Refutation of Grade 9 Homeschool Creationist Textbook: World Geography PACE 1097

A few months ago, a smart friend of mine in Louisiana sent me several pics of his home school textbooks. Thankfully he is a smart kid who saw through the lies and nonsense in these books, and thankfully he convinced his grandfather that he should not be home schooled with such nonsense and enrolled in a school. (Unfortunately, he cant even escape a overwhelming Christian bias classrooms and harsh environment from his Christian peers in a Louisiana school. Best of luck mate!)

Anyway, after looking into these books, I made some notes that refuted a great deal of the material. This is the book I first examined.

PACE 1097 covers creation and the fall, the Flood, the postdiluvian earth, and seasons and climates.

There is a lot to cover, but I will only address the creationist BS parading as science.

Page 4

CREATION

"We have no way of knowing or understanding exactly what existed before God's initial creative act, because God has chosen not to reveal it to us."

So the things we don't know are simply secrets God has decided to keep for himself?

“If we wish to study the origins of our universe, the Bible is the only source of true information.”

Such a bold claim that has nothing to back it up.

In fact, we know that this claim is 100% incorrect. We know that the secrets of the universe are not hidden within the pages of an old sacred book written by superstitious men who did not know anything they were talking about. The answers to the secrets of the universe are as much as found in the pages of Genesis as they are in a Greek Mythology manuscript or on a hieroglyphic wall in Egypt.

The only way to solve the answers to the secrets of the universe is not to look down into the dusty pages of a fairy tale book, but to look UP into outer space and investigate the universe as well as the quantum world.

“Only in the first two chapters of Genesis can we find the true day-by-day description of the first week in the life of our universe.”

This is asserting that the Earth was formed within a literal, seven day, week.

The problem is, not a single scientific study has ever been produced to show the Earth is anything less than several million years old.

Nothing in these pages provide any explanations, links or sources of such studies, nor any names of scientists who have made any discoveries to back up the assertion that the Earth was formed in a week.

“Before God created Heaven and Earth, time did not exist.”

Time did not exist? And yet this same book says that God created the universe from nothing. It says that God created time itself, and time did not exist before God created time...A moment's thought is all it takes to discredit this ridiculous statement. Here is the logical counter-argument:

Premise 1) God is defined as the arbiter (creator) of all things, including time;

Premise 2) A decision requires transition from indifferences to will (requires time)

Premise 3) Since time cannot exist prior to its existence, God cannot choose to create time;

Premise 4) If God cannot choose to create time, he is not arbiter of all things;

Premise 5) Therefore, a personal entity cannot be the ultimate arbiter of all things;

Premise 6) Therefore, God as defined is internally inconsistent

Conclusion) Therefore, there is no God.

In other words, if you want to create something, you must first have the thought. That thought is the structure and plan of what you want to create. Then that thought must transition into an action. That action is what sparks the creation. This idea-to-creation act requires time...but how can that be if time did not exist?

“Our finite minds cannot comprehend the concept of eternity, when time did not exist.”

So we cannot comprehend the CONCEPT of a being, and yet human believers label is attributes as: god is love; god is omniscient; god is ombibenevolent; god is mercy; and so on and so on.

Giving a incomprehensible Being characteristics... seems like a way to make stuff up as you go along.

“The next two words of Genesis 1:1 are “God created.” Man can form or make, but he cannot create. When man “creates,” he is merely organizing already existing materials into something different. When God created, He spoke into existence something whose materials had no previous existence. The Latin term ex nihilio, which means “out of nothing,” is often used to express God's method of Creation.”

"When God created, He spoke into existence something who materials had no previous existence."

Reread that sentence again.

What they are saying is that a entity spoke some words that caused everything popped into existence from nothing.

In other words: ABRACADABRA!!!

That's right. The creationists answer: MAGIC.

An incantation is a series of words used in a magic spell.

““In the beginning, God created the heaven...” Before God began His work of Creation, the term space had no meaning. God was limited in neither time nor space, for time did not exist and He was everywhere. When He created the heavens, God created a definite, limited place. As finite beings, we are both limited to time and space.”

How can some being be somewhere if there is no space?

In order to be "somewhere" there has to be space. But since these creationist authors claim that space did not exist, how can there be a somewhere to be?

“'In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.' The word 'earth' here refers to matter that God created and would then use to for the rest of creation.”

Really? Not even going to provide any translations or anything to show why the word 'earth' refers to all matter in the universe???

Because last I checked, the Earth refers to...the Earth. A singular planet. The single small little blue-colored rock spinning around a great big ball of burning hydrogen. This planet, Earth, is a tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny piece of mass, a miniscule sample of matter in a really really really really BIG universe.

Saying that this tiny planet is in comparable with the entire matter of this universe is laughably absurd.

“Today Creation scientists believe God enclosed Earth in a canopy of water vapor at Creation. This water vapor canopy made Earth like a giant greenhouse with uniform temperatures everywhere and a much greater atmospheric pressure than exists today. Many of these things that affect the geography of Earth today were not present; there were no winds, no violent weather, no deserts, and no ice caps. The canopy also provided an effective filter for harmful radiation from the sun and space so both humans and animals lived longer, healthier lives.”

NO WIND???? 

So was the sun not hitting the Earth? Was the Earth not ever spinning???

For those who need a refreshment on how wind is formed: As the sun warms the Earth's surface, the atmosphere warms too. Some parts of the Earth receive direct rays from the sun all year and are always warm. Other places receive indirect rays, so the climate is colder. Warm air, which weighs less than cold air, rises. Then cool air moves in and replaces the rising warm air. This movement of air is what makes the wind blow. 

So, there have to be no sun for there to be no wind, but if somehow we where able to have sun, and remove wind, while there still was air, then all the trees would die, and all life on the planet would cease to exist, as the wind carries carbon atoms from animals and human beings across forests, and carries oxygen from greenery to animals and humans. Human beings breathing in their own CO2, and trees breathing their own O2 would kill it all. 

These creationist authors say there were no deserts or ice caps, so they are trying to eliminate temperature difference around the globe. This means that the global climate would have at a constant everywhere. This means there cannot ever be rain, because rain causes winds.

Large areas of vegetation will die because
a) no wind to carry pollen to fertilize. Plants that are pollenized by insects and birds will thrive but only to the extent that those animals increase in population
b) no wind means no rain. Evaporation and precipitation will be localized to the immediate area of the water source.

Certain long range migratory birds will die off due to hardship in flying long distances without the help of thermals. They will evolve into localized birds (since the climate is all the same anyway) and will fight the indeginous birds for food.

Large numbers of fish species will die when ocean currents stop and water temperatures mimic atmospheric temperatures (constant). No currents, no migratory fish, no migratory fish, animals and people dependent on those fish will perish. If there are currents, wind will be caused.

Large areas of land will develop high concentrations of carbon dioxide emanating from the ground. Toxic pollutants will linger around their sources. Over abundance of oxygen created by plants will further deplete plant life and all animals dependent on them.

AND GET THIS. These creationist authors claim that "day and night" existed for many generation since Adam to Noah. In order for there to be a day and night, the Earth must be rotating in orbit on an axis (unless you are a complete idiotic Geocentrist and/or Flat Earther).

Due to Newtons law of motion and the Coriolis Effect, which is due to the rotation of the Earth in orbit, even if you exclude all the factors that contribute to a constant global climate, the force from the rotating Earth alone will cause movements in the atmosphere. The earth is a sphere that spins on an axis.  At the equator its surface speed is about 1,040 miles per hour; at 40 degrees north (and south) latitude the speed is about 600 mph, while at the poles the it is 0 mph.  This means that adjacent "slices" of the atmosphere are moving at different speeds; thus there will be shear forces between them, and these will cause movements within the atmosphere.  This is what gives rise to the Coriolis Effect, and this alone would cause winds.  In addition, the gravitational force at the equator would be acting in the same direction as the centrifugal (or centripetal) force, whereas at other latitudes these vectors would not line up, and there would be additional shear forces that would cause differential air movements. This means that there will ALWAYS have to be winds on the earth.

So, in this creationist worldview of there was "night and day" and yet had no wind is impossible.

And we are not done yet!

What about this "Water Canopy" the creationist authors spoke of? They say that the Earth was enclosed by a water canopy, forming the Earth into a greenhouse paradise. So how plausible is this water canopy?

A vapor canopy with more than twelve inches of precipitable water would raise the temperature of the earth above boiling. A vapor canopy of only four inches of water would raise the temperature of the earth to 144 degrees F. It is worth noting that several prominent creationists agree with this conclusion, yet their close colleagues continue to teach that there was a vapor canopy

Some creationists try to solve the vapor canopy problems by moving the canopy out of the earth's atmosphere and into orbit. A canopy of orbiting ice would have been unstable (it could only exist in a ring much like Saturn's due to gravity). It would have cooled the climate (probably just slightly) until it somehow collapsed to cause the flood. Then the release of its gravitational potential energy would have converted all the ice into superheated steam, not into a flood.

This video will explain the effects of a water canopy on top of the atmosphere, such as the dramatic increase in PSI and the amount of water would cover the Earth when the canopy would fail.

Page 5

“Although God has no physical body, he created man with the ability to do some things that He can do. God can see, hear, smell, touch and speak, and so can man.”

Does god have a penis?

Does god have a nose?

Does god have a stomach?
Watch this video, and keep those questions in mind.

“Man is also a free moral agent who is free to make choices.”

Unless those choices don't abide by the laws of a supernatural Dictator.

“Except for the forgiveness offered to us through faith in Jesus Christ, we would all receive the consequences of our sinful actions.”

What would our consequences be without this Christ? In Judaism, we would only end up in the ground, or "Sheol." It is only several thousand years later with the inception of the christian cult is the concept of Hell created, a remodeling of the Hellenistic ideal of Hades/Tartarus. (which, btw, 2nd Peter Chapter 2 verse 4 mentions the word tartaroō (Tartaros/Tartarus)).

“Like God, man has emotions and is capable of feeling. He can love, be angry, feel compassion and experience both happiness and sorrow.”

I would recommend reading about the work "Trusting Doubt" by psychologist Valerie Tarico on why God is pathetically man-made. Her arguments on why a god should not have human emotions is quite spectacular.

“Only beings made in God's image can paint a picture...”

Oh really...

A non-human creature that can paint a picture. Does God's image involve tusks and big ears?

“Like God, man is a moral being; animals are amoral. Of all God's earthly creatures, only man can distinguish between right and wrong, form moral judgments, and follow moral ideals. Only man has a conscience.”

Animals are not amoral, this is a fact supported by science. Read a book. Try Marl Rowlands book "Can Animals be Moral?" (Oxford University Published in 2012).

Animals even grieve their dead.
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/animal-emotions/200910/grief-in-animals-its-arrogant-think-were-the-only-animals-who-mourn

Page 6

“Like God, man is immortal. Although man has a definite beginning, he then lives forever. Our bodies die because of sin, but our souls live on.”

Where is the evidence that a soul exists? This book does not provide a lick of proof.

With no proof, this book's assertion that a soul exists holds as much weight as a New Age quack claiming our bodies illuminate with Auras.

“Illness and disease are unknown.”

If illness and diseases were unknown, they why were humans and countless animals born with an immune system?

Immune systems serve one purpose: to protect the body from diseases.

So what is the point of god making animals with an immune system?

There are only two conclusions,

There were indeed diseases and illnesses in pre-Flood times,

OR that god knew that man would sin long before he created man so he built humans with an immune system ahead of time. (And if this is the case, then god is evil. He knew humans would bring the Fall upon the world, and yet he created them anyway and condemn them for his mistake.)

“Imagine a place...There is no sin, no crime, no disharmony, no pain, no death.”

No death? This is just as stupid as the claim "there was no wind" in Eden.

Animals by their very nature are meant to consume and digest. That is how living organisms function. Even if an animal eats some vegetation, that said vegetation is a living organism.

How about shark babies who must eat their fellow sibling embryos to survive while in their mother's womb?

A world without death would be far from Edenic. Either there would be no possibility of new birth, in which case none of us could be alive today, or the world would become so overpopulated with living things that most people would be buried alive under others. Death is a necessary part of life.

Page 7

THE FLOOD

“According to Biblical genealogy, at least nine generations of people lived on Earth between Adam and Noah. By the time Noah became an adult, the world was filled with violent, evil people; and only he “found grace in the eyes of the Lord.” Because of the unrepentant wickedness of man, God had planned to destroy “them with the Earth.””

And according to the Rig Veda, the God Brahman created the universe billions of years ago.
See, I can do it too.

Notice the one thing they don't mention to kids: Noah lived to be 900 years old. Of course they don't mention that to kids, because even kids might think that is total nonsense.

But let's get this straight: God creates an imperfect world and knows way ahead of time it will screw up. He knows that man will become (what he considers) evil, and decides to KILL THEM ALL and then repopulate Earth with the SAME STOCK of humans that pissed him off the first time.

The sickening and sad part of this is, Christians like to think this is a "moral" story and think it is appropriate to tell kids through stories, songs, and children cartoon videos.

Bear this is mind, God kills untold men, women, children, babies and UNBORN babies. Yes, God decided to kill the unborn because he already deemed them wicked. And ontop of that, God drowns every animal.

Isn't it any wonder that many Christians abandon Christianity. Why would you praise a God that drowns babies?

“When it [the Ark] was finished, Noah was to take his wife and three sons and their wives into the Ark. In addition, he was to take two of every “unclean” animal, and seven of every “clean” animal and every bird. Added to this was the food supply for all the people and animals on board. Some believe that the account of Noah and the Ark is just a myth for children. It seems preposterous to them that the Ark could hold so many people and animals. The Ark was not, however, a small boat. It was about 450 feet (137 m) long, 75 feet (23 m) wide, and 45 feet (14 m) high. It's volume was more than 1,500,000 cubic feet (43,000 m^3). Because it had three floors, it's area was about 101,250 square feet (9,400 m^2). In case you still don't have a mental picture of the size of the Ark, it had as much volume as 356 railroad livestock cars. (Imagine waiting at a railroad crossing for ten trains, each of which consists of 36 cars!) The Ark had about as much room as 100 average-sized houses in the United States. Certainly the Ark was large enough, with room to spare, to contain the people, animals and food that were on board during the Flood?”

You think that's impressive?

Math is a bitch ain't it.

This Creationist textbook may try to appear intelligent, using certain numbers, but without any proper comparison, they sneakily hide the obvious that their "Ark" is too small and it is completely impossible to house all the animals.

“Another problem area for many scoffers is the fact that Noah would have been unable to gather all the animals, but this was not at all difficult for him. God told Noah the animals would come him when the Ark was ready. God must have instilled within these animals a migration instinct that caused them to move to the Ark at that particular time. Because of the canopy, Earth's climate was uniform and the animals were not widely separated as they are today, so they would not have had to travel a great distance. In addition, most Christian scientists believe the land areas on Earth formed one continent, called Pangea, before the Flood. If you look at a world map, you can see that the continents look almost like the pieces of a puzzle that could have fitted together.”

All animals coming from a uniform climate strongly argues against creation. Creationism argues that features of animals are designed; for example, that the camel's desert adaptations are designed for the desert, that the mountain goat's sure-footedness is designed for mountains. (Evolution says much the same, but "designed" by natural selection.) If all animals come from the same sort of climate, there is no need for such features, so it does not make sense that they are designed.

“When “the windows of heaven were opened,” the canopy above Earth began collapsing, and the water began falling in a deluge. The falling water joined the water surging from the underground reservoirs; rivers and streams overflowed their banks; and mudslides carried away trees and other plants from hillsides."

So, the waters above the atmosphere came falling down to Earth and flooding the world.

First of all, how did that "water" not already fall due to gravity? And how did it survive the fall and not get vaporized? And even if it did make it through the atmosphere, it would be unbelievably hot, to the point Noah and the whole Ark would have been vaporized. If the canopy began as vapor, any water from it would be superheated. This scenario essentially starts with most of the Flood waters boiled off. If the water began as ice in orbit, the gravitational potential energy would likewise raise the temperature past boiling. When the canopy fell to form the Flood, everything on Earth would be POACHED.

But we are not done yet. Remember, math is a bitch. Creationists HATE math.
Consider the circumference of the Earth, and keep in mind the circumference above the atmosphere is much greater. Do the math of the amount of water there would have to be above the atmosphere, then drop all that onto the world... well, let this video walk you through it and show you how STUPID this "canopy hypothesis" really is.

"As the water began rising, the Ark floated just as God designed it to. It had no wheelhouse and no rudder; there was no way to steer the massive boat. Of course, that did not matter; the Ark was no going anywhere because it had been designed only to keep its cargo safe during the onslaught of water. Because of it's size and shape, the Ark was very stable and did not capsize, even in the stormiest weather."

Ignoring the obvious mathematical impossibilities just addressed about the Flood itself (especially the air pressure alone would kill everything), would a vessel that side MADE OF WOOD not capsize in the "stormiest weather"?

"While rain continued falling from the fractured canopy and bursting from underground, lava poured from newly formed volcanoes. The ocean floor was elevated and the continents sank. The water and sudden temperature changes caused splits to form in Earth's crust. The resulting final earthquakes produced gigantic tidal waves that surged across Earth and changed the shape of the land. The falling water combined with the gushing from inside Earth until the mountaintops were covered by at least 22 feet (6.7 m) of water."

Every mountain covered by 22 feet?
How much water would be required to cover the highest mountain by 22 feet?

Again, math is a bitch.

If creationists claim (and many do) that the Earth's mountains and continents were formed dramatically due to the Flood, they dig themselves into a deeper hole (besides the fact they never show a model to prove it).

The catastrophic formation of mountains and subsequent return of the sea into its basin would have released tremendous amounts of heat and mechanical energy, enough to boil the oceans and metamorphose the minerals in the mountains. No trace of such a catastrophe exists. Formation of mountains during the Flood does not explain why different mountains are different ages. The Appalachians are much older than the Rockies, for example, as one can immediately see just from how the two ranges are differently eroded.

ONCE AGAIN, MATH IS A BITCH!

If the geologic record was deposited IN A SINGLE YEAR, then the events it records must also have occurred within a year. Some of these events release significant amounts of heat.

Magma: The geologic record includes roughly 8 x 10E24 grams of lava flows and igneous intrusions. Assuming (conservatively) a specific heat of 0.15, this magma would release 5.4 x 10E27 joules while cooling 1100 degrees C.

In addition, the heat of crystallization as the magma solidifies would release a great deal more heat.

Limestone formation: There are roughly 5 x 10E23 grams of limestone in the earth's sediments [Poldervaart, 1955], and the formation of calcite releases about 11,290 joules/gram [Weast, 1974, p. D63]. If only 10% of the limestone were formed during the Flood, the 5.6 x 10E26 joules of heat released would be enough to boil the flood waters.

Meteorite impacts: Erosion and crustal movements have erased an unknown number of impact craters on earth, but Creationists Whitcomb and DeYoung suggest that cratering to the extent seen on the Moon and Mercury occurred on earth during the year of Noah's Flood. The heat from just one of the largest lunar impacts released an estimated 3 x 10E26 joules; the same sized object falling to earth would release even more energy. [Fezer, pp. 45-46]

Other: Other possibly significant heat sources are radioactive decay (some Creationists claim that radioactive decay rates were much higher during the Flood to account for consistently old radiometric dates); biological decay (think of the heat released in compost piles); and compression of sediments.

5.6 x 10^26 joules is enough to heat the oceans to boiling. 3.7 x 10^27 joules will vaporize them completely. Since steam and air have a lower heat capacity than water, the steam released will quickly raise the temperature of the atmosphere over 1000 C. At these temperatures, much of the atmosphere would boil off the Earth.

Aside from losing its atmosphere, Earth can only get rid of heat by radiating it to space, and it can't radiate significantly more heat than it gets from the sun unless it is a great deal hotter than it is now. (It is very nearly at thermal equilibrium now.) If there weren't many millions of years to radiate the heat from the above processes, the earth would still be unlivably hot.

"After forty days and nights, the canopy was finally depleted and the torrential rain stopped falling, but the waters “prevailed upon the Earth an hundred and fifty days.” It was nearly one year after the Flood began that the water receded enough to allow Noah and the animals to leave the Ark. During that year, the mud, slit, rocks, dead plants, animal remains, and debris settled to the bottom of the water. In the process, many sea animals and fish were caught in the silt, died, and were added to the sediment. Much of the sediment quickly solidified and became sedimentary rock. Some of the plants, animals, and sea creatures in the debris formed the fossils that are found in sedimentary rock everywhere on Earth."

"Other decaying plants and animal bodies were converted into underground deposits of coal, oil, and gas that have helped industrialize the modern world. The tremendous pressure of water that covered the Earth during the 150 days immediately after the Flood contributed to formation of these fossil fuels."

Coal is a rock consisting almost entirely of organic material. The structure of this material can be observed by looking at thin sections of coal under the microscope in either transmitted or reflected light. Coal consists of fragments of land plant material, including wood, cuticle (the waxy surface found on some leaves), sap (amber), and spores and pollen. Each of these can be present in varying degrees of degradation due to decay near the surface and "cooking" due to burial in thick sediments. The progenitor of coal is peat like that found in modern swamps and bogs (although older coals look a little different because the plants were different types). Some people have proposed coal forms from floating mats of dead plant material deposited in deep water in a short amount of time. Although not too far from the conventional explanation (dead plant material, sometimes transported), it can not explain the majority of coal deposits. Most coals are found in sedimentary rocks deposited in terrestrial river floodplains. They have river channels, levees, and fossil soil horizons. Often soil horizons are found immediately below coal seams, and these are often filled with plant roots. All these structures are similar to modern peat-forming environments. The common occurrence of rooted upright trees that can not be transported (because they have delicate rootlets embedded in the sediment) is compelling evidence that most coals form near the surface in terrestrial environments (see the "polystrate trees" above). However, even more convincing is the co-occurrence of dinosaur footprints and upright trees on the top surface of several coal seams at a Cretaceous-age locality near Price, in southeast Utah.

It is impossible to interpret these deposits as formed by a single event of short duration. The plants that form coal take time to grow, coal takes time to accumulate and decay, and trees take many years to grow. There are multiple coal seams and multiple tree and footprint horizons, and this is only in one short interval of the geologic record in one area. There are many other areas of similar coal deposits (e.g., Joggins, Nova Scotia). Rather than being a significant problem for conventional geology, coal is explained quite easily by analogy to modern peat environments. Coal deposits and associated sediments are an immense problem for any interpretation involving a "global flood".

"As the waters began to recede after the Flood, greater rivers surged toward the oceans. Because much of the rock was newly formed and relatively soft sedimentary rock, these massive, forceful rivers cut huge canyons as they flowed. Evolutionists would have us believe that the formation of the Grand Canyon, for example, was accomplished by slow erosion over a period of many millions of years, but creationists believe that the enormous canyon was formed during a short period following the Flood as torrents of water flowed over the land toward the Gulf of California and the Pacific Ocean."

Page 15

Seasons and Climates

Only in the latter half of the opening of this section is smeared with Creationist nonsense.

"A study of geography must include a study of seasons and climates, for these factors both have their effect on, and are affected by, the geography of any region. To understand seasons and climates, we must understand the movement of the Earth in space. As it travels through space, Earth is rotating in a counter-clockwise, west-to-east direction with a surface speed of 1,040 miles (1,674 km) per hour. Even at that speed, it takes a full twenty-four hours for Earth to make one complete rotation. Earth's rotation is truly amazing. What force propels Earth? Who set the speed so that there is perfect balance between Earth's gravity and the centrifugal force created by Earth's rotation? If Earth were to spin a little faster, we might all be thrown into space, and if the rotation stopped, we would either have daylight or darkness all the time. Only God the Creator could have planned and established such a perfect system!"

Once again, the mindset that the Earth was made specifically for humans, getting everything completely backwards.
Earth and it's speed was not "set" for humans and life in general. Rather, life in general is adapted to the speed of the Earth.

"God once stopped the rotation of the Earth to show His power. In the Bible, we read in Joshua chapter ten that God extended the daylight hours to give the Israelites time to defeat the Amorites. The Bible states, "And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies...So the sun stood still in the midst of heaven, and hasted not to go down about a whole day." God must have stopped Earth's rotation to give His people the additional daylight needed to defeat their enemies."

I try to understand how creationists expect to be taken serious, even by children, when they talk about this.

Remember, just a moment ago, they said "if Earth were to spin faster, we might all be thrown into space." Well, how about if the Earth completely stopped? Ever been in a car that was going over 70 mph, and then it suddenly just stopped? What happens? You fly forward, and if you are not wearing a seat-belt, you will hit your head on the dashboard.

Likewise, since the Earth is spinning at 1,040 MILES PER HOUR, and the Earth suddenly STOPPED spinning on it's axis... imagine that catastrophic results! Due to momentum, everything would fly off at 1,040 mph. People would either be crushed, entire mountains across the globe would fly off into space, the entire continents would topple all over one another, and the Earth shriveled to a cinder.

All these things would have to happen according to the natural laws of physics. These Creationist authors are once again AT WAR WITH COPERNICUS AND SCIENCE in general. Here they are, claiming the absolute impossible happened to defend their faith, and in so doing spit on the work and discoveries of great astronomers.

Page 25

A Challenge

"Along with the privileged of living on Earth, God has given man a tremendous responsibility. The first man, Adam, was instructed to subdue Earth and have dominion over all other creatures living here. During the short time we have lived on God's Earth, we must  nurture it as if it were our own. Plants, animals, water, land, and hidden resources are ours to enjoy, develop and improve; they are not ours to waste or destroy."

Notice that nowhere in that intro says that man must "preserve" Earth's resources, or give the option that we just don't have to use certain resources. Saying "[Earth's resources] are not ours to waste" seems to imply that we should not let all the uranium of the world go to waste, so lets dig it all up and through it into a nuclear reactor. Or, lets drill and suck up all the oil in the world and burn it all. Or, lets unleash all our fisheries and capture all the fish in the oceans until there is no more fish left.

"When we study our universe, we become convinced that it's very orderliness points to a Being Who created it. The cycles of nature, the complexity of the forces which keep the planets in their proper orbit, even the veins carrying nourishment in an oak leaf are convincing evidence that an Intelligent Being is responsible for it all. The wonders and order in the universe and the laws by which it is sustained presuppose an infinite intelligence. That Intelligence is God."

Nothing in the study of our universe points to "orderliness" or a "intelligence" or "creator." Pretty much every point made in this creationist textbook is easily demolished by High School mathematics. It is mathematically impossible for a global flood, among many other creationist stories.

"We believe that God created Heaven and Earth in the beginning of time. We accept this by faith. We also believe in the catastrophic Flood that covered the entire Earth and completely changed Earth's geography. We base our belief on both the evidences we see in our universe and on the fact that God has recorded these facts in His Word."

And as this review has demonstrated, the creationists beliefs for a global catastrophic flood is based on anything but evidence. Not even physics and mathematics supports creationism.

Claiming that the claim "God recorded these facts in His word" is evidence is completely wrong. One can apply the same argument to the Koran or Rig Veda. Hindu's have and do call the word of the Bhagita Vita is the "absolute truth" written by god, and it completely contradicts the stories of Christian creationism.

"As an evolutionist observes the laws and process that govern our Earth today, he is blind to the evidence of a divine Creator. He denies proof of Creation and a worldwide, catastrophic Flood. Instead, he accepts uniformitarianism, the principle that laws and processes operate essentially today as they always have. He does not believe that fossils, fossil fuels, and the Grand Canyon were all formed during the year of the Flood. Instead, he believes these things took millions, or even billions, of years, because he believes that's how much time they would take today. He believes that, since light travels through space at a speed of 186,000 miles (300,000 km) per second today, it has always done so. If, based on these calculations, a star is two billion light years away, it has taken two billion years for the light from the star to reach Earth, and therefore that star has existed and has been giving off light two billion years ago. A belief in uniformity removes the necessity for a belief in God, the Creator of the universe. It also removes the necessity for a belief in the intervention of a supernatural God in natural processes."

There is nothing to be "blind" from something that is not there or ever was. All Creationists have relied on has been special pleading, huge stretches and many times outright falsehoods and lying.

There is no "proof" of Creation or a worldwide Flood anywhere.

And here is a special part. The Creationist slams scientists for believing the natural laws of physics "operate essentially today as they always have." This means, the creationists insist that the natural laws were different in the past - yet they do not point out exactly when this was or how it happened.

But lets take a look at this for a second, and address the creationist argument that natural laws were not always the same as they were in the past, and squeeze that into the time frame of a 6,000 year old Earth.

And...say it with me know... MATH IS A BITCH

Let's measure radioactivity in a "6,000 year old Earth" model. How much would the "natural laws" have to change in the past to fit this model????

Thanks to student of astrophysics, who goes by the alias King Crocoduck, demonstrated using mathematics the change in radioactivity required to fit the 6,000 year old Earth model. And the math shows the following:

The radioactive decay of uranium on Earth would have to be sped up dramatically. How dramatic? The radioactive decay would have to be increased 760,000 times more, which means this would release 8.5 times MORE radiation than the nuclear accident of Fukishima did in total, EVERY square mile on planet Earth, EVERY SECOND for the past 6,000 years. And that is being generous, and only focusing on Uranium over the rest of other molecules.

Since this has NEVER occurred, we can conclude that the creationist model is mind-numbingly and HILARIOUSLY incorrect. 

But it gets even worse. In order to believe Creationism, not only do you have to deny general mathematics, chemistry, geology... but even gravity.

"After the eruption of Mount St. Helens, some evolutionists were forced to reconsider their views. During a short period of time, many changes occurred that evolutionists had believed would take millions of years. If an isolated volcanic eruption can cause these changes, imagine what a worldwide catastrophic Flood did!"

Nothing about the incident of Mount St. Helens challenged the scientific community in any field.
http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/mt_st_helens_dacite_kh.htm

"The evolutionist criticizes the creationist for accepting the Biblical account of Creation. He recognizes that the creationist accepts this account by faith. The evolutionist does not realize the he also accepts his theories on faith; he cannot prove them by scientific demonstration, and he is dishonest when he claims they are science. His theory is a belief of faith that cannot be proven by scientific methods."

Simple and direct flat-out lying.

Science is not based on "faith."The theory of evolution is based entirely on facts and evidence. These include: ERVs, atavisms, transitional forms, physiological, anatomical, and molecular vestiges, ontogeny and developmental biology, protein functional redundancy, convergent phenotypes, mobile genes, observed speciation, or the myriad methods of dating geologic stratigraphy, nor any twin-nested hierarchy of phylogenetic clades. All of these are peer-reviewed and verified accurate evidence positively promoting evolution as well as directly disproving creationism.

These are not things "believed" rather, contrary to the lies of this creationist textbook, all of these evidences CAN and HAVE been proven by scientific methods. They have been observed, tested, repeated, and proven.

It is a fact that evolution is the only explanation of biodiversity with either evidential support or scientific validity and no would be alternative notion has ever met even one of the criteria of being a theory. Despite the fact that creationists will lie about everything that proves the theory of evolution, evolution is supported by actual evidence and therefore the theory is a matter of knowledge rather than mere belief.

"God gave man, that includes you, the responsibility of caring for the world and its natural resources. If you are to be an effective caretaker of your planet, you should know as much as possible about it. Part of that knowledge must include a study of geography."

A good start to being an effective caregiver of the planet will include preserving the knowledge of humankind, the one thing that differentiates us from the rest of the species. The human mind and the ability to reason. It is a gift to humans that has made us walk on the moon and discover the secrets of the universe.

Care giving for the planet is vitally important, but we cannot and must not do so by forsaking reason and the human thinking mind.