I Dont Have Enough Faith to be an Evolutionist - Skepticism of Evolution
(06-19-2019, 10:06 PM)Stanis Wrote:
(06-18-2019, 06:16 AM)cassini Wrote:
During this time of discovery two scholars, Robert Sungenis and Richard Delano also took an interest in the CMB’s findings. To them, interpretation of the data shows the Earth sits at the centre of the universe.
Such were the accolades from the scientific community for the CMR/CMB and its Nobel prizes that Robert Sungenis and Rick Delano felt confident in the discoveries involved. Accordingly they decided to make a movie and a CD out of it they called The Principle

If they really believed "the data shows" that, they could have submitted their findings to a peer reviewed journal. 

You might think no scientific journal would publish it, but in fact journals do regularly publish alternative interpretations. Petit successfully published several papers on a variable-speed-of-light alternative to inflation theories that appeared to be consistent with existing data.

So, if their work could really stand up to scholarly review, it would likely be featured in a top level publication like Nature or Science.

Instead, they make a film, and they had to mislead several of the people to get the interviews for the film. Is that what a scholar would do? Or is that more consistent with what a huckster would do?


Let us bring ourselves up to date on this subject of uniformitarianism (long-ages) based on the research by the French geologist-sedimentologist Guy Berthault. Long-ages on Earth are based on the theory that sediments are separate deposits built upon one another at intervils of millions of years. Experiments conducted by this man at the University of Colorado between 1985 and 1990 have shattered all conceived ideas that sediments were laid down one layer on top of another throughout the ages.[1] In fact he found sediments are laid down in a sideways motion, thus in fact the bottom strata of deposits, always considered the oldest according to Lyell, can well be younger than the top strata further back along the path of any deposit. This evidence, after confirmed and valid tests, means animal fossils in one stratum at or near the surface can well be buried longer than fossils in the lower strata, thus shattering the whole ‘fossil-column’ assertions of the evolutionists. This means fossils found at the bottom of a ravine may well be younger than a fossil found further up the cliff-face. And not only does this falsify Lyell’s ‘scientific’ postulation that the ages of fossils can be classified according to their depth in the rock, but it shows that the radioactive dating used to confirm this false theory is itself manipulated to suit the evolutionists. Other discoveries, such as radioactive halos left behind by decaying radioactive elements in the ‘Precambrian granites’ and coal, showing fossil fuels like coal and oil, as well as granite formed very quickly and not over millions of years,[2] provide empirical evidence that challenge theories of long-ages.
     Guy Berthault’s work[3] we must admit, totally falsified Hutton’s and Lyell’s nineteenth century theories of the Earth’s sediments and the fossils in them that they claimed proved all were laid down and formed successively over millions of years. Berthault offered scientific evidence that showed the long-age sedimentation geology used by Darwin for his evolution is no longer feasible. The geologist’s findings were published in the French scientific review Fusion. Peter Wilders tells us how the scientific world reacted.
‘First was the classical and normally most effective tactic of silence. By not replying to the documentation sent to them, the Geological Society, in this case that of France, blocked all dialogue on it. The author of the experiments countered their tactics by sending a copy of the scientific journal to all the 1,200 or so active members of the society. In this way, everyone in the geological community in France was made aware of the experimental results. The society retaliated by attacking the experimenter from authority, i.e., they claimed that all the geologists for three centuries could not be wrong; therefore the experimental evidence could be safely ignored. The success of such a method depended upon the geologists being united. To a large extent they were, but a few responded independently of the society saying they were interested… Supportive geologists fearing for their credibility and, therefore livelihood, wait in the wings.’[4]
Wilders goes on to say that the final rejection of Berthault’s evidence came from the now Galilean Catholic hierarchy as might be expected. They placed a letter in the Geological Society’s half-yearly newsletter and, giving no heed at all to the empirical evidence supplied by Berthault, they accused the scientist of ‘pseudo-science and creationism.’ ‘By attacking his personal credibility they knew that most geologists would not take his work seriously’ wrote Wilders.              
Finally, there is the Mount St Helens volcano eruption in Washington State in 1980. In a matter of hours and days layer after layer of sedimentation formed before the very eyes of the scientists studying the explosion. This demonstrated that the supposed thousands, if not millions of years of uniformitarian sediment building, could in fact be created in hours or days. In other words a catastrophic six-month long flooding, revealed in Genesis, together with Earthquakes and volcanic eruptions that bent some sediments, which then receded, could well have formed in those six months most of the sedimentary and igneous deposits as well as the great canyons and other land formations found on Earth today.

[1] Geological Society of France’s Journal, October 1993.
[2] R. V. Gentry: Creation’s Tiny Mystery, Earth Sciences Association, Tennessee, 1986.
[3] Guy Berthault: Principles of geologic dating in question, Fusion, May-June, 2000 pp.32-39.
[4] P. Wilders: David and Goliath, Christian Order, May 2001, p.335.

Note it was the Catholic hierarchy, not the Protestant hierarchy who DISMISSED Berthault's findings. Here once again when it comes to the origins of Genesis it was the Protestants who kept to the literal while Rome went with the long-age evolutionists.

Messages In This Thread
RE: I Dont Have Enough Faith to be an Evolutionist - Skepticism of Evolution - by cassini - 06-20-2019, 05:59 AM

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)