I’ve been wondering what I should feature in my next episode of Those Wacky Creationists. Last night I had my father and his gf over for dinner, and talked about creationism. Then, I went with my friend S for a pint, and talked about creationism. Through both those conversations, I’ve realized that this is the next story I need to relate. Hold on to your hats…it’s a doozy.
Lilithattack and I discussed our strategy in the car. We both knew that we were about to enter a museum entirely dedicated to an idea we were both whole heartedly against, so how to act? Both of us knew we’d be upset at what we saw, did we march up to the curator and demand an explanation? In the end, we decided to be passive. We figured that we didn’t want to get into a full blown argument because it was unlikely we were about to change anyone’s minds in an hour.
However, when we finished all the displays, a volunteer invited us to talk to him. We did and launched into several reasons we thought the museum was bunk. Respectfully, the whole conversation was actually very civil and polite…which I didn’t expect and was a very nice surprise.
I began by telling him that the entire museum was based upon a profoundly flawed idea of what evolution is, exactly. That the science they argue against is often not the same science that evolutionists believe. Man…I actually hate using the term “evolutionists” but it’s easy to use. When I say “evolutionists” I mean “everyone else”.
Now, I’ll go through different parts of this conversation in subsequent posts as I remember them and as they relate to what I’m talking about, but this post is dedicated to the ice shell story. If someone who reads this know, could you please tell me if this is conventionally accepted in creationist circles as true?
It’s a complicated story…bear with me. Here we go:
The man looked at us and said, ‘now, what I’m about to tell you is probably going to seem wild to you.’
“I bet that you’re absolutely right. Tell us, though.”
And he did. He told us that the earth, before the flood, was cloaked in ice. There was a shell…a massive ice shell…that contained the earth within it.
“Above the clouds?”, I asked.
“yes…it would have been difficult to see from earth, but it was somewhere above the clouds.”
He went on to explain that this ice shell caused a different atmospheric pressure and composition. This is what allowed people to live into their 900s (eg. Noah, who built the ark when he was in his 600s). In fact, he told us, this different pressure and composition has been found in bubbles within amber. A scientist (no idea who) extracted the air trapped in a bubble in amber and built a chamber with the same pressure and composition he found in that bubble. In that chamber he managed to grow a cherry tomato tree 14 feet high!!
I will remind you here that everything I’m writing is what he actually said to us.
To any chemists out there I have a question. Is it possible for the composition of air trapped in a bubble in amber to change by certain elements dissolving into the amber? That was my response to part of that argument, but I have no idea if I was right.
Anyway. Cherry tomato trees 14 feet high…yeah. So. This is, he said, what the earth was like pre-flood.
Oh…also…he said that the water of the earth and the water of the sky were separate. In other words, clouds were clouds and puddles were puddles. I asked if that meant there was no cycle of evaporation and then rain..blah blah blah. He told me that since rainbows did not exist pre-flood (actually, ha…I “knew” that) it must mean that, no, there was no such cycle.
Now we get to the flood. “Something hit this shell”, he said punching his fist into his other hand to illustrate. “Something”. I didn’t mention it but ‘something’? We’re talking about how god is the man in complete control and then just ‘something’ hits this earth shell? But, I decided there were other battles to be fought here.
This ‘something’ that hit the earth ice shell smashed the ice and caused heavy rain for 40 days and 40 nights.
See? All perfectly scientific [that’s me talking, not him].
I think that’s enough for this post. In more of a reminder to myself than anything, I will try to remember to relate the part of the discussion about ‘flood mythology’ vs ‘there was a flood’.