Another blatant lie from aig.

[Crazyharp81602]

Me again.

Here's another false claim made by aig that states that the early 19 century British scientists defended the so-called "literal genesis according to the yecs" and regards it as an historical account while in fact these scientists would have been easily excommunicated from the yec group had the yecs know of that writings in full text confirms the fact that the earth is far more ancient than 6,000 years and the flood was a local event.

The article is here.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v11/i2/geology.asp

Any imputs on it?

Crazyharp81602

[djmullen]

The article lists Buckland as one of those scientists. He actually did try to defend Genesis, but in 1830 he formally announced that there was no way that the Genesis flood could be harmonized with geology. I think that Gould mentioned this in one of his books. If I remember correctly, Buckland was also an ordained minister.

[Manitoumulegirl]

Interesting how the author manages to give a false patina of authenticity to the whole thing with a mix of truth, half-truth, and a few outlandish lies. I guess you can put a scholarly slant on ANYTHING, if you try hard enough. I like the way they gloss over the entire Gallileo thing. Like, "Oh well, in the case of the rotation of the universe around the earth, the Bible only SEEMED to say that." Whatever. :devil1:

[Albion]

Well, I had a quick look at it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that article omit Adam Sedgwick's recantation of a Noachian flood origin of geological features?

http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/apr02.html

[Jet Black]

Well, I had a quick look at it. Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't that article omit Adam Sedgwick's recantation of a Noachian flood origin of geological features?

http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/postmonth/apr02.html

interesting stuff.