RE: Coal and YEC models

From: James Mahaffy (
Date: Mon Jul 29 2002 - 12:04:58 EDT

  • Next message: John Burgeson: "RE: Infusion of the soul as a process(private)"

    Bill and other YEC's,

    I would still answer my questions in my post and make an attempt to
    explain the paleochannels seen in a coal from the floating mat theory.
    In that explanation also show how the model can account for the change
    of miospores in proximity of the channel. Both the Herrin and
    Springfield have well mapped out paleochannels and show a change in
    miospores in proximity to the channel.

    Bill - I like to see Christians playing with models outside the
    paradigms - but if they are going to be seen as credible they have to be
    shown to have explanatory power that can explain specific feature and
    not be just general theories. I would not expect an initial explanation
    from a floating coal model to be as good as the accepted models
    initially. However, if it can be shown to be useful at this level, it
    would do a lot to increase the credibility of the model.

    If you or some of your friends have some ideas feel free to share them
    with me first privately and I will give you my evaluation so you can
    make your explanation stronger. Mind you, I really I don't see how it
    will work, but unless you develop the model from the broad hand waving
    stage to explaining specific sedimentary or vegetation patterns, you
    don't have much of a shot at getting it accepted.

    James Mahaffy

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 29 2002 - 17:47:03 EDT