  In the early 1830's, around 125K Native Americans were forced to flee their homelands in Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, North Carolina and Florida and travel to Oklahoma (Indian Territory).  Many died along the way.  The Choctaw, along with a number of other Native American tribes, have tales of a Great Flood that occurred just thousands of years ago.  A poem I wrote is based on the Choctaw tale.  I highlight a number of Flood Legends in my latest book Is a Young Earth Possible? and include the Choctaw version. [1]

Sir James Frazer (d. 1941) was an anthropologist, folklorist and classical scholar.  His lengthy work The Golden Bough: A Study in Comparative Religion compares aboriginal traditions from around the world.  I saw a pristine set at a bookstore in Las Vegas a few years ago (Bauman Rare Books).  A used set may run you around $500.  Regarding the origin of such disaster stories, Frazer rightly admits that,

 

The old answer to the question was that such a catastrophe actually occurred, that we have a full and authentic record of it in the Book of Genesis, and that the many legends of a great flood which we find scattered so widely among mankind embody the more or less imperfect, confused, and distorted reminiscences of that tremendous cataclysm. [2]

 

Vine Deloria (d. 2005) was a Native American historian and activist from the Yankton Sioux tribe of South Dakota.  He wrote dozens of books and hundreds of articles and testified before Congress and even the U.S. Supreme Court.  Many geologists hold that a giant rock hit the earth and killed off the dinos.  Could such an event explain great catastrophe of the past?  Deloria explains:

 

But suppose that a major fly-by had occurred within the time period of interest to these scholars, raising the Cascades and Andes, shifting the Alps eastward and tilting them, or creating the Himalayas?  Much of what we regard as geological knowledge would have to be radically revised in favor of a drastically shortened chronology of Earth history. ... Traditional stories about the world ending with massive floods and fires are not taken seriously because we have been taught to believe that no forces more powerful than those we can presently observe have ever been active on the planet. [3]

 

Deloria challenged the reliability of radiometric dating and Deep Time. [4]  We defend Catastrophism in our two most recent works YES - Young Earth Science and Is a Young EarthPossible?  Check out this cool pro-YES t-shirt.

Here we see Choctaw Chief Pushmataha (d. 1824, Wash. DC), who is considered by many as the greatest of all Choctaw chiefs.  He fought in the War of 1812 and rests in the Congressional Cemetery (Wash. DC).  I am a proud member of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma.

 

 

Notes:

1) Is a Young EarthPossible? by Jay Hall (Institute for Catastrophism and Tectonics - iCAT, Big Spring, TX, 2019), pp. 239-243.

2) Folklore in the Old Testament by Sir James Frazer (Tudor Pub. Co., NYC, 1923), p. 135.

3) Evolution, Creationism and Other Modern Myths by Vine Deloria (Fulcrum Pub., Golden, CO, 2002), p. 110.

4) Hall (note 1), pp. 110-112.

 

#SCOTUS #VineDeloria #Choctaw #JamesFrazer #GoldenBough #FloodLegends #Deluge #Oklahoma #Catastrophism #DeepTime #YES  #Pushmataha

Join the Young Earth Revolution!

John Joly (d. 1933, FRS) was an Irish physicist and Professor of Geology at the University of Dublin.  Some may say it's hypocritical for advocates of Deep Time, the beneficiaries of radiation treatments in medicine, to discard the skepticism of John Joly towards radiometric dating.[1]  Joly was a pioneer in both fields: radiation therapy and radiodating.  It would appear that many mainstream scientists are unwilling to rethink some dearly cherished ideas regarding the age of the earth.

 

How did Senator Rand Paul (KY) respond to the age-of-the-earth controversy?  In 2010 he said, “I forgot to say I was only taking easy questions. ... I’m gonna pass on the age of the Earth.  I think I’m just gonna have to pass on that one.”  If he has read my book Is a Young Earth Possible? since then, maybe he's changed his mind.

From CNN we read this enlightening prose:

 

At rocky sites across America, including Pikes Peak and the Grand Canyon, 550 million-year-old rock sits on top of rock that has existed as long as 3 billion years. But there's nothing in between. It's as though that time period between 3 billion years ago and 550 million years ago has literally been wiped from Earth.  It's called the Great Unconformity, and some researchers believe it's the result of one massive cataclysmic event in Earth's history.

 

This is exactly what we are proposing - most of the rock record was formed during one great catastrophe: a Singular Epoch of Rapid Geologic Activity (SERGA).  The Great Unconformity trumpeted the dawn of that ginormous disaster.  Thus, the traditional geologic timescale must be collapsed.

 

During this time of extreme net censorship ("why do those internets have to be so mean"), it's important to consider alternative search engines.  Both Yandex and Swiss Cows gives a fair hearing to Young Earth Theory Intelligence (YETI) when you search "young earth evidence."

 

You may have heard of the aluminum gear found in coal in Russia.[2]  Another amazing find is an iron face mask found in coal in the Appalachian region:

This seems to punch a hole in the evolutionary timeline.

 

Consider another conundrum - where did the missing 1.6B years of rock layers go in Black Canyon (CO)?

The Entrada Sandstone (mid to late Jurassic) lies flatly atop the Pre-Cambrian Painted Wall.  It appears that there is no great time gap between the deposits because there is no erosional surface with hills and gulleys.  Standard dating of the Entrada Sandstone says it's as young as 144M and the Painted Wall is supposedly 1.75B years old.  That's a difference of around 1.6B years!  What if that time never existed?  That would fit with the young earth view.

 

How can you show your support for Young Earth Science (YES)?  You could get a car wrap with a big YES:

Or ... you could get this super cool shirt and join the young earth cohort:

My site:  TotalYouth.us

Let us know what you think:

DeepTimeSkeptic@protonmail.com

 

 

Notes:

1) Is a Young EarthPossible? by Jay Hall (Institute for Catastrophism and Tectonics - iCAT, Big Spring, TX, 2019), p. 329.

2) YES - YoungEarth Science by Jay Hall (IDEAS, Big Spring, TX, 2014), p. 164.

#Yandex #SwissCows #EntradaSandstone #PaintedWall #paraconformity #IronMaskInCoal #YoungEarth #censorship #JohnJoly #RandPaul #CNN  #Catastrophism

A Challenge to the Deep Time Paradigm

According to a paper on "Uncertainties in Age Dating" by C.S. Noble and J.J. Naughton published in Science, radiodating is not all that:

 

The radiogenic argon and helium contents of three basalts erupted into the deep ocean from an active volcano (Kilauea) have been measured.  Ages calculated from these measurements increase with sample depth up to 22 million years for lavas deduced to be recent.  Caution is urged in applying dates from deep-ocean basalts in studies on ocean-floor spreading. ...it is possible to deduce that these lavas are very young, probably less than 200 years old. [1]

 

If radiometric dating can't give us the correct answer for rocks of known age, why should we trust it for a stone allegedly billions of years old?

Way back in the 1970's, the New York Times was not afraid to oppose the Deep Time Syndicate:

 

A fundamental assumption of nuclear physics - the predictable decay rates of radioactive materials - has been opened to question on the basis of research reported here today at the national meeting of the American Chemical Society.  ... Dr. John L. Anderson, a Tennessee chemist, described experimental  observations with radioactive carbon‐14 that he said “just do not fit the accepted theory.” ... Dr. Willard F. Libby [who developed ¹⁴C dating], a Nobel Prize‐winning chemist at the University of California at Los Angeles, said: “I must say I've racked my brain about what's going on in his data. It's a real bag of worms.” ... Dr. Anderson said that his observations indicated that the decay rates might not be as constant as  assumed.  Other forces, perhaps from adjacent atoms, could alter the process, he said.

 

One application of accelerated nuclear decay is aiding the safe and sure disposal of radioactive wastes from nuclear power plants.

 

From a more recent item in Geology in 1990, Ajoy Baksi (Geology Dept., Louisiana State Univ.) dropped the kraken on isotope dating: "Subjective and, in many instances, incorrect use of radiometric data has become endemic in the earth science literature.  Mathematical analysis of imperfect and, in many cases, highly subjective data sets leads to dubious conclusions." [2]

In contrast to the humility shown by Baksi, some researchers seem blinded by their own bias.  Think about this manifesto from the founder of the modern series of Scientific American, Gerard Piel (d. 2004):

 

A scientist has no system of absolutes to tell him whether he is right or wrong ... He can trust no authority but his own judgment. ... In biology, all of us are Darwinians; we perceive the unity of our species with all other living things and find a new reverence for life in the realization that we are the terminal point of its  evolution on our planet. ... All of us, in brief, are scientists.  With the overthrow of received  authority and the banishing of superstition, we are comprehending that it is man's destiny to make himself. [3]

 

First off, there are hundreds (if not thousands) of biologists who reject Darwinism.  The authority of Big Science tells us that the earth is old, but what if they are wrong?  An AP-GfK poll from 2014 found that 36% of Americans doubt Old Earth Fallacies (4.5B).  Are the transhumanists right?  Will humans develop into some more advanced being?  Who can fight the authority of Big Tek censorship? 

 

 

Notes:

1) "Deep Ocean Basalts: Inert Gas and Uncertainties in Age Dating" by C.S. Noble and J.J. Naughton, Science, vol. 162 (Oct. 11, 1968), p. 265.

2) quoted in Evolutionists Say the Oddest Things by Lita Cosner (Creation Book Pub., Powder Springs, GA, 2015), p. 93.

3) Science in the Cause of Man by Gerard Piel (Alfred Knopf, NYC, 1962), pp. 198-200/

#ScientificAmerican #DeepTime #YoungEarth #poll #survey #opinion #RadiometricDating #Geo #Geology #BigScience #BigTech #OldEarthFallacies  #Biology #Darwin #NewYorkTimes

Polling, Young Planets & the Decay of Radiometric Dating

During this political season have you received a call to answer some survey questions?  I have had one such call, but chose not to participate - it was Texas specific.  How does Young Earth Theory Intelligence (YETI) show up in public opinion polls?

First off, let's distinguish between various hot topics:

  How old is humanity?

  Is our home billions of years old?

  What is the age of the planet Venus?

During discussions on origins, these distinct questions may be blurred together.

We have a chapter in our book Is a Young Earth Possible? espousing a young Solar System.

 

Around the year 2000 about 47% of Americans of voting age held that humans started on this planet within the last 10K years.  That's almost half, for all my old pals in Rancho Cucamonga.  A survey in June of last year showed that 40% still held to the "young humanity" position.  I would argue the this is not only consistent with YETI but implies it.  The beginning of man and the origin of the world go together (cf. Mk. 10:6).

 

Here is my survey question that I would like to get national attention:

How old is the Earth?

A) 4,000 years

B) 6,000 years

C) 8,000 years

D) 10,000 years

E) more than 10,000 years.

 

A Harris poll found that 39% of Americans confirmed that the universe, the Earth, as well as all the plants, animals came into existence within the last 10K years.  The survey was conducted in 2009.  A superb article in the Tulsa World at least gave young-earthers' their say:

 

Rabbi Yehuda Weg, with the Chabad, an Orthodox Jewish community in Tulsa, said belief in a young Earth is widely held in the Orthodox Jewish world.Weg said Orthodox Jews believe the world is 5,775 years old [in 2015 AD] and that humans were created on the sixth day of the creation, according to the biblical record.  He said that date is not derived from adding up the years of the genealogies in Scripture but is consistent with those dates.  “It’s not like we figured out the date by adding up the genealogies. It’s the other way around. This is information we’ve (handed down) since the creation,” he said.

 

The article also highlighted the work of Jonathan Bartlett of Broken Arrow (OK), who defends a youthful world with geological evidence.  We recently took a trip to Broken Bow and picked up a "Vote for Squatch" shirt.

 

In contrast, the National Academies of Science (NAS) produced a work in 2008 which is extremely one-sided (Möbius anyone?).  Their book deals with origins, the age of the earth and related topics.  It highlights ten short comments from several scholars, social leaders, organizations and legal opinions.  Yet, not one response from the opposition to the mainstream view, biological essentialism (like begets like) and a young earth, is included.  The authors state that some, "have argued that science teachers should teach the 'controversies' surrounding evolution.   But there is no controversy in the scientific community about whether evolution has occurred." [1]  Is that really true?  Charles Bleckmann, writing in BioScience, brings out some opposition to Darwin during the late 1920's:

 

Not all biologists accepted evolution. ... Barrington Moore [d. 1966], the first editor of Ecology and a past president of the Ecological Society of America ... said, “I have no use for evolution and do not see how any intelligent person can have.”  Moore, a founder of scientific forestry in the United States, is now honored by the Society of American Foresters with a research award named after him. [2] 

 

For more recent examples of scientists who are Darwin Doubters, I would highly recommend Slaughter of the Dissidents by Jerry Bergman.

 

The NAS report has a segment on radiometric dating, but it fails to bring out the fact that it was not until an endorsement by a key scientific committee in 1926 that gave radiodating its supreme status as "proof" of Deep Time.  Dating rocks via radioactive isotopes is not all that.  A paper from Science mag (AAAS) drops the Kraken on Rubidium-Strontium dating:

 

One serious consequence of the mantle isochron model [a method that avoids knowing the initial daughter product] is that crystallization ages determined on basic igneous rocks by the Rb-Sr whole-rock technique can be greater than the true age by many hundreds of millions of years.  This problem of inherited age is more serious for younger rocks, and there are well-documented instances of conflicts between stratigraphic age and Rb-Sr in the literature. [3]

 

Research from the Geological Society of London exposes the radiodating skeptics: "Much still remains to be learned of the interpretation of isotopic ages and the realization that the isotopic age is not necessarily the geologic age of a rock has led to an over-skeptical attitude by some field geologists." [4]

Are there other methods of dating our wonderful world?  One technique is to look at various metals in the oceans:

 

The startling conclusion . . . is that most trace metals are at extremely low concentrations in the oceans and have rather unspectacular variations in their concentrations.  The calculated theoretical concentrations of copper, nickel, silver, gold, lead and other metals in the oceans are many orders of magnitude higher than the best currently measured values.  Why are the oceans so depleted of these trace metals?  Certainly it is not for the lack of availability from rock weathering ... [5]

 

The answer to the age-of-the-earth controversy is simple: stop the censorship and support free speech.  Our two most recent books provide evidence from history and science that favors Young Earth Theory Intelligence (YETI) and truly drops the Kraken on Deep Time:

          Is a Young Earth Possible?

          https://www.amazon.com/dp/1088860788

          YES - Young Earth Science

https://www.amazon.com/YES-WorldView-Fallacies-Collapse-Darwinism/dp/0692320075

 

Our website: https://totalyouth.us/

 

 

Notes:

1) Science, Evolution, and Creationism ed. by Francisco Ayala et al (National Academies Press, Wash. DC, 2008), p. xiii.

https://www.nap.edu/read/11876/chapter/1

2) "Evolution and Creationism in Science: 1880–2000" by Charles Bleckmann,  BioScience, Vol. 56, Issue 2, Feb. 2006, Pages 151–158,

https://academic.oup.com/bioscience/article/56/2/151/274042

3) "Ancient Lithosphere: Its Role in Young Continental Volcanism" by C. Brooks, David James and S.R. Hart, Science, vol. 193 (September 17, 1976), pp. 1086-1094, p. 1093.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6047264_Ancient_Lithosphere_Its_Role_in_Young_Continental_Volcanism

4) "Interpretation of Isotopic Ages in Orogenic Belts" by P.E. Brown and J.A. Miller, in Kent et al., "Time and Place in Orogeny," Geological Society of London Special Pub., vol. 3, (1969), p. 137.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238424166_Interpretation_of_isotopic_ages_in_orogenic_belts

5) "The Fate of Metals in the Oceans" by Karl Turekian, Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, vol. 41 (August 1977), pp. 1139-1144, p. 1139.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/0016703777901090?via%3Dihub

 

#DropTheKraken #TrueTruth #Geology #Origins #Worldview #YoungEarth #Polls #Surveys #Opinion #Science