The Macro-evolution Framework for History.

In the beginning, there was a massive explosion and our current universe slowly formed and cooled. There are many diverse views on where the original matter came from and when it first expanded, but this is the commonly taught starting point. Complex chemicals somehow came together on the planet earth to form the first self-replicating and self-repairing cell. This cell adapted itself to its environment, becoming more and more complex with time. Billions of years passed as useful information was added to the chemical blueprint of simple organisms causing the variety of life forms to increase. The end result is the current diversity of life we see all around us. Evolution requires faith that an adequate mechanism explaining how one type of animal could be transformed into another will be found. The commonly proposed evolutionary mechanisms simply do not explain how life could develop. Mutations are random mistakes which demonstrably do not add useful information to the DNA molecule. Natural selection can only select that which is already present in an animal's genetic code. Thus, evolution is firmly based on faith in future discoveries... not current observations.

This is the Biblical Framework of History.

This framework acknowledges the possibility of four major interventions by God into history. The first is the instantaneous creation of the universe and diverse forms of life. The second is the curse of this creation in response to the disobedience of the only organisms created with free will (mankind). The third is a worldwide flood as judgment for the almost total rebellion of humanity. The last was God's appearance on earth as Jesus Christ in order to deal with the human sin problem. This framework is also based on faith.

TRUE SCIENCE POINTS TO THE CORRECT VIEW

The rocks don't talk. No fossil has ever been uncovered with a label attached. All must be interpreted within a framework. An evolution geologist and a creation geologist shown the same rock or fossil will arrive at a different conclusion concerning its origin and age. They will interpret the data based on the framework which they believe to be true. Yet they can not both be right. The best way to determine which is right is to see how many contradictions arise from interpreting data within each framework. An example of this is the black shale’s of the Hartford rock formation in Connecticut. Evolution geologists commonly interpret these rocks as forming from plant and animal sediments slowly collecting at the bottom of a deep lake. ¹ Creation geologists interpret this deposit as the result of a rapid deposit of sediment during the worldwide flood which has subsequently turned to stone. Interestingly, portions of this formation contain hundreds of well preserved and tightly packed fish fossils per cubic meter of shale. This is what would be expected from a catastrophic burial but does not match the observations of slow settling at the bottom of a deep lake or shallow sea. Dead fish can occasionally settle and be well preserved but not in the tightly packed manner observed in this formation. To re-interpret this entire formation as a catastrophic deposit would upset the entire uniformitarian foundation of geology. Therefore, the sediments continue to be interpreted in a way which does not match observations. If this were the only evidence for catastrophic deposition of this formation it might be acceptable to continue to present the Hartford formation as the result of slow processes over eons of time. However, John Whitmore lists many others in his study.² Furthermore, this is not an isolated example because massive fossil graveyards are quite common around the world.

1. McDonald, N.G., "Paleontology of the Mesozoic Rocks of the Conn. Valley", State Geo. and Natural History Survey of Connecticut, 1982, p.147.

2. Whitmore, John, " The Hartford Basin of Central Connecticut: Multiple evidences of Catastrophism ", Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference On Creationism, 1990.