You may have heard of the Channeled Scablands, about which Wikipedia says:
The Channeled Scablands are a relatively barren and soil-free landscape on the eastern side of the U.S. state of Washington that was scoured by a single cataclysmic flood which was unleashed when a large glacial lake drained. … Geologist J Harlen Bretz coined the term “channeled scablands” in a series of papers written in the 1920s. The debate on the origin of the Scablands that ensued for four decades became one of the great controversies in the history of earth science. …
Bretz conducted research and published many papers during the 1920s describing the Channeled Scablands. His theories of how they were formed required short but immense floods -500 cubic miles (2,100 km3) – for which Bretz had no explanation. Bretz’s theories met with vehement opposition from geologists of the day, who tried to explain the features with uniformitarian theories.
J.T. Pardee first suggested in 1925 to Bretz that the draining of a glacial lake could account for flows of the magnitude needed. Pardee continued his research over the next 30 years, collecting and analyzing evidence that eventually identified Lake Missoula as the source of the Missoula Floods and creator of the Channeled Scablands.
Pardee’s and Bretz’s theories were accepted only after decades of painstaking work and fierce scientific debate. Research on open-channel hydraulics in the 1970s put Bretz’s theories on solid scientific ground. In 1979 Bretz received the highest medal of the Geological Society of America, the Penrose Medal, to recognize that he had developed one of the great ideas in the earth sciences.
It’s a great example how a scientific hypothesis, although initially greeted with skepticism, can eventually be accepted as a well supported theory. Another example is the long struggle of Alfred Wegener to establish the theory of Continental drift.
Creationists like to delude their drooling followers by claiming that one day they too will be vindicated. Unfortunately, they use what we call the Creationist Scientific Method:
We see a good example today from Ken Ham (ol’ Hambo) — the ayatollah of Appalachia, the world’s holiest man who knows more about religion and science than everyone else. He just posted Mega Floods Are No Longer “Geological Heresy” to Science. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis:
National Geographic recently ran an interesting story about the scablands in Washington State. The subtitle reads, “Geologists couldn’t account for the strange landforms of eastern Washington State. Then a high school teacher dared to question the scientific dogma of his day.”
In 1909, high-school-teacher-turned-geologist J. Harlen Bretz noticed that the features of the scablands couldn’t be the result of slow and gradual processes over millions of years as was commonly believed at the time. He proposed that a massive flood carved out these startling features. But this “was geological heresy,” and his ideas were dismissed. And it wasn’t because he didn’t have evidence — he did, and what he proposed is accepted as fact today (with a few modifications).
Here’s the magazine article that inspired Hambo: Formed by Megafloods, This Place Fooled Scientists for Decades. You know where Hambo is going with this. He says:
The geologists of his [Bretz] day rejected his proposal because they were locked into the mindset of millions of years of slow processes and didn’t want to consider anything that sounded like it could have been related to the biblical Flood of Noah’s day. It’s the same sort of bias we currently see secularists exhibiting.
This is so predictable. Hambo tells us:
From a biblical perspective, what we see in Washington State, and other places, makes sense. There was a global Flood [Hee hee!] that ripped up miles of sediment and redeposited it in layers.
Geologists today miss the overwhelming evidence of a global Flood (that’s staring at them all across the earth) because they are blinded by the idea of millions of years of slow and gradual processes. Many geologists won’t even consider the history in the Bible because of their naturalistic assumptions about the history of the earth. But it’s the Bible that provides the true history of the universe, and this has been confirmed over and over again as we study the world around us.
Those geologists are fools! Here’s the end of Hambo’s post:
Why won’t secular geologists consider the Bible’s history? Because if the Bible is right in its history, then they would be challenged to consider the Bible’s morality — and the gospel message that is based on that history!
Yes, that’s the reason. It’s all about avoiding morality. Hambo is so wise!
Copyright © 2017. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.