The statements by Wise on coal were not to prove a young earth, but rather as a rebuttal to the claim that coal has to form in long periods of time used to deny validity of the views he subscribes to. So tests prove that coal can be produced rapidly.
Dont write him off. I had a couple of interchanges w him over the yrs and respect his honesty…i just found a record of one interchange all the way back in 2003! He has always been kind to answer my questions …even as juvenile as they may have appeared. I dont think he is interested to prove a young earth with science but rather to do science and research which he loves to do and offer conclusions to call into question the validity of the conventional old earth evolutionary models we are innundated w from every major university. .
Driving back from TN today, for the first time i noticed what i assume to be coal seams along the highway as it cut thru mountain passes. Long straight runs of black rock in thick and thin layers with light colored sedimentary layers between. Could this be created from a swamp that got “flooded?” Isnt a swamp a flood already? The bark theory seems valid…the sedimentary layers around are full of marine fossils.
It is going to be fun one day to watch reruns on how God did all of this. We are probably all off and maybe really off
The geology explanation is by episodes of sediment deposition, lithification, uplifting and tilting, erosion, sea incursion with additional deposition, more lithification, then more erosion so the whole thing is visible. Each step in the process takes millions of years.
Contact a young earth geologist for his or her opinion. All i can say is that if GOOD professional historians attempting to put the pieces of evidence of a recent American historical event will write books that display very different perspectives, then i would fully expect this with even more profound differences of historical interpretation of the rocks. The stuff i have read on flood theories is that along w the flood came monumental geological events beyond just erosion. These cannot be proven if course…just theories of consideration to match a view that might be believed.
That’s how creationists tend to do it. Nobody knows anything; it’s all just a matter of opinion; different interpretations of the same facts. As long as you’re willing not to look closely, it all sort of works.
Unfortunately for Greg, some people do look closely. Fortunately for Greg, he can always rely on “nobody knows anything”, etc.
I’ve searched the Creationist literature for years and not one of those brave YEC geologists will touch angular unconformities. Not Austin, not Snelling, not Wise, not Baumgardner. Not a single one will offer an explanation. The only thing I’ve seen is a single reference to the Great Unconformity in the Grand Canyon where an AIG article claims “the Fountains of the Deep caused it” with no explanation HOW.
When all the YEC professional geologists ignore one of the most common geologic features found everywhere across the planet that should tell you something. Does it?
Rephrase: Wise has a theory that coal seams are made of tree bark fr the flood. Coal seams in north America, Europe, but no where in the Atlantic. He happens to subscribe to a young earth perspective. So critics called him out suggesting that coal requires long ages to produce in order to debunk his young earth perspective as imbeccile. Wise then provided evidence that coal can be produced in a matter of weeks with volcanic ash to stimulate the rapidity of formulation.
If they’re tree bark from the flood, shouldn’t they all have been washed into the ocean and be found in deep waters? Then again, if real geology is correct, they should be found in continental areas, and the ocean should have little sediment of any sort. Are you at all familiar with plate tectonics?
Anyway, it isn’t the requirement of long ages for a single coal seam that’s the problem for Wise. It’s that there are coal seams of many different ages, each of them recording the demise of a forest, and containing fossils of plants from many different ages. Well, that and radiometric dating, stratigraphic correlation, and so on.
Do you or @swamidass have any fellow geologists who can review this resource by Wise for legitimacy. When i watched this, it all seemed quite fitting that the geologic column matches a flood theory and is not fitting of a evolutionary one. But i do not have a trained eye for these things to vocalize confidence in this claim.
If you know someone, it would be important that the person not have such a bias against a worldwide flood theory for the formulation of the geologic column that will cause eye rolling and rejection before actually seeing Wises research and conclusions. The resource i sent before talked of the nature of the bio organisms in sedimentary layers fitting a creationist model. This speaks of how sediment layers found universally dispersed through all the world seems to fit a worldwide flood. I found this resource packed with what appeared to be sound scientific language and reasoning and would be interested to learn if Wise is hitting on all cylinders.
I’m afraid that anyone educated in geology will have that bias unless they, like Wise, have a countervailing YEC bias. Only ignorance would save a person from that bias. So you’re out of luck there.
Yeah, that’s nonsense. Wise isn’t hitting on all cylinders; in fact his car is missing its engine entirely.
Yes, we are all familiar with the great floating forest theory that in no way can equal the amount of material that became the stores of coal that are available on this planet. Nor the oil, nor the natural gas. They all require time. You have fallen victim to a red herring. In this case, that the issue is that coal forming quickly somehow explains a YEC perspective (it does not) and that it is even the issue in contention (it is also not.) That coal can form quickly is not the issue. Proving that coal can form quickly provides no help to Dr. Wise or the YEC position. The issue is that coal formed over millions of years (quickly, in some cases) from material that grew over millions of years in order to provide the amount of material that makes up the coal stores we see today. No matter the gesticulations, one cannot in tens of thousands or even hundreds of thousands of years, grow enough material to account for the coal deposits seen on our planet.
There are a lot of resources links at that page. I’m not sure which resource in particular you are referring to here. Just finding similar sediments all around the world doesn’t necessitate a global flood. yes, it could be evidence of a global flood but it doesn’t say that global flood must be the cause.
I would like to take your word on that but then again, the camp from which you are part consists of many who cannot get themselves to admit that the laws of physics cannot describe our existence without a Cause outside of it. When i further the contention, get,“well there could be naturalistic understanding outside of our knowledge” i think, “Ok then”
Likewise, you speak on behalf of many who believe that the natural consists of a paradigm of selection of completely random mutations, where in the case of an eye, require the bone eye socket group, nervous system group, muscle group and eye mechanics group to wait on each other’s happening upon their mutation to build highly complex forms in themselves that must fit with the others (im gonna stop there because i feel like im insulting myself to even think i have to explain)
I have been told in response to this type of scenario, well Greg, give me a statistical analysis as to why its not possible. Really? How can one possibly do that? I know its possible that after a trillion throws of a coin its possible to get all heads, but do i have to give you a statistical anaysis of this?
So about the qty of coal, i will have to bow out and forward this to experts. I do have to say that in this presentation offered by Wise, he has very compelling evidence that wrecks the conventional evolutionary perspective. Evolutionists have chosen to gather at the church of darwin, and like even any great American history author, can easily miss some of the most telling evidences in the rocks where one small errant snowball in the beginning of determinig the history of our existence snowballs into a glacier of apostacy in describing what they are speaking to us.
So for the qty of coal- i will look for explanations while i encourage evolutionists to look inwardly to any potential mistakes in their camp and to view the resources by Wise on flood geology because it is compelling.
Gregg Davidson and Ken Wolgemuth (Christ-followers and PhD geologists) wrote a piece with Joel Duff (Christ-follower and PhD Biologist) addressing “Is Genesis History” for BioLogos several years ago.
I didn’t see any research to address in the link you provided, but is this what you are looking for?
I see @Joel_Duff has already popped in. Gregg Davidson isn’t a regular here, but he is an occasional visitor and might possibly be summoned by the “magic @” if you want to give it a try.
