Floods of evidence slowly surely washing away the pseudo-science of "uniformitarianism"

Well, now. The worm of evolutionary dogma continues to turn - and burn.

I just saw on Yahoo News about an article to be published yesterday (July 19, 2007) in the journal Nature. The Yahoo News post was:

Megaflood Created Great Divide Between Britain and France

Here is the link:

news.yahoo.com/s/livescience/20070718/sc_livescience/

If you are a discerning and informed observer of science, education, Judaeo-Christian scripture (the Holy Bible), and natural philosophy, you will know that the notion of "uniformitarianism" now nears completion of its second century of (choose one or more) (1) rightful prominence, (2) philosophical dominance, or (3) intellectual tyranny.

So what is "uniformitarianism"?

Ian Taylor (In the Minds of Men, TFE Publishing, 1984) explains that the dogma of uniformitarianism is primarily attributed to British lawyer-turned-geologist Charles Lyell (1797-1875):

"Lyell's geological principles, based on Hutton's dictum that the present is the key to the past, make the assumption that all natural processes have continued as they were from the beginning (if there was a beginning. d.u.). This view has been called 'Uniformitarianism'. Lyell published his work in three volumes entitled Principles of Geology in the years 1830-33, and his principle has since become the foundation of modern geology."

So where is the rub? Hutton's idea that "the present is key to the past" sounds - well - downright reasonable. Reasonable, that is, until you realize that Lyell took it further to infer that 'all natural processes have continued as they were from the beginning', meaning "no miracles allowed." Lyell's "principle" has become the axiom (an unproveable beginning idea which must be assumed to proceed logically) upon which modern geology has been based. Why is this an axiom? Because it is impossible to prove by observation of present processes that no supernatural events have occurred at the beginning (e.g. Biblical creation) or in intervening time (e.g., the global flood of Noah).

This "axiom" has now been mainstreamed to redefine science into something that is in reality "scientism", a kind of intellectual tyranny.

To demonstrate the absurdity of the full-bloom uniformitarianism axiom:

You see a nice shiny functional automobile sitting in a driveway with this kind of "new car smell" emanating from the interior. Then Charles Lyell walks up and tells you that the car has been formed there as the result of eons of time and natural processes such as wind, blowing debris, rain, random bird droppings, falling branches, and so on. You would object that the automobile was created by intelligent designers and engineers (although you never saw them personally) for a purpose (teleonomy). To which former lawyer Mr. Lyell, with words poisonous yet smooth as silk, says, "But we know that science says that only currently observeable processes have formed all we see now. And all we see is wind, rain, and occasional droppings of bird poop." To which you of course reply, "Well, gee .. golly ... ummm... well, if science says that, I guess you are right. How could I have been so wrong for so long?"

I assert that the above comparison is not silly, but is in fact precise to show how nonsensical is the idea that creative and intelligent forces and agents can be defined out of existence merely on the basis of a capricious definition demanding that the unseen is non-active, irrelevant, and maybe unreal.

So, more about catastrophism.

Michael Oard has written a book entitled "The Missoula Flood Controversy" in which he details how difficult it was to get geologists to recognize the monstrous flood(s) now known (not by observation but by the remnants left behind) as the "Missoula Flood)s)" or the "Bretz Flood(s)." You can read all about it elsewhere. I will just include here a photo (right) of the apparent "shoreline" marks visible in Missoula, Montana, USA. The practice field for the University of Montana football team is in the foreground and the giant "M" on the mountain behind rests on the actual shoreline marks. In Chapter 7 of his book, Oard explains:

"The Lake Missoula flood controversy is a lesson on how certain scientific biases about the past intrude when new ideas or data are introduced. The public expects scientists to be objective, carefully weighing all the possibilities before coming to conclusions. We do not expect a scientist to censor ideas with which he disagrees. But instead he is to use hard evidence to prove or disprove them. David Alt (2001, p. vii) ponders what the dispute over Bretz’ hypothesis means in regard to the condition of science in general:
"This is also a story of scientists grappling with an emerging science controversy. Some handled it well, others miserably as personalities, pride, and outright prejudice superceded scientific evidence. This is not how science should work, but how it often does work.
"The public perception of science is mostly a myth.
"Despite the obvious signs of a gigantic flood, the leading lights in geology opposed Bretz and his hypothesis with vehemence (Baker, 1983, p. 122). Most of them went to their graves still believing that he had gone too far. They feared he had committed the ultimate scientific sin by straying from “good science” into the realm of biblical catastrophism, thereby rejecting 100 years of “enlightenment.” In their mind’s eye, a flood of biblical proportions was reminiscent of the so-called dark ages when most scholars believed Noah’s Flood produced the earth’s rocks and fossils. E. C. Olson (1969, p. 503) pontificates: “Geology was not a science until the legendary Noachian flood and six-day creation were replaced by explanations derived from careful study of the rocks.” The “careful study of the rocks,” however, has been accompanied by a straightjacket mentality of how they should be interpreted. This explains why controversy raged over the Lake Missoula flood – it challenged the dogma of uniformitarianism."

Now excerpting the July 18, 2007, Yahoo Livescience "megaflood" report:

"About 450,000 years ago, a 'megaflood' breached a giant natural dam near the Dover strait and began the formation of the English Channel , according to a study detailed in the July 19 issue of the journal Nature. Following this first disastrous flood, a second deluge finished the job.
'The first was probably 100 times greater than the average discharge of the Mississippi River,' said Sanjeev Gupta, a geologist at Imperial College London and co-author of the study. 'But that's a conservative estimate—it could have been much larger.' ... An even larger and more cataclysmic event, however, outdid the first megaflood, sometime prior to 180,000 years ago. This second deluge created the characteristic English Channel bottom seen today, according to the study. The second torrent added insult to injury, whittling polished mesa-like islands out of the basin floor. Gupta said such structures are tell-tale signs of megafloods."

So your fearless blogger observes that the seemingly unassailable and tyrannical doctrine of uniformitarianism is beginning to topple as catastrophic fact slowly displaces uniformitarian folly chip by chip. Keep watching for stuff like this.

Just one more tidbit for this time. Here is a picture (right) of rounded flood cobble deposits several thousand feet deep in China at the east end of the Tibetan Plateau. This site is traditionally considered to be the birthplace of Taoism. Look carefully at the size and shape of the stones and consider the SCALE of the deposit (thousands of feet deep). Now consider the creationist notion of a rapid uplift of the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau with attendant water runoff in the waning time of the Biblical Noachian flood and in the post-flood period of resettling and stabilization of the earth's features. If your mind is open, you will begin to realize that only a hydrologic-hydraulic event of the scale of the Noachian flood would be able to produce geologic features commensurate with the scale of the flood cobbles in the photo.

Keep your mind open and this stuff gets more and more interesting.

HAVING FUN AND BEING BLESSED EVERY DAY,

Respectfully submitted,

D.U.