Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T13:19:10.303Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Partial Castastrophism and Pick & Choose Empiricism: The Science of “Creationist” Geology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 July 2017

William J. Frazier
William J. Frazier*
Affiliation:
Department of Chemistry and Geology, Columbus College, Columbus, GA 31993
Get access

Abstract

“Scientific creationists” have created their own version of geology in order to defend their axiomatic insistance on a young Earth. To “prove” the Earth's youth, they cite (among other things) measured decay-rates of Earth's magnetic field and concentrations of elements in seawater. They also state that all plutons are quick frozen, that plutonic igneous rocks bear no relation to modern volcanism, and that all sedimentary rocks must be interpreted in terms of a “global hydrologic singularity,” i.e. Noah's Flood.

Having explicitly denied uniformitarianism and embraced catastrophism, “Creationists” renege by using uniformitarian reasoning over and again. They practice “pick & choose” empiricism by citing only those data which seem to support their case. “Creationists” even choose when and if to apply scientific principles, e.g. their use of thermodynamics to “disprove” organic evolution while ignoring thermodynamics' implications for magma cooling and metamorphism.

The methods of “Creationism” are clearly intended not to increase knowledge of the Earth but to delude the scientifically unsophisticated. Thus, “Creationism” can hardly be considered a science. Further, its repeated use of fallacious thinking brands “Creationism” as hopelessly illogical and its disingenuous statements and tactics disqualify it from even the ranks of nonempirical epistemological systems.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Paleontological Society Special Publications , Volume 1: The Evolution-Creation Controversy: Perspectives on Religion, Science, and Education-A Handbook , 1984 , pp. 50 - 65
Copyright
Copyright © 1994 Paleontological Society 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References Cited

Barnes, T. G. 1973. Origin and destiny of the Earth's magnetic field. Institute for Creation Research Technical Monograph No. 4. Creation-Life Publishers Inc., San Diego, Calif., 64 p.Google Scholar
CREATION/EVOLUTION. 1981. New briefs from the Editor, California. VI: 47–48.Google Scholar
Edwords, F. 1980. Why Creationism should not be taught as science. part 1. The legal issues. Creation/Evolution. I: 2–23.Google Scholar
Frautschi, S. 1982. Entropy in an expanding universe. Science. 217: 593–599.Google Scholar
Freske, S. 1981. Creationist misunderstanding, misrepresentation, and misuse of the second law of thermodynamics. Creation/Evolution, IV: 8–16.Google Scholar
Gish, D. T. 1972. Evolution. the fossils say no. Creation-Life Publishers, Inc., San Diego, Calif., 129 p.Google Scholar
Gould, S. J. 1965. Is uniformitarianism necessary? American Journal of Science. 263: 223–227.Google Scholar
Gross, M. G. 1982. Oceanography. a view of the Earth, Third Edition. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 498 p.Google Scholar
Jaeger, J. C. 1957. The temperatures in the neighborhood of a cooling intrusive sheet: Am. Jour. sci., v. 255, p. 306–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lamb, H. 1883. Philosophical Transactions, London, 174: 519f.Google Scholar
Leeder, M. R. 1982. Sedimentology: process and product. George Allen & Unwin, London, 344 p.Google Scholar
Lewin, R. 1982. Where is the science in Creation Science? Science: 215, 142–146.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. 1981. Evolution/Creation debate. a time for truth: Bio-Science: 559.Google Scholar
Lisitzin, A. P. 1972 Sedimentation in the world ocean. Society of Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists Special Publication 17, 218 P.Google Scholar
Morris, H. M. 1974. Scientific creationism. Creation-Life Publishers, Inc., San Diego, Calif., 217 p.Google Scholar
Morris, H. M. 1975. The young Earth: Institute for Creation Research Impact Series No. 17, San Diego, Calif., 4 p.Google Scholar
Nevins, S. 1973. Evolution: the oceans say no: Institute for Creation Research Impact Series No. 8, San Diego, Calif., 4 p.Google Scholar
Overton, W. R. 1982. Memorandum opinion (in the matter of Rev. McLean, Bill, et. al. vs. the Arkansas Board of Education); Case No. LRC 81 322 of the United States District Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, Western Division, 37 p.Google Scholar
Sadler, P. M., 1981, Sediment accumulation rates and the completeness of stratigraphic sections: Journal of Geology, 89: 569–584.Google Scholar
Slusher, H. S., 1973, Critique of radiometric dating: Creation-Life Publishers, Inc., San Diego, Calif., 47 p.Google Scholar
Stacey, F. D. 1969. Physics of the Earth. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 324 p.Google Scholar
Thwaites, W. and Awbrey, F. 1981. Biological evolution and the second law. Creation/Evolution, IV: 5–7.Google Scholar
Titus, H. H. 1964. Living issues in philosophy, an introductory textbook (4th Ed.). American Book Co., New York, 543 p.Google Scholar
Turner, F. J. 1968. Metamorphic petrology. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 403 p.Google Scholar
Winkler, H. G. F. 1967. Petrogenesis of metamorphic rocks. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York, 237 p.Google Scholar