Volume 14, Number 3
Volume 14, Number 3
The Attenuation Of Visible Radiation In The Vapor Canopy
A common objection to the vapor canopy theory has been that an extensive vapor blanket would attenuate all incoming starlight. In the following discussion, a vapor canopy model containing vapor amounting to forty feet of precipitable water is proposed. The physics of the maintenance of this amount of water has been developed and will be the subject of a later publication. The scattering coefficient of the vapor canopy is calculated and some approximations are made on the visibility in the pre-flood heavens. In conclusion, some suggestions are made regarding the effect on ancient mythology of the change in the appearance of the sky after the flood.
Evidence is presented to show that the sage Imhotep, of Egyptian monuments and literature, may have been the same person as Joseph of the Bible.
Pillars, Polystrate Formations,
Three kinds of column-like formation are discussed. There are columns of unconsolidated material, often differing from their surroundings, embedded in sand or drift. There are pillars of consolidated material, often sandstone, embedded in rock. And there are free-standing solid pillars.
It is proposed that all of these kinds of pillars, and also potholes, are to be ascribed to one cause: disintegration following the release of pressure as the material was raised out of the water at the end of the Noachian Flood. It is hard to believe that sedimentary processes could have caused these formations; hence the cross stratification, often found with them, can not be an effect of sedimentation.
Some reasons are suggested why the study of these formations may be especially worth while to a Creationist.
Genetics Favors Creation
While Charles Darwin and the naturalists were speculating about vague tendencies in heredity, Gregor Mendel was learning from his own research the scientific laws which govern the passing of genes from parent to offspring. This paper points out how these laws do not agree with the speculations of the evolutionists.
A Simple Geometrical Model
For Comparing Pre-Flood And Post-Flood Geomorphology
A simple model, based on Gen. 1:9, Ps. 104:6-8, Gen. 7:11 et al., for comparing the geometric disposition of land and sea of the of the pre-Flood, Flood time and post-Flood worlds, is developed and evaluated. Numerical evaluation of this model provides estimates of: the energies associated with the Flood and "the fountains of the great deep," the change in the earth's radius, and the changes of the depth of the ocean and heights of the continents. A discussion follows, on the application to: global ice formation, continent building, the frozen mammoths, the rotation of the earth on its axis and the accuracy of the King James Version translation of Ps. 104:8.
A Plea For Caution About
The well known skull 1470, found by Richard Leakey, has been cited by many Creationists as evidence that man appears in the fossil record as early as other hominids, and that when he does appear he is fully man. However, the skull has ape-like, as well as man-like, features. The author urges that Creationists be very cautious in using this skull as evidence; for if it should be decided later it is not a human skull after all, they would have been leaning on a broken reed. It is suggested also that there is other evidence which Creationists should consider, and which they might find to be more conclusive and more helpful.
Skull 1470 - A New Look
The skull 1470, which Leakey found a few years ago in Kenya, has puzzled both evolutionists and Creationists. For it is much more human in many ways than anything which evolutionists had expected to find from as long ago as they believed it to be. On the other hand, there were some ape-like features. Reasons are presented here for believing that the ape-like features may be due to environmental happenings to the skull after its owner's death. Thus the owner may well have looked very much like a present-day man.
Certainties, Less Than Certainties,
It is suggested that Creationists may work more efficiently by noting that there are some doctrines about which they are certain, others which admit some uncertainty. Those which are firmly based on Scripture, and are matters of faith, are certain; there is no need of research to establish them, although corroboration may be satisfying.
About other points, which may for instance be mentioned only incidentally in Scripture, one feels less than certain. About these, sincere believers can and do reach different conclusions. Experimental research may throw light onto these matters; and, of course, so may further Bible study.
At the opposite pole from certainly - or, rather, it is certainly false - is the dogma of evolution.