Occam’s razor
How has sea level changed over history?
Scientists think that in ancient times the global climate and sea level went through many cyclic changes. Why do they believe this and what is the pattern of the sea level according to written history? This post addresses the gross features of the global mean sea level (GMSL), and not minor variations and trends. (more…)
Share this:
Beware of the bias
Everyone is biased
If you change the bias in lawn bowling, the ball curves in the opposite direction and finishes in a different position. Similarly, if you change the bias (assumptions) in a scientific investigation you may obtain a different outcome.
In this post we look at the occurrence of bias in scientific investigations. (more…)
Share this:
Converting ancient secular dates to biblical dates
There are two main explanations of the earth’s geological history. One (Biblical) is based on recorded history in the Bible and the other (Uniformitarian) is based on assuming that the present (processes today) is the key to the past (ancient processes) and on the hypothetical geologic time scale. The biblical explanation allows for catastrophic events (such as the flood of Noah), whereas the Uniformitarian explanation minimizes the role of catastrophic events (because it has a preference for gradual events). The biblical explanation mainly involves rapid processes over short periods of time, whereas the Uniformitarian explanation mainly involves slow processes over long periods of time. (more…)
Share this:
Six reasons to be skeptical of the geologic time scale
The concept of geologic (or deep) time is now part of our culture. It’s a product of a secular worldview that rejects biblical history and is the foundation of atheism. And it’s so popular that I expect few people will read this post or question the status quo.
The methods used to determine the geologic time scale are summarized in Appendix A. And the main differences between the geologic time scale and the biblical time scale are summarized in Appendix B. Despite its seemingly scientific basis, there are many reasons to be skeptical of the geologic time scale. Some of these are summarized below.
Orally-transmitted Aboriginal stories
According to the biblical time scale (Appendix B), after the ice age the oceans would have reached their current level about 3,800 years ago, which is 3,200 years less that according to the geologic time scale. This implies that Australian Aboriginal stories describing times when sea levels were lower than today were probably 3,700 years old, which is more credible than the 10,000 years quoted by researchers. It also represents about 148 generations, which is more realistic than the supposed transmission of these stories over 400 generations. So the biblical time scale provides a more credible explanation of these orally-transmitted Aboriginal stories than the geologic time scale. (more…)
Share this:
Soft tissue in dinosaur bones
In 2005 paleontologist Mary Schweitzer found the first evidence for soft tissues in a dinosaur bone. Blood vessels, red blood cells, and soft and stretchy ligaments were found in the bone. Also proteins like collagen, hemoglobin, osteocalcin, actin, and tubulin were found. And Schweitzer has even recovered fragments of the more fragile and complex molecule, DNA. These are complex molecules that continually tend to break down to simpler ones. The bone was said to be 68 million years old according to the geologic time scale. Schweitzer was the first researcher to identify and isolate soft tissues (such as collagen, a connective protein) from an ancient fossil bone (Appendix A).
Soft tissue has also been extracted from bones that are assumed to be from the Jurassic period which lasted from 145-200 million years. And in 2015 fibers and cellular structures were discovered preserved in 75 million year old dinosaur specimens. Both of these ages are assigned according to the geological time scale. Typically an animal’s remains mineralize as they decay, so most specimens of this supposed age consist of inorganic material. (more…)
Share this:
Heads I win, tails you lose
Coin flipping is a way of choosing between two alternatives. The person who calls correctly wins. It’s often used to make decisions at the beginning of games and sports. But if someone says “heads I win, and tails you lose”, then you always lose! That’s not fair. But it’s how people often treat the Bible. They are willing to accept many ideas, as long as they aren’t based on the Bible.
For example, Australian researchers have investigated Aboriginal stories describing times when sea levels were lower than today (Reid et al, 2014). The orally-transmitted Aboriginal stories were written down after Europeans arrived in Australia in 1788. The stories describe coastal flooding which the researchers identify with the rise in sea level since the last ice age to its present level about 7,000 years ago on the geologic time scale (Appendix A). See Appendix B for the equivalent biblical dates. The team analyzed the contours of the land where the stories were told and used reconstructions of prehistoric sea levels to date the origins of each of the stories. They claim that these stories can be 10,000 years old which represents accurate oral transmission across 400 generations. Nunn and Reid (2015) expanded their analysis to 21 stories about coastal drowning that in most cases was considered likely to recall the effects of postglacial sea-level rise more than 7,000 years ago. They also noted that “no Aboriginal stories are known that talk of the sea level falling and exposing coastal lands”. (more…)
Share this:
Was Noah’s flood global or local?
I have received a comment that challenges my understanding that the flood described in Genesis 6-9 of the Bible was a global event. The reasons given for the comment include:
– The biblical passages quoted don’t support it in any way.
– Many people who believe Noah was a real person, also believe the flood was local.
– Scholars devote their lives to their studies, and while we don’t always have to agree with what they say, we also don’t have to completely disregard them, either.
They conclude that I’m making a huge assumption to believe that the flood was global rather than local.
My understanding with regard to this topic is based on the biblical text and my concerns about the common interpretation of sedimentary rock layers. I will begin with the Bible as it is the primary historical record of the flood. (more…)
George's Journal 
RECENT COMMENTS