Feb 162007
 

Gentleman,

Because I sense interest in the topic, I’m thinking of forming a YEC/ID weblog. Although I’ll continue to post at UD, my threads are being bumped off the forefront as time passes, unlike ARN and ISCID where a topic can be visited and discussed for months!!!!

Furthermore, we’ll organize the information and discussion hierarchically and try to get some better critics. It will also be a gateway to a Virginia Creationist society.

Is anyone interested? OECs and non-creationists are welcome to participate and help with the material and web programming?

Sal

  25 Responses to “Forming a YEC/ID weblog”

  1. There are certainely lots of interesting topics to discuss related to YEC. It seems like there is a never ending parade of discoveries related to catastrophism, plate tectonics, and geology that have implications on YEC models.

    Sometimes jaw dropping reversals of previous held positions, like the formation of the Hawaiian Islands.

    Here is another example, from New Scientist

    Earth’s Continental Land Masses Created In Short, Fast Bursts, Scientists Say

    According to Alexander Cruden, associate professor of geology at the University of Toronto and second author of the paper to appear in the Dec. 6 issue of Nature, the way that granite forms – a rock that makes up about 70 to 80 per cent of the Earth’s continental crust – is not the sluggish, multi-million year process that scientists previously believed. In fact, Cruden and his co-authors argue that the process occurs in rapid, dynamic and possibly catastrophic events that take between 1,000 and 100,000 years, depending on the size of the granite intrusion. And that’s changing how scientists look at the formation of the Earth’s continents.

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/12/001207140240.htm

    Well howdy, from multi-millions to maybe a 1000?

    Creation Safaris of course is also a consistent source of rich topics.

  2. Jehu,

    My intent is not to compete with CreationSafaris.

    CreationSafaris does not have a discussion section for reader comments. I was wondering if you might be interested in participating in this weblog if it is launched.

    Salvador

  3. Great article by the way Jehu! LOL!

  4. I would be glad to participate, it would give me a chance to post articles I come across for discussion.

  5. Jehu,

    So glad to hear. Now the trick is for a good name for the site. Any ideas. Here are some:

    http://www.YouthfulCosmos.com

    http://www.YoungCosmos.com

    Sal

  6. Sal,

    While I think the idea has merit, the truth is that with my travel and other activities, I can barely keep up with posting initial OP’s here, not to mention trying to make occaisional comments on UD, PT or TT. So, while I’d certainly want to try and check into to such a blogsite from time to time, I just don’t see how I can be a “regular” given my time constraints.

    Donald M

  7. Donald M,

    Thanks though for your consideration. One thing that will be differents is that like ISCID and ARN,
    topics of interest will be persistent for months as long as there is interest.

    It’s a matter of the architecuture of the site to make it possible.

    Salvador

  8. Hi Sal,
    My first comment on this blog.
    You suggested:

    http://www.YouthfulCosmos.com
    http://www.YoungCosmos.com

    If one has a YEC view, then a 6000 year old universe (using earth time as a reference) is actually about as old as it gets 🙂 The reason all of us young earthers use the term “young” is because of the popular paradigm that it (the earth) is billions of years old. But then again.. 6000 years actually doesn’t seem tooooo long ago.

    By the way, you’ve implied, by the domain name, the youthful aspect – and only for the cosmos. You need to also suggest the design aspect of the cosmos (so..maybe use ‘creation’)?

    …brainstorm…

    http://www.youngcreation.com
    http://www.novuscreation.com [a littel Latin twist]
    http://www.yecreationism.com
    http://www.yecreation.com
    http://www.neocreo.com [don’t ask, but I think it means “new creation”]
    http://www.genesiscreation.com
    http://www.yecreation.com

    Any objections to biblical views? eg. http://www.literalgenesis.com

    Anyway.. all just brainstorm.. nothing serious.

  9. JGuy,

    Sometimes links seem to trigger the spam buffer. Let me know if your other comments are trapped.

    Sal

  10. Young Creation is already taken, it’s some body building site!!

    There will be some sections on ID as well. I think there was some good material at Uncommon Descent, but it’s falling off the queue. I want to be able to preserve good discussions and material.

    I wanted to put more ID material at UD, but it will expire.

    I want to appeal to the “middle ground” that is the OECs. The word “literalgenesis” is too associated with bad memories for many OECs being and labled an denigrated. The host of teleological, teleologist is an OEC. He’s the sort of guy we want to feel free to come visit.

    I don’t want my OEC brethren to feel denigrated. We should treat them like beloved brothers.

    The ID componenet is very important to me.

    Sal

  11. As a note: If you want, by chance, content to be in the middle, then it won’t really be a YEC blog. It would, however, be a YEC biased blog – knowing your bias for YEC already. I can see the reasoning to draw in OEC types to see the evidence for YEC.

    Scripture is important. What is the only reasoning/basis, so far, for YEC ideas anyway? It’s a literal intrepretation of Genesis and geneaologies. I doubt any scientists would have thought to pursue investigating the young age concept without the bible to guide them. Perhaps, over much mor etime someone would have stumbled upon the idea. But just look at what has driven Humphries, Baumgardner and Setterfield to develop their theories – scripture. I believe the bible is good at leading us to make bold & risky predictions. I know this is something that Reemine is big on.. making risky predictions. Well, YEC does just that.

    Anyway… regarding domain names… I’ll just dwell on it a while.

  12. Ok I test drove some ideas. I chose YoungCosmos for now, until a better name comes along.

    Check out what I did:

    http://youngcosmos.com/

    Can you try to log in?

    Salvador

  13. JGuy,

    There is actually some OEC theology prior to an old earth becoming the scientific consensus. I forget what exactly but it was out there. The gap theory is one.

    The Bible says that creation is “ancient”

    This is the blessing that Moses the man of God pronounced on the Israelites before his death. … About Joseph he said: “May the Lord bless his land with the precious dew from heaven above and with the deep waters that lie below; with the best the sun brings forth and the finest the moon can yield; with the choicest gifts of the ancient mountains and the fruitfulness of the everlasting hills ;

    Deuteronomy 33

    He stood, and shook the earth; he looked, and made the nations tremble. The ancient mountains crumbled and the age-old hills collapsed. His ways are eternal.

    Habikuk 3:6

    he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood … For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old , and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water

    2 Peter 2-3

    I would prefer a blog that explores the issues rather than dogmatically stands for YEC the way AiG does. Frankly, I don’t have the chops to deal with all the evidence and give YEC a good defense.

    One area of geology that seems to have been consistently trending toward a more YEC world view is catastrophism. It seems to me that more and more geology is being explained by sudden catastrophic events as opposed to slow gradual uniform processes.

    So maybe something like http://www.catastrophical.org would be a good idea.

    Just a thought.

  14. I’d love to join. This is what I tried to do with http://baraminology.blogspot.com/, but I don’t have a lot of time to post and don’t have a very steady readership. I’d be interested in a similar site with more audience, and I’d be interested in moving my contribution there, too.

    By the way, are you going to BSG? I’m going to try to get there if I can, but baby #4 is coming out shortly before, so it’s not very likely. I’m going to miss meeting P.N., you (if you’re there) and others 🙁

  15. Hi Jehu,
    I’m guessing Sal will want to address OEC questions in the blog. Never-the-less, I still think it’s Sal’s thrust to make the blog YEC biased. I think it’s a good choice, because of the unique & risky predictions it brings to the table.

    My personal feel is that AIG is doing a good thing by sticking with a plain reading of scripture and not compromising with ever changing science. Sal and others disagree. I know Sal thinks that AIG is thinking they are infallible, but it’s my view they are really taking the most plain reading adn saying that THAT is not fallible. I think that the scriptures have proven themselves as a reliable in many ways, so, they have a good basis sfor sticking to that view.. in my opinion. So, why not use that view as a paradigm for science? My view is that literal Genesis from scripture is a sound foundation to approach new discovery of how this universe works.

    I would prefer a blog that explores the issues rather than dogmatically stands for YEC the way AiG does.

    I don’t think Sal is dogmatic. I’ll admit to being pretty close to dogmatic, now that is. See, I was an old earther before. When confronted wih scripture, I asked myself why I thought the earth was old. I entertained the gap theory.. etc.. I was open either way. But the simplest rendering of the scripture lead me to think it was young. And I couldn’t come up with a leak proof answer for an old earth earth – not even scientifically. And I saw many evidences that supported a young earth. So, being that I believed scritpture was from God, I saw no reason to try to bend it to secular opinions.

    I know some/many might not share my view. But it shouldn’t stop us from looking at the evidences together.

  16. Jehu,
    Sorry. I forgot to mention. “Ancient” from scripture can mean even something a few hundred years old. Even in modern speak we can use ancient the same.

    1 Chronicles 4:22 “And Jokim, and the men of Chozeba, and Joash, and Saraph, who had the dominion in Moab, and Jashubilehem. And these are ancient things.”

  17. Sal,
    I can see the website, but I can’t log in. I don’t have an account, and I don’t see where to log in. Unless you are speaking to someone else.

    JGuy–

  18. JGUY,

    I think I fixed it. Try again. When you register, I’ll try to make you an admin.

    It needs a major facelift and reprogramming. We’ll have to start somewhere.

    Sal

  19. Sure Ancient can mean a few hundred years. That would make the earth mega-ancient. 🙂

    I think the key to steady blog readership is consistent new content. If content isn’t added very often, people stop checking in.

  20. Sal,
    Ok. I logged in.

    Jehu,
    I think you’re right. We’ll keep the onus on Sal to do that 🙂 haha
    Actually, I know someone that may contribute articles. I asked him and he is up for making contributions if not busy. I don’t want to mention names yet.. but his work, writings & presentations are top notch.

    It will be nice to find good contributors. This will all help keep content interesting, helpful, enlightening, thought provoking etc… and keep it dynamic. I know Sal wants to be able to hold topics for longer periods of time.. that’s good.. but it’s also good to keep fresh ideas coming in under new topics. We can all hash this out with Sal.

  21. re: name for the blog.

    I strongly suggest avoiding word “young” in the name

    GenesisScience
    OriginScience
    Battle over Genesis (or something like that)
    DesignedWorld
    TimeOverMatter

  22. Donald M,

    Thanks though for your consideration. One thing that will be differents is that like ISCID and ARN,
    topics of interest will be persistent for months as long as there is interest.

    It’s a matter of the architecuture of the site to make it possible.

    Sal,

    I like that idea a lot. So often on these blogs, an interesting subject gets “buried” on page 2 or 3 and its tough to go back and intiate interest. I’d be happy to contribute, if you’re satisfied that I could only do it once in a while and not on any regular basis. I should also tell you, if you don’t already know, that I am not YEC. But that doesn’t mean I am opposed to it, only that I’m satisfied that the earth and cosmos are, in fact, as old as scientists tell us it is. However, if strong or conclusive scientific evidence surfaced to disconfirmm that and support a much shorter age, I certainly see no philosophical, theological, or scientific reason to reject the idea.

    Donald M

  23. I like that idea a lot. So often on these blogs, an interesting subject gets “buried” on page 2 or 3 and its tough to go back and intiate interest.

    What I’m thinking of doing is having two methods of accessing the data. One method is via a hierarchical front end, and the other the traditional weblog (which tends to be more news driven and live discussion oriented). I think there will be one website like trueorigin.org with links to good articles and discussions. Some of those links will point to ongoing topics at the weblog. The weblog itself will run almost like any other. That way, the best of both worlds can be enjoyed.

    Salvador

  24. Ok the new website is open for futher discussion and construction. Please feel free to register and login here:

    Web mechanics and ideas

    Thanks.

  25. johnnyb asked:

    By the way, are you going to BSG? I’m going to try to get there if I can, but baby #4 is coming out shortly before, so it’s not very likely. I’m going to miss meeting P.N., you (if you’re there) and others

    Undecided, but hopefully! God bless you and your little one.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.