Oh Snap! Young Earth Truth is Chewgy Fire‼

Are you low key about being a Science Truther?  Standard geological dating methods are unreliable – fax that!  Old Earth Fallacies (#OEF) and billions of years (trillions anyone?) are sus.  Does that jargon throw you off?  If so, then it’s possible that y’all don’t have a teen in your household.  Many are awed by the tekno-babble of Big Science when they take OEF’s at face value and don’t apply their critical thinking skills to the age-of-the-earth debate.  Whence arises the old earth idea?  We read this from The Elements of Geology

by William Harmon Norton (1905):

 

The age of the earth [section title].  The thickness of the stratified rocks now exposed upon the eroded surface of the continents is very great. …Knowing how slowly sediments accumulate upon the sea floor, we must believe that the successive cycles which the earth has seen stretch back into a past almost inconceivably remote, and measure tens of millions and perhaps even hundreds of millions of years.

Oof‼  Obviously, Norton missed my podcast on Catastrophism.  Look at the sandstone beds above from his book.  If each layer was formed rapidly (remember Mount St. Helens from the 1980’s) and there is no large time gap between the layers (look up paraconformity), then this outcrop is a testimony to Young Earth Science (#YES).  Norton continued,

 

The great length of geologic time inferred from the slow change of species [section title].  Life forms, like landforms, are thus subject to change under the influence of their changing environment and of forces acting from within.  How slowly they change may be seen in the apparent stability of existing species.  In the lifetime of the observer and even in the recorded history of man, species seem as stable as the mountain and the river. But life forms and landforms are alike variable, both in nature and still more under the shaping hand of man. … Assuming also that life forms have always changed as they are changing at present, we come to realize something of the immensity of geologic time required for the evolution of life from its earliest lowly forms up to man.

 

Talk about anvils and alligators!  If we have 3 snakes and 5 apples, does that give us 8 Snapples?  Geological change and atoms-to-Adam transformation are two different processes.  Also, is not this circular reasoning?  Evolution needs millions of years and we know there have been millions of years of earth history because Darwin was right.

 

One objection to Young Earth Theory Intelligence (#YETI) is the assumption that it takes billions of years and exploding stars for certain elements to form.  Not so, for we read this from the American Institute of Physics:

 

Researchers in Japan and Canada are now challenging a piece of the Big Bang puzzle.  Do all of the elements heavier than iron really originate from stars exploding, or are some created deep within the Earth’s mantle, thanks to convection dynamics driven by plate tectonics?

I have argued for RPM (Rapid Plate Movements) in my prior book Is a Young Earth Possible?  Looking for Christmas gift ideas?  I have written two books defending a youthful planet from history and science.  Even Pravda allows for the presentation of young earth arguments!***

 

If you know someone who wants to receive our monthly newsletter, please have them contact me with the request:

https://totalyouth.us/contact-us

                                                                                                                 

 

** Special thanks to Crevo Headlines for the info on element formation.

Note: the quotes from The Elements of Geology by William Harmon Norton may be found on pages 293 & 302.

*** The claim about moon dust should be reconsidered.

 

#MOYA #BOYA #YES #YETI #YoungEarth #Darwin #OldEarth #HeavyMetals #tectonics #Geology #ScienceTruther #BigScience #Christmas

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

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

Prepare for the ICE AGE

This is our private stockpile for the Ice Age.  Subarctic temperatures will force us underground for a billion, billion years. - Dodo (Ice Age)

Is another Ice Age coming?  I doubt it.  But what about the Ice Age of the distant past?  Young Earth Science (YES) holds that this planet is thousands of years old (not billions).  Many geo theorists claim that the multiple layers in ice cores in Greenland pose a problem for the YES idea of one Ice Age.  However, the layers are not always annual – many layers can occur in one year.  J. Southon writing in Quaternary Research freely admits, “… the GISP2 (Greenland Ice Sheet Project) ice contains many subannual structures which mimic annual bands …”  R. B. Alley et al. stated in the Journal of Geophysical Research, “… it is almost certain that variability exists at the subseasonal or storm level, at the annual level… We certainly must entertain the possibility of misidentifying the deposit of a large storm or a snow dune as an entire year…”  We propose that there were tremendous storms in the past partly due to extreme global volcanism (including the oceans) at the time of the global cataclysm that world legends testify too.

Mainstream science cannot explain the Ice Age and over 60 theories have been proposed.  J. K. Charlesworth explains that there are “… an absolute riot of theories ranging from the remotely possible to the mutually contradictory and the palpably inadequate.” [1]  After the worldwide catastrophe of a few thousand years ago volcanic ash cooled the earth; tremendous eruptions in the seas heated up the oceans. This combination of higher precipitation, caused by the hot seas, and cooler summers produced the Ice Age. This is the only model that successfully predicts huge ice sheets.

Big Science should take a hint from former aeronautical engineer and award winning SciFi author, James Hogan who said, “A comparatively young word [thousands not millions] – in the sense of the surface we observe today – is compatible with unguided Catastrophist theories…” [2] Hogan states that conventional dating, “was more a product of materialism’s fight with religion than an empirical construct … [it was] manufactured to provide the long time scales that Lyell and Darwin needed.” [3] Hogan maintains that, “Mountain uplifts and other formations show indications of being younger than conventional geology maintains.” [4] One example that Hogan presents that challenges standard dating uses thermoluminescence of lunar material which was dated at less than 10,000 years. [5] If the Moon is thousands of years old, then maybe the Earth is too!

The Ice Age is apparently referenced in the Walam Olum (Red Record) the tribal chronicle of the Lenni Lenape or Delaware Indians. [6] 

Notes:

1) The Quaternary Era Vol. 2 by J.K. Charlesworth (Edward Arnold, London, 1957), p. 1532.

2) Kicking the Sacred Cow by James Hogan (Baen, New York, NY, 2004), p. 47.

3) Ibid., p. 175, Note: Hogan is endorsing Velikovsky’s opinion.

4) Ibid., p. 174.

5) Ibid., p. 206.
6) The Lenâpé and their legends : with the complete text and symbols of the Walam olum, a new translation, and an inquiry into its authenticity (1885) by Daniel Brinton & C.S. Rafinesque (Kindle), loc. 3489, 3490.

Straight Out Of Science (SOOS)

Should we always trust Big Science?  Michael Crichton (Jurassic World) said, "Consensus is the business of politics.  Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right … The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus."  Let's consider some scientific frauds that fooled many in the scientific community.

Piltdown Man, found in 1912, was supposedly an early hominid.  It wasn’t until 1953 that the scam was brought to light.  The skull was human, but the jawbone was from an orangutan.

In November of 1999, Archaeoraptor came on the scene as an allegedly feathered dino.  Almost a year later, National Geographic magazine (Oct. 2000) admitted that Archaeoraptor was a fake.  But the damage was done and some even today may not be aware of the hoax. [1] 

Can science get political?  Trofim Lysenko (Трофи́м Лысе́нко, d. 1976) was a Soviet biologist who applied Jean-Baptiste Lamarck's idea of acquired characteristics.  Lysenko denied the ideas of Gregor Mendel (d. 1884), the father of Genetics.  Joseph Stalin favored Lysenko's program and over three thousand biologists were sent to prison, fired or executed.  Lysenkoism is the manipulation/distortion of science in order to teach what is dictated by the powers that be.

Science by force fails.  We are reminded of these sayings from Yoda:  "Many of the truths that we cling to depend on our point of view [i.e. WorldView]" and "You must unlearn what you have learned."

Consider these wise words from Emil Røyrvik:

Efforts to make people bow uncritically to the authority of a dogmatic representation of Science, seems largely to produce ridicule, opposition and inaction, and ultimately undermines the legitimacy and role of both science and politics in open democracies. [2]

Reject Old Earth Fallacies (OEF) and learn about Young Earth Science (YES) by getting our newly updated book (w/ a brilliant new cover).

Science is not defined by majority vote.  Some would call global warming a hoax.  Let us know what you think:  YoungEarthScience@yahoo.com

Notes:

1) YES - Young Earth Science by Jay Hall (IDEAS, Big Spring, TX, 2014), p. 182.

2) quoted in Hall, p. 192.