Sunday, December 30, 2018

The Overthrust Enigma

How could older rocks move over younger rocks for a distance of over 100 km?  J. G. C. Anderson describes the Glarus overthrust in the Swiss Alps where older rocks are on top of younger layers:

... the main contacts between nappes [thrust sheets] are often remarkably smooth; for example, along the famous Glarus overthrust Permian red beds overlie Lower Tertiary flysch [shale/conglomerate mix], the zone of disturbance being exceedingly thin, even of the order of 10 cm. [1]

And as we see in the pic above sometimes the contact at the Glarus Overthrust is knife edge in certain locations!  That is, it appears to be continuously deposited.

We seem to have two options, a catastrophic explanation or this is the order they were actually deposited and the geologic column is refuted (Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian etc.).  I deal with these alleged overthrusts in my book YES - Young Earth Science. [2]

There are a number of overthrusts around the world where old strata lay on top of younger rocks.  In a number of cases these extend many miles with no evidence of movement at the contact.  Native American scholar Vine Deloria comments,

This concept has been liberally applied when the fossils do not line up in a coherent evolutionary sequence, even when there has been no evidence that strata have been disturbed.  Overthrust is thus often used to hide anomalies and explain inconsistencies in the progression of fossils. [3]
Vine Deloria offered these perceptive remarks on overthrusts:

The rocks are not always found in the proper order; sometimes a formation has simpler fossils on the top and more complex ones on the bottom.  To solve this problem, geologists invented the “overthrust.”  This term is applied to formations in which, in theory, some layers of older strata are pushed up over younger strata, disrupting the sequence of fossils.  This concept has been liberally applied when the fossils do not line up in a coherent evolutionary sequence, even when there has been no evidence that strata have been disturbed. [4]

Writing in 1908, Thomas Mellard Reade had this to say about the geological paradox of large overthrusts:

In attempts to unravel some of the weightier problems of geology it has lately been assumed that certain discordances of stratification are due to the thrusting of old rocks over those of a later geological age.  Without in any way suggesting that the geology has in any particular instance been misread, I should like to point out the difficulties in accepting the explanation looked at from a dynamical point of view when applied on a scale that seems to ignore mechanical probabilities. ...  I venture to think that no force applied in any of the mechanical ways known to us in Nature would move such a mass, be it ever so adjusted in thickness to the purpose, even if supplemented with a lubricant generously applied to the thrust-plane. [5]

Has the problem had a definitive solution with over a century of research on the issue?  Fridtjof Riis, who is a senior geologist at the Norwegian Petroleum Directorate and a recipient of the Brøgger Prize (Geological Survey of Norway’s honors award), gives the answer.  He is totally honest about the overthrust enigma:

A thrust nappe consists of rocks that have been pushed several kilometers.  The lower boundary of a thrust nappe is defined by a thrust fault. ... A typical thrust nappe rests more or less horizontally on top of a younger sequence of strata.  ... What kind of forces were able to push large mountain masses more than a hundred kilometers on top of younger layers? ... Two mountains stand out as the  Scandinavian reference sites [Norway/Sweden] of thrust nappes where older types of bedrock lie on top of Cambro-Silurian sedimentary rocks. ... the thrust nappes on the Norwegian side must have been transported at least 100 kilometers relative to the Swedish Cambro-Silurian sequence.  ... to many people it seemed physically impossible that such large distance thrust faulting could have taken place.

Be sure to get our book YES - Young Earth Science for more on catastrophism and a young earth.  Please visit our website early and often.  Here are our podcasts.

1) The Structure of Western Europe by J. G. C. Anderson (Pergamon, NYC, 1978), p. 160.
2) YES - Young Earth Science by Jay Hall (IDEAS, Big Spring, TX, 2014), pp. 106-108, 141, 175.
3) Evolution, Creationism and Other Modern Myths by Vine Deloria (Fulcrum Pub., Golden, CO, 2002), p. 92.
4) Ibid.
5) quoted in The Structure of Geology by David Kitts (SMU Press, Dallas, 1977), pp. 79, 80.

Sunday, November 18, 2018

To Earth with Love ♫

True Earth

See the shouting of the earth
I think he's angry at fake worth
They find it hard to see what's blurred
Overshadowed by the youthful neworld
Who is that thinking near real history?
I think they'd like to eat the mystery
Her recent scar is just and deep
It needs no mask, its doom will keep
Big Tek brings such a ban
a pet turtle and lots of spam
The turtle seeks true free speech
Especially ones they do not teach
The earth shudders at the ancient critical
He wants our gang to pump up analytical

  -- ice-j (11/14/18)

Thursday, October 11, 2018

In Case You Missed It - YES means "Yes"

A recent study on a Pre-Cambrian organism sheds a bright light on the age-of-the-earth debate:

Russian doctoral student Ilya Bobrovskiy and a research team of Professor Jochen Brocks from the Australian National University carefully collected organically preserved specimens of Dickinsonia from steep cliffs of the 558-million-year-old White Sea area of Russia.  From the thin layers of organic material on these specimens the scientists could extract biomarkers that specify the type and amount of steroid lipids that were present in Dickinsonia. ... they found a very high amount (85-93 percent) of C27 cholesteroids, which is considered to be a hallmark of animal cells.

Hold the phones!  I thought organics don't last M's of years?? [1]  Let's go with the evidence and question the dating method.

Research published this year detailed the discovery of a 210M year old pterosaur found in Utah.  This puts the oldest pterosaur 65M years before the prior estimate.  If all Essential Type of Life (ETL's) existed at the same time this is exactly what we would expect - it's called range extension. [2]  Chapter 3 of our book YES - Young Earth Science explains ETL's.

A paper published earlier this year in Nature disclosed findings about a 240M year old lizard.  That's 75M years older than what was previously thought.  Another range extension!

Apparently, these scientists have not read YES - Young Earth Science to discover the powerful evidence from history, philosophy, biology, geology and physics for a youthful world.

Be sure to visit our site early and often ... ==> "for Total truth, support earth's Youth"

1) YES - Young Earth Science by Jay Hall (IDEAS, Big Spring, TX, 2014), pp. 17-19.
2) Ibid., pp. 165-167, 172-174.

Sunday, August 5, 2018

Net Censorship and the End of a Young Earth

As far as the mass of the people go, the extraordinary swings of opinion which occur nowadays, the emotions which can be turned on and off like a tap, are the result of newspaper and radio [& now TV & the Net] hypnosis.
  - George Orwell (author of Animal Farm & 1984)

Are Google, facebook, YouTube and Twitter trying to take over popular thought?  Now, certain political views are censored, but what's next?  The definition of marriage, religious doctrine, alternative opinions on controversial scientific issues (e.g. climate change) etc.

Journalistic bias is rampant and the "tek giants" have a virtual monopoly on the internet-of-ideas (IOI).  Mike Adams (,, has produced an explosive report documenting net censorship. 

For example, here is a list of 55 serious errors, poor journalism and fact-checking epic fails in media reporting just about President Trump alone!  This includes the recent Time magazine cover with the crying Honduran child who was actually  never separated from her mother.  Mainstream media often calls the alternative media "fake news."  But who defines the alleged "fakeness" of alleged news?

To whom are the internet fact-checkers and moderators accountable to (SPLC, SNOPES, Politifact)?  The establishment media is losing audience at a rapid rate.  Is their only hope of survival crushing the opposition of conservatives, non-PC voices, #MAGA hats, Christians, Libertarians and so-called "haters" into silence?  Will the Drudge Report survive?  According to Mike Adams,

Maintaining monopoly control over cultural narratives is crucial for commanding primary influence over the worldview held by news consumers, whose beliefs, opinions and “realities” are largely shaped by the news to which they are subjected.

Is CNN, ABC and the like really just indoctrination and propaganda?  Do you think of YouTube as a public utility?  Adams has proposed a number of solutions to Techno-Tyranny through legislative and regulatory actions to halt the censorship of independent media (p. 53+).  Remember James Damore, who was fired from Google?  Adams has nailed it in describing the problem:

The highest priority of news monopolists is to silence independent, opposing voices that encourage individuals to “snap out” of their numbed, passive acquiescence to mainstream news narratives.

One perspective often ignored is that history, philosophy and science definitely favor a young earth (  Have you ever heard of Steven Fielding,  who was an Australian Senator from Victoria and leader of the Family First Party?  He supports the young earth position. 

Kip Hansen in an article last month, "GOOGLE and the ‘adjustment’ of inconvenient viewpoints, especially climate," points out that net censorship may eventually target Edgar Allan Poe, Mark Twain and Charles Darwin.  Hansen also specifically mentions that the young earth topic has a potential of being banned.  He has studied a number of scientific controversies where "...  one side seems to have an accepted consensus view but also has a vital and strong contrarian view that is solidly scientifically supported."    

An error I spotted in Adams' report is about the Flat Earth Myth (FEM) which is on page 28.    
Let us all seek mutual understanding through a Worldview of Wisdom (#WOW)  by dealing with opposing views via respectful dialog and debate.  Feedback (pro or con) is most welcome:

note:  our blog in May of this year also touched on free speech

Wednesday, July 4, 2018

Young Earth Today - A Potpourri of YES

Here's our latest video:

We tackle a potpourri of topics:

  • Thunder ... Lightning ♫ & C-14
  • How Old is the Earth?
  • Tree Rings & Ammonites
  • Norman Macbeth (Darwin Retried) & OMNI 
  • Censorship
  • George Bernard Shaw & more!

Senator Rubio takes a water break: The Carson-Rubio-Perry Effect: Be sure to catch our other videos >>> Is Evolution Wrong? Evolution of Evolution: David Kitts interview:

#Rubio #PullARubio #Ozarka #Ogallala #sand #NormanMacbeth #evolution #Darwin #AltMed #pines #TreeRings #Coconino #GeorgeBernardShaw #catastrophism #MayaAngelou #Radiometric #lightning #radiocarbon #paraconformity #YoungEarth #YouthfulWorld #OMNI #OMNImag

Friday, June 22, 2018

A Potpourri of YES (Young Earth Science)

You may have heard of recent censorship on the major social media sites.  Alternatives are on the rise such as Gab and Yandex.  Just yesterday, I did this search on Yandex:
   "young earth" history philosophy
My site came up #5 on Yandex but today it's further down the list but at least it's on the first page.

If the earth is really young, then plate tectonic (continental drift) had to move super fast.  Are there indications of this?  See chapter six in my book.  Also, check out this report from LiveScience on a new rift in Africa:

A piece of East Africa is expected to break off the main continent in tens of millions of years [I doubt it].  And if you need any proof, look no further than Kenya's Rift Valley, where a giant, gaping tear opened up following heavy rains and seismic activity ...  The enormous crack appeared on March 19 [2018] and measures more than 50 feet (15 meters) wide and several miles along ... it's still growing longer.

A piece from Colorado State University deals with the origin of Ag:

The invention of agriculture changed humans and the environment forever, and over several thousand years, the practice originated independently in a least a dozen different places.  But why did agriculture begin in those places, at those particular times in human history?

Stephen Jay Gould called Georges Cuvier the "Newton of natural history.”   Cuvier held that there was a global natural disaster just thousands of years ago, so of course humans had to reboot and start there ag projects from scratch.   Also, some groups may have lost the skills and had to learn it again from other tribes or derived the concepts from careful thought and observation.

There is strong evidence that humans and dinosaurs have coexisted. [1]  Even Calvin & Hobbes likes to play with the idea!  As a child, I had a similar imagination.  One example is the many dragon tales around the world.  In France, on the Rhône River, there was a dragon named Tarasque which had a number of dino-like characteristics.  Dragons are dinos.  If so, maybe we need to question the dating methods that say T-Rex went extinct 66M years ago.      

Please be sure to check out our book, videos, podcast and social media early and often.  Here is my Gab page.

1) YES - Young Earth Science by Jay Hall (IDEAS, Big Spring, TX, 2014), pp. 167-172.

Wednesday, May 2, 2018

Obama, Free Speech and banning a Young Earth

President Barack Obama had this to say about free speech:  "I believe in evolution, scientific inquiry, and global warming; I believe in free speech, whether politically correct or politically incorrect ..."  Kudos to Obama for supporting the First Amendment!  However, if Young Earth Science (YES) is true, then Darwinism in all its many splendored forms must be tossed out.  In addition,  there are sufficient scientific reasons for rejecting the "climate disruption" movement.  Writing in 2016, Anthony Fisher provided this keen summary of Obama's thoughts on free speech:

For the better part of the past year, President Obama has repeatedly beaten this drum. He decried "militant political correctness" on college campuses as a "a recipe for dogmatism" in an interview with ABC's George Stephanopolous.  He told a high school student in Iowa that he didn't believe young people needed to be "coddled and protected from different points of view."  In an interview with NPR, Obama said, "unwillingness to hear other points of view can be as unhealthy on the left as on the right."

A startling law proposed in California (AB 2943) could lead to the banning of Bibles according to a CBN News report.  You can read the law yourself - note Section 1 point "r" in the light of 1 Corinthians 6:9-11.

Is there a chance that the young earth view will eventually be banned in the USA?  Recall that during the Obama administration organizations seeking tax-exempt status associated with the Tea Party, “Patriots,” criticizing the government or Constitutionalists were subject to extreme scrutiny by the IRS. 

What about so-called “net neutrality?”  The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) attempted to control the Net in 2010 making an analogy with the AT&T phone monopoly we suffered under during most of the last century.  In 2014, courts struck down this push.

Now let's consider some of the evidence for a youthful world.  Chemist Melvin Cook (d. 2000) was an explosives expert in the mining field.  He was a Nitro-Nobel recipient and won the Chemical Pioneer Award from the American Institute of Chemists.  Cook was a Professor of Metallurgy at the University of Utah and published around 200 scientific papers.  His groundbreaking Prehistory and Earth Models was published in 1966 (I own a signed copy).

According to Cook, high oil pressure is consistent with YES:  "... there are really no completely impervious traps [e.g. anticline trap]; abnormal and abnormally high pressures can thus only mean sudden deep burial not long ago." [1]

Let's continue with the oil theme.  Crude contains porphyrins which as William Low Russell explains, writing in Principles of Petroleum Geology (McGraw-Hill),  "... are complex organic substances related to chlorophyll and hemoglobin, which are destroyed by oxygen and heat."  Rapid catastrophic burial would protect them from oxygen and if most rocks were formed quickly, this poses a challenge for the standard geologic timescale.  This mainstream source admits that the source beds for oil deposits were formed quickly (see p. 11).  Could it be that these porphyrins in oil were protected from heat for millions of years?  We think not.  Let us know your opinion ==>    

1) Scientific Prehistory by Melvin Cook (Family History Pub., Bountiful, UT, 1993), p. 168.

Thursday, March 15, 2018

Rush Limbaugh and Young Earth Science (YES)

Happy Pi π Day (belated)‼  I was shocked in a happy way when I heard Rush Limbaugh yesterday talk about the age-of-the-earth controversy (just like Rick Perry, Marco Rubio & Ben Carson!).  Is Rush ready to embrace Young Earth Science (YES)?  In the context of the death of Stephen Hawking and the Big Bang, Rush divulged this,

The moment in timeline on this gigantic time of which we are not even the size of a speck of sand… To put this in perspective, the timeline of earth from beginning to present, it’s either billions and billions or it’s 10,000 years. ... Let’s say billions and billions [Sagan anyone?].  If it’s billions and billions or even if it’s 10,000, our time here - given life expectancy, 83, whatever it is - is a speck of sand.  Who are we?  What kind of audacious arrogance do we have to say that the way things are now is the way they were at the birth or creation or the so-called norm?  We don’t even know that!

His brother David admitted that the young earth view is a live option. [1]   Furthermore, a 2014 AP-GfK poll found that 36% doubt the old-earth view.  Here are my podcasts confronting Old Earth Fallacies and defending YES.  Rush pushes against the mainstream, arguing against the billions of years hawked by Big Science is non-conformist as well.  Rush said this yesterday,

... I’m not a conformist, and I don’t get sucked in by conventional wisdom.  In fact, conventional wisdom repels me.  Conventional wisdom actually pushes back at me. I don’t think I’m constitutionally capable of joining conventional wisdom, because it’s groupthink.  And you have to set aside your own brain, you have to set aside your curiosity, you have to disregard your own common sense, and you have to subscribe to the groupthink. ...

By the way, Stephen Hawking in his early days was more open to God's reality:  "If we discover a complete theory, it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason – for then we should know the mind of God" (A Brief History Of Time, 1988).  Could God have created a planet that's only thousands of years old?  Speak your mind >>

My book, YES -Young Earth Science, supports a youthful world from history, philosophy and science (  How does pi relate to the origins debate?  Find out here.

1) Jesus on Trial by David Limbaugh (Regnery, Wash. DC, 2014), p. 290.

Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Does Google censor Young Earth Science (YES)?

First, to make plain the grammar - I am not saying that I have definite proof that Google is censoring the young earth view, but I would love to have your feedback on this question.  One opinion piece from US News claims that Google is the world's biggest censor.  Project Veritas recently released video proof that exposed Twitter for banning  views that run counter to the Silicon Valley mindset.

One interesting paper in Nature from some Japanese researchers last year showed that lightning can produce gamma rays which can lead to the formation of Carbon-14.  Of course this would require some revisions in radiocarbon dating which does not consider this source.  When was the last time you dated some coal or a dino bone using the C-14 method?  My prediction is that you will get thousands of years and not millions.

Another paper that did not get much attention is from the American Nuclear Society.  Robert Hayes points out that not taking into account differences in diffusion rates can lead to serious errors (the isochron method is intended to improve radiometric dates):

By taking into consideration the isotope effect (differential mass diffusion rates) when measuring isotopic ratios from very old samples, the distribution dependency in the coefficient ratios will cause a bias if isotopic diffusion rates are not identical throughout a sample.  The isotope effect is that isotopes having a smaller atomic mass will diffuse faster throughout a medium than will their heavier counterparts causing concentration gradients of their ratios even when there are no contributions from radioactive decay. The application to Rb/Sr dating is evaluated and shown to result in expected age overestimates when isotopic ratios are employed to linearize the isochron.  ...  the only method to fully eliminate the isotope effect is to not use isotopic ratios at all in radioisotopic dating as the physics do not require the use of isotopic ratios for geochronological dating.  However, without the ratios, the data are inherently noisy. [emphasis added]

So we see that the data favors Young Earth Science (YES).  Be sure to get our book which supports a youthful world from history, philosophy and science.  Does Google censor YES?  Let us know what you think:

**special thx to Jay Wile for the heads up on lightning & diffusion rates