Please see the Canyon of Lodore and Split Mountain page for more information on Split Mountain. Then use “Back” from your browser to return to this page. Also, please see “Ancestral River Systems of the World” - A pictorial world tour of locations where river systems cut through mountain ranges instead of taking easier routes around them. http://www.durangobill.com/AncestralRivers/AncestralRiversIndex.html




   Perhaps nowhere else is the arrogance/ignorance of Creationists better illustrated than the contortions/delusions they go through to try to explain how the Colorado River established a path across the Kaibab Plateau. First, they invent a false argument claiming that the “evolutionists” required the Colorado River to flow uphill over the Kaibab Plateau before it started to cut down through it to form the Grand Canyon.

   No legitimate geologist has ever made such an “uphill” claim, but of course the Creationists are not interested in reality.

   However, ignorant Creationists fully believe that a large remnant lake from Noah’s Flood wouldn’t have had any problem duplicating the same uphill maneuver. For example, please see Eric Hovind’s Blogspot:




   The Colorado River starts cutting the Grand Canyon at Lees Ferry nearly 60 miles further to the NNE at an elevation of about 3,100 feet. (Off the top right of the picture.) While the Creationists fully believe that “their lake” could climb over the 7,700 foot high barrier, let’s look at alternate lower locations (using current topography) where the water would go if you could fill a lake on the east side of the Kaibab. (All of the following lower potential routes can be verified by Google Earth.)

1) Roughly follow U. S. highway route # 89 westward through southern Utah around the north end of the Kaibab and never go above 5,640 feet.

2) Again, go west around the south end of the Kaibab between the South Rim and Flagstaff, AZ and never go above 6,530 feet. (Max altitude is near 35.68 N, 111.87 W)

3) Roughly follow Arizona highway route # 77 south from the Little Colorado River and cross over the Mogollon Rim at under 6,510 feet near Show Low, AZ. In the 110 mile stretch from Show Low to just south of Flagstaff there are multiple other routes over the Mogollon Rim under 7,000 feet.

4) Follow Interstate Route 40 east from Arizona into New Mexico and cross the Continental Divide into Rio Grande drainage at under 7,270 feet.

5) Back up the San Juan and Chaco Rivers (southeastward across New Mexico) and cross over into the Rio Grande drainage. (Cross the Continental Divide near 35.91 N, 107.44 W) at under 6,680 feet.

6) Back up the Yampa River and then roughly follow routes 13 and 789 north into the North Platte drainage in Wyoming. In the process you cross the Continental Divide at 41.487 N, 107.882 W at 6,730 feet.

7) Back up the Green River into Wyoming and follow the Union Pacific Railroad east from Rock Springs, WY. Cross the Continental Divide at 41.63 N, 108.31 W at under 6,950 feet. A “prairie” route stays under 6,830 feet when it crosses the Divide at 41.656N, 108.420 W.

8) Follow the Union Pacific Railroad west from Rock Springs, WY and cross over into Utah’s Bear River drainage a short distance west of Kemmerer, WY. Stay under 7,130 feet.

   If you are an ignorant Young Earth Creationist, then the topography has had very little time to change, and you are forced into the contortion/delusion that the Colorado River/remnant lake had to flow uphill to get over the Kaibab. Of course the Creationists only have to have faith in Noah’s Flood. They are arrogantly ignorant when it comes to topography. They have “faith” that their lake could easily cross the 7,700 foot barrier of the Kaibab and ignore the lower escape routes.

   The topography was obviously different 5.5 million years ago when the Colorado River established its current course across the Kaibab. Five and a half million years ago, the Kaibab was significantly lower, and the terrain to the east of the Kaibab was higher. Over the intervening 5.5 million years, there has been a renewed uplift of the Kaibab combined with over one thousand feet of erosion to the east of the Kaibab (e.g. at Cameron, AZ). Today’s topography is the result of geologic changes that have taken place in the last five and a half million years.

      If you are interested in the geologic history, please see “Evolution of the Colorado River” at  http://www.durangobill.com/Paleorivers_preface.html . Some 5.5 million years ago, the river’s route was downhill all the way. We’ll leave the “flow uphill” delusions to the willfully ignorant Creationists.





   The Creationists insist that all the Paleozoic sedimentary layers that we see in the Grand Canyon were laid down during Noah’s Flood. So far, four thousand feet of sediments. There’s another 4,000 feet of Triassic and Jurassic sediments that were eroded away from the Grand Canyon area long ago, but they can be seen in other areas such as Zion National Park. You can add several more thousands of  feet on top of this (e. g. The Mesa Verde Group - visit Mesa Verde National Park). All of this is on top of 14,000 feet of sedimentary layers that are present in the Grand Canyon Supergroup. Altogether, we’ve got an easy 25,000 to 30,000-foot accumulation of sediments. If the Noah’s Flood story is going to be true, all of this has to be eroded from somewhere, transported to the Grand Canyon/Colorado Plateau and laid down during “the Flood”. (Let’s say one year, max.). In any case, the water would have to be pretty murky as it would need enough mud to have 100 feet of sediments settle out per day.

   Whales eat by swimming through the ocean and opening their mouths to gulp/eat many thousands of pounds of plankton and small fish per day. (e.g. see “All about Whales” http://www.enchantedlearning.com/subjects/whales/species/Bluewhale.shtml ). However, if the water were this muddy, they would be eating many thousands of pounds of mud per day. Perhaps Noah had a (very) large aquarium aboard the ark where he kept the whales. (And the sharks,…)

   Or, perhaps, the Creationists have a deep psychological need to believe, and this “deep psychological need” overrides answering “the tough questions”.




   The picture below illustrates the famous angular unconformity in the Grand Canyon. The original photograph was taken by Edwin McKee, and the USGS has a larger version at: http://libraryphoto.cr.usgs.gov/cgi-bin/show_picture.cgi?ID=ID.%20McKee,%20E.D.%20%20280ct
 
   The view is part of what you see if you look north from Moran Point (popular viewpoint) on the south rim of the Grand Canyon. The highlights of the photograph include a horizontal layer of Tapeats Sandstone on top of the tilted layers of the Grand Canyon Supergroup. The Colorado River is at the bottom of the picture. Let’s compare a geologic explanation for the angular unconformity (a horizontal layer on top of tilted layers) vs. what might happen if you ask a willfully ignorant creationist for an explanation. A brief synopsis of the geologic story follows:

1) Starting about 1.2 billion years ago, thousands of feet of limestone, silt, and volcanic rock (black layer) were laid down in multiple horizontal layers to form the Grand Canyon Supergroup.

2) Starting about 800 million years ago, these layers were uplifted and subjected to tensional stretching. The surface rock fractured into blocks - some of which were faulted downward and tilted in the process. Most of the rest of the Grand Canyon Supergroup was eroded away by surface erosion, but the tilted layers which had been faulted downward were safely below surface erosion.

3) Erosion beveled the surface to a nearly horizontal plane, but the tilted layers of the Grand Canyon Supergroup that had been faulted downward out of harms way were preserved.

4) About 570 million years ago, this portion of the North American continent subsided below sea level, and thousands of feet of new horizontal sedimentary layers were deposited on top of the old beveled surface. (Which included the top of the preserved tilted layers of the Grand Canyon Supergroup.) The first of these new layers was the Tapeats Sandstone

5) There were multiple episodes of sedimentary deposition and above sea level erosion over the next 500 million years, but the Grand Canyon area has been above sea level for the last 70 million years.

6) About 5.4 million years ago, the Colorado River established its current course, and subsequent erosion has sliced a deep canyon that allows us to see a major portion of the whole story.

   Multiple other angular unconformities exist throughout the world. Photographs of many of these can be seen by running a Google image search using:   angular unconformity


   Now, let’s suppose that you ask a Young Earth Creationist how an angular unconformity is produced. You might get a 3-word reply - “God did it.” You might even get a 4-word reply - “Noah’s Flood did it”. If you ask HOW “God did it” or “Noah’s Flood did it”, in all probability they will accuse you of being an agent of Satan. They will assert that you will face eternal damnation because you are attempting to deny their “deep psychological need to believe” in an “all powerful father” who will protect them from the real world. Frequently, this is accompanied by some obscure quote from the Bible.

   And then they will run someplace else and proclaim that their faith has protected them from another agent of Satan.




   The photo below by Kevin Delaney of Salt Lake City, Utah shows a 2,000-foot thick section of the Green River Shale as seen in Desolation Canyon, Utah. (Animals on the far side of the river are cows.) The Green River Formation was deposited long after the sedimentary layers in the Grand Canyon were deposited.


   Note the thousands of visible layers that extend for many miles. The Green River Formation has millions of varves - alternating layers of silt deposited during seasonal variations in water/silt flow. How could these millions of layers that extend uniformly over many miles be deposited in a flood that lasted less than a year?

Please see http://www.durangobill.com/DesolationCanyon.html for more information on Desolation Canyon.

   Varves are common in sedimentary rock layers. The picture to the right is a close-up view of relatively thick varves (Green River varves are much thinner) that show up in Little River State Park in Vermont. (Photo courtesy of the Vermont Geologic Society.) Each layer in the sequence represents an annual deposition pattern that was deposited in a body of water. (Typically a lake) Seasonal variations in water flow (e.g. spring runoffs) wash sediments into the body of water. Larger particles settle out quickly while smaller particles take months to settle out. The size and difference in composition of the particles produces alternating layers. Seasonal variations in the amount of organic material also contribute to the color differences. Each light-colored layer fades into a dark layer to form a couplet. Each couplet is a record of one year’s deposits. In each subsequent year, a new couplet is deposited on top of the previous year’s couplet. The sequence is repeated over multiple years. How could a single “Noah’s Flood” event produce these bands?








   How do creationists respond to this kind of evidence? Typically, they “squeeze eyes shut” and yell “Does not” until out of frustration you give up and go away. Then they will claim “victory” because you haven’t convinced them that their “flood” is pure fiction.

“Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon; it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory.”



A quote from “The God Delusion”

“Faith (belief without evidence) is a virtue. The more your beliefs defy the evidence, the more virtuous you are. Virtuoso believers who can manage to believe something weird, unsupported and insupportable, in the teeth of evidence and reason, are especially highly rewarded.”

Given the Creationists’ fear of the real world (see below), they are more apt to “spout” from the first half of Matthew 6:13. (Hint: “…deliver us from evil”)






   Is there any possibility that Creationists will ever be able to learn anything from scientific evidence? The answer is: “Not likely”. There are large numbers of people who choose to be willfully ignorant, and there is always the scientifically ignorant Ken Ham (and his Creation “Museum”) who revels in catering to the ignorant.
For example, see:
“Once again, creation science advocate Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis is showing his willful ignorance of old earth belief.” http://www.answersincreation.org/rebuttal/aig/daily/2005/20050912_ham_truth.htm
“Ken Ham “I bask in the praise of the ignorant””
http://hjhop.blogspot.com/2008/11/ken-ham-i-bask-in-praise-of-ignorant.html

Just imagine how easy it must be for half-wit Ken Ham to puff up his own ego when his audience is composed of TOTAL dimwits. For more on “Ignorant Ken Ham” please see: http://lists.topica.com/lists/ii_errancy/read/message.html?sort=d&mid=805451894



  
   Ignorance of geology seems to be a common trait shared by both Young Earth Creationists and believers in “Abiotic oil”. The rapidly approaching peak (and subsequent decline) in world oil production due to geologic limits is covered on the Great Rollover and other pages - including the myth of “Abiotic oil”. The “Abiotic oil” people believe that somehow the earth will supply an infinite amount of oil. They believe that “the earth” will provide. You can substitute the words “God” and/or “the Intelligent Designer” for “the earth”. Both the Abiotic oil believers and the Creationists illustrate a faith that has no basis in reality.




   A common tactic used by Creationists is deliberate misrepresentation of reality to promote their own beliefs. Under the guise of “Creation Science”, and “(Un)Intelligent Design” creationism, they present their religious dogmas as if they were real science. One of their favorites is to claim that gully erosion in the Mt. St. Helens ash debris is equivalent to formation of the Grand Canyon.


   The picture above shows the original banner of the Discovery Institute’s Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture - the institutional home of (Un) Intelligent Design Creationism/Evangelism - featuring the familiar picture from the Sistine Chapel of  “God touching Adam.” (Courtesy of NCSE)

   The Discovery Institute is the home of (Un) Intelligent Design Evangelism. The founders (and prime financial backers) of the Discovery Institute represent “an extreme faction of the Religious Right that seeks to replace American democracy with a harsh fundamentalist theocracy” http://www.dangerouscitizen.com/Articles/1090.aspx




1)  Who is the Intelligent Designer?
2)  How did the Intelligent Designer do whatever he/she/it did?
3)  What is the (Un) Intelligent Design reason that humans have toenails, pimples/acne, an appendix, suffer from Alzheimer’s, cancer, etc.?
4)  Why would the “Intelligent” Designer populate the earth with trilobites, dinosaurs, saber-toothed tigers, “woolly” mammoths, etc. and then subsequently remove them?
5) Why does the Intelligent Designer cause/allow hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc.? It seems the Intelligent Designer exists only when religious fundamentalists wish to promote their dogmas.

   Science tries to find answers to questions and uses real world evidence to support these answers. Why do the evangelists want to treat “(Un) Intelligent Design” as a science when the only answer they have for the above questions is: “An unknown Intelligent Designer did it”?

   In regard to virtually all the scientifically ignorant people in the U.S. who would like to promote “(Un) Intelligent Design Evangelism” as a science, isn’t it amazing that most of them actually have a religious dogma that they are trying to promote?

A final question: What do the letters   ID  iots   really stand for?
Answer: (Pick one from each group)
{Immeasurably, Incalculably, Infinitely, Incredibly}
{Dense, Doltish, Dumb, Deficient}

Note: A miscarriage is Mother Nature’s version of an abortion. Thus, if an “Intelligent Designer” is responsible for our world, then the “Intelligent Designer” advocates abortions.




   The document states that (Un) Intelligent Design “promises to reverse the stifling dominance of the materialist worldview, and to replace it with a science consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.”

   A simplification of the Discovery Institute’s  phraseology in the above statement would be that (Un) Intelligent Design promises to destroy (the “we are not capable of understanding real-world of”) science, and to replace it with a “religious faith” consonant with Christian and theistic convictions.”

   As stated in plain English, the Discovery Institute wants to replace our democracy with a theocracy - with the theocracy being their own brand of religion. 

(Un) Intelligent Design - The delusion that personal ignorance is better than evidence.







   Michael Behe, the leading intellectual light of the intelligent design movement and author of “Darwin's Black Box”, would like us to believe that Intelligent Design is a science. He has also stated under oath that Astrology is a “science”. From the “Kitzmiller et al. v. Dover Area School District” trial, as quoted from the York Daily Record “Behe's 15th-century science” http://ydr.com/story/mike/90330/


Also please see: “Astrology is scientific theory, courtroom told” http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8178

The following is an exact quote from the court transcript.
http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/Day11PMSession.pdf  Page 39, Lines 6 - 9



   Thus one of the primary proponents of “Intelligent Design” has stated under oath that “Intelligent Design” is no more “scientific” than the astrology/horoscope columns that appear in newspaper tabloids.


    There is a postscript to the Dover trial that confirms the true religious intention of (Un) Intelligent Design. In Nov. 2005 (shortly after the trial ended) the citizens of Dover, Pennsylvania voted to remove eight members of the school board that instituted the (Un) Intelligent Design policy and to replace them with the “Dover CARES” candidates. Subsequently, evangelist Pat Robertson used his television program, the “700 Club”, to castigate Dover with:

The judgment in the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District case:
“For the reasons that follow, we hold that the ID Policy is unconstitutional pursuant to the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution and Art. I, § 3 of the Pennsylvania Constitution.”
Page 3 at: http://www2.ncseweb.org/kvd/main_docs/kitzmiller_342.pdf

Federal District Judge John Jones: “The overwhelming evidence is that intelligent design is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism and not a scientific theory.”




   “Intelligent Design” is religious mythology. If you are not capable of distinguishing between reality and mythology, you have an unresolved problem in your educational background.




For an editorial from the New York Times on Creationism = Willful Ignorance,
Please see “Willful Ignorance of Evolution”

The USGS tells us how and why it is known that the earth is about 4.5 to 4.6 billion years old.
Please see: “The Age of the Earth”

NASA tells how and why it is known that the universe is about 13.7 billion years old.
Please see: http://apod.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap030217.html

The American Astronomical Society has published an excellent booklet titled:
“An Ancient Universe: How Astronomers Know the Vast Scale of Cosmic Time”. It is aimed at the grade school level and is available online at: http://education.aas.org/publications/ancientuniverse.html

There is an immense amount of information about the multi-billion year history of the earth and the universe at the Smithsonian Institute’s Museum of Natural History. (http://www.mnh.si.edu)

Measurements show multiple advances and retreats of glaciers over the last 750,000 years. http://www.museum.state.il.us/exhibits/ice_ages/specmap_graph.html

The earth’s magnetic field switches polarity about once every 500,000 – 1,000,000 years. This produces parallel symmetric stripes on both sides of mid-ocean ridges. Animation at
http://www.wwnorton.com/earth/egeo/flash/2_3.swf

The National Geographic Society is tracing 200,000 years of human evolution/migration/ancestry via DNA analysis in their Genographic Research project.  https://www3.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/
Partially funded by IBM:  http://www.ibm.com/genographic/

The religious crackpots continue to invent stories to perpetuate their religious dogmas. For example, you can always check out the “Young age of the Earth & Universe” at the “Answers in Genesis” website.




   Then there is Kent Hovind - the reincarnated animation of an old fashion carnival side show barker. “Hi there rubes. I bet I can tell more whoppers per minute than anyone else on earth.” Kent Hovind has a long history of operating in fantasyland. In Nov. 2006 he was found guilty of 58 counts of tax fraud.

   However, to creationists, Hovind is their hero. For more information on Kent Hovind, including his “claimed doctorate is from a diploma mill” please see:  http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/

   Wikipedia has an article about Kent Hovind’s unaccredited “Alma Mater” at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Bible_University.

   The following quote is from Patriot Bible University’s catalogue. (I have a complete copy of the original “.pdf” PBU catalogue if/when PBU deletes the following quote. If you would like a copy of the original, send me an E-mail and I’ll return it with the copy attached.)



   Kent Hovind’s claimed Ph.D. degree is from Patriot [Bible] University. PBU is another “Unaccredited Bible School”. If you just look at the online catalogue of any of these “Unaccredited Bible Schools”, you might not get a true picture of exactly what they represent.

   The picture at the right was taken by the author from a car window on French St., Del Norte, CO on Nov. 22, 2006. It shows PBU’s “entire campus”. I have more information and photographs at: http://www.durangobill.com/Patriot_Bible_University.html


“Fake degrees equal fake integrity.”
 -- Don Reasons



   If you are an ignorant creationist and are not qualified to get into a good university, what do you do?
Answer: File a lawsuit claiming “discrimination”.
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-christian27aug27,1,7818465.story?coll=la-headlines-california





   One of the things that fundamentalists try to claim is that they are morally just vs. the “atheistic scientists”. If this were true then:

1) Jail and prison populations would be limited to just atheists. In practice it tends to be the other extreme. The following quotes are from page 229, “The God Delusion” by Richard Dawkins which in turn are quoted from Sam Harris’ “Letter to a Christian Nation”. (2004 election)



2) Evangelical “leader” Ted Haggard wouldn’t have had an ongoing drug and gay relationship with a male prostitute. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Haggard

3) Wikipedia would not have sections on scandals by television’s evangelicals.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_televangelist_scandals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Bakker
etc.

4) Bert Thompson, the one-time director of Apologetics Press would not have been fired for “sexual misconduct”. http://exchristian.net/2005_07_01_archive.html (Includes other similar items)

5) And of course the following statistical posting wouldn’t have appeared on page 21 in the Feb, 2007 issue of Playboy.


How many has God killed?


And this represents the “morality” of “Our loving God” who commands “Thou shall not kill”.




   Religious cultists, and in particular Creationists, often assert that religion is responsible for morality - and without religion there would be no morality (with resulting high crime rates). It’s obvious that, as per usual, they don’t check the facts. Fact-finding studies have found that just the opposite is true. Countries that have high religiosity (e. g. the U. S.) have the highest crime rates while countries with low religiosity (e.g. Japan and Sweden) have the lowest crime rates. The following quote is from a study published in the Journal of Religion and Society: http://moses.creighton.edu/JRS/2005/2005-11.html


   Within the United States, it’s not the atheists who commit crimes. For example, see: “Atheists Supply Less Than 1% Of Prison Populations” http://www.skepticfiles.org/american/prison.htm


   In the U. S., over 10% of the population is composed of atheists. If atheists committed as many crimes as non-atheists, then the ratio of atheists within the prison population should also be over 10%. If you do the arithmetic, atheists are less apt to be a criminal than non-atheists by a factor of over 100.

   There are many more statistics at the above skepticfiles web site that confirm that crimes are committed by those who are religious, and not committed by atheists/agnostics.






The Kansas Board of “Education”:
Hear no science.
See no science.
Speak no science.


Hayseed - Kansas - Creationism:
The triplet does have a ring to it.







But Kansas did “benefit” by adopting creationism as part of their education standards.
See “Ignorance is God’s gift to Kansas.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,592-1619264,00.html
(“Creationism: God's gift to the ignorant”)

Prior to 2007, the Flat Earth Society prevailed at the “Kansas Board of Education”.





   Was the pre-2007 school board interested in helping students in Kansas get a better science education? – Nope.
Were they determined to force creationism and their brand of religious ignorance down the throats of everyone else in the state? – You betcha!





According to the Creationists, “Lying for God” is perfectly acceptable. For example see:
“Lying For God:    Creation Science Exposed”
“A Response to Fraudulence in the name of Religious Ethics”
http://web.archive.org/web/20031226133632/astrosun.tn.cornell.edu/students/kornreich/lfg/index.html

or just run a Google search using:
“Lying for God”




   If you are thinking of debating a creationist to “defend science”, it’s probably a good idea to “take a rain check” for the following reasons.

1) As noted above, creationists lie. A creationist “debater” can and will make false assertions far faster than you can provide evidence to disprove these assertions. You will use up all of your time allocation giving explanations/refutations, and very few people will understand your details and facts.

2) A creationist “debater” is very similar to an old-fashion circus sideshow barker. “Step right up ladies and gentlemen to see the two-headed …”. Science is not hype and promotionalism with the intent to draw a large audience. Science is a slow, do-your-homework process where you present evidence to support your case.

3) The attention span of a creationist is about 5 seconds. This is long enough for a creationist to make a flashy assertion and for the faithful to believe it. Science is a much slower process. E. G. “Oh that’s interesting - now prove it”. Debates only allow enough time for a “5 second” presentation.

4) Creationists thrive on attention. If you participate in a “debate” you will be giving them the audience that they crave.

5) Creationists are always trying to achieve credibility. They try to discredit standard science, but at the same time they frequently use “PhD” degrees from diploma mills to try to gain credibility. If you have real knowledge, any “debate” will equate your credentials with their diploma mill degree. The creationists have worked a long time to earn their crackpot image. Why should you spoil this image?

6) You will not convince any creationist in the audience to give up their beliefs by participating in a debate. The only way to disarm creationists is to repeatedly ridicule and embarrass them about their scientific ignorance. This will erode their willingness to defend creationism. Then, and only then, will a creationist be susceptible to understanding scientific evidence.




   One of the characteristics of religious fundamentalists is their constant/multiple forecasts of “The End of the World”, “Jesus will Return”, “The Rapture will save us”, etc. The “faithful” always believe this garbage despite a long history that the forecasts have failed. This is also an accurate guide to the rubbish “value” of Creationism (and its pseudonyms).
For a quick history of these past failed predictions please see:
“Over 200 predictions and counting!”
http://www.bible.ca/pre-date-setters.htm

Alternately run a Google search using:
“End of the world” biblical list
There are about half a million hits which should keep you busy for awhile.


Also please see: “Dr” Jason Gastrich, “Ph.D.” - A Typically Fraudulent Young Earth Creationist and George Bush Misrepresents Science and Knowledge.




   For reasons unknown and for which Yahoo refuses to disclose, this entire website has been blacklisted/banned from Yahoo’s search engine. Other websites have suffered a similar fate. If you are trying to find information via Yahoo’s search engine vs. Google’s search engine, you should understand that Yahoo’s results may not include the information that you are seeking.

Return to Durango Bill’s Home Page





   The origin of the Noah’s Flood story dates back to Sumerian/Babylonian time (about 2,000 B.C., but this was still several hundred years after the “Step” Pyramid was built in Egypt). No one knows who the author was, or what evidence (if any) there is to support it. For a list of problems with a global flood please see: http://members.shaw.ca/tfrisen/evolution/Creationism/flood.html

   In any case, flood stories have been passed down via legends, Mesopotamian clay tablets, multiple language translations (and interpretations), etc. for thousands of years before being printed in present day Bibles (and there are at least 15 versions). All of this should be taken into consideration before you are convinced that every word in “the Bible” is an exact depiction of what happened.



   Some of the YECs attempt to weasel out of the Genesis description, which states that Noah’s Flood covered all the high mountains. They claim that the high mountains were created after Noah’s Flood. As seen below, these people are ignorant of the Bible as well as not understanding geology. If they wish to claim Genesis is in error, let them specify exactly which verses in Genesis are incorrect:

Gen 2:14  The Tigris/ Euphrates valley existed in its present form before the flood.

Gen 7:19-20   The text specifically states the flood covered “all the high mountains”. If the mountains were low at this time, the word “high” would not be used.

Gen 8:4-5  The high Ararat mountains existed before the flood subsided. The ark came to rest on the highest portion of the Ararat Mountains ~16,800 feet. It took an additional 2 1/2 months of water subsidence before the remaining mountains of Ararat could be seen. According to Archbishop James Ussher, the ark landed on Mt. Ararat exactly on Wed. May 5, 2349 BC. (See: “The Age of the Earth: Physics vs Faith?”  http://courses.science.fau.edu/~rjordan/phy1931/AGE/age.pdf - Page 6. This link is a good reference source tracing the history of Creationism vs. Reality.)



From:  http://www.bible.org/netbible/index.htm

New English Translation
 
Gen 2:14 The name of the third river is Tigris; it runs along the east side of Assyria. The fourth river is the Euphrates.
 
Gen 7:19 The waters completely inundated the earth, so that even all the high mountains under the entire sky were covered. 7:20 The waters rose more than twenty feet(30) above the mountains.(31)
 
(30) Heb "rose fifteen cubits." Since a cubit is considered by most authorities to be about eighteen inches, this would make the depth 22.5 feet. This figure might give the modern reader a false impression of exactness, however, so in the translation the phrase "fifteen cubits" has been rendered "more than twenty feet."
(31) Heb "the waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward and they covered the mountains." Obviously, a flood of twenty feet did not cover the mountains; the statement must mean the flood rose about twenty feet above the highest mountain.
 
Gen 8:4 On the seventeenth day of the seventh month, the ark came to rest on one of the mountains of Ararat. 8:5 The waters kept on receding until the tenth month. On the first day of the tenth month, the tops of the mountains became visible.


Web page generated via KompoZer