I need your help to continue publishing this blog. Your financial assistance would be greatly appreciated.

588. Modern Geology Based on a Lie

Learn the real motivation behind the “principles” of modern geology.
IT’S WORTH CONSIDERING
While James Hutton (1726-1797) is usually credited with being the father

Charles Lyell

Charles Lyell

of modern geology, Charles Lyell (1797-1875) took Hutton’s theory of uniformitarianism and established it as one of the pillars on which modern geology is based. Uniformitarianism espouses the assumption that the same natural laws and processes that are currently operating in the universe are the same that have always operated in the universe; observed changes over time resulted from a constant process at the same rate of speed. With this assumption, the thickness of rock layers can only be explained by the belief that they happened over a great amount of time.

The fact, however, is that nobody has observed these changes over time.

Charles Darwin

Charles Darwin

Geologists have simply examined what we see today. The conclusions drawn are based on the old-earth assumption. This assumption became the “rock” on which most other geological postulations were based, including those in Principles of Geology which he published in 1830. Many of Charles Darwin’s theories and conclusions were influenced by this book which he took with him on his famous journey aboard the “Beagle.”

Recently, some of Lyell’s written correspondence was uncovered, revealing the real motivation behind his “research” and his rock strata conclusions, and it was anything but scientifically objective. In his letters to Roderick Murchison, a fellow old-earth (millions of years) geologist, he admitted that his intention was to discredit the Bible and its young earth (6,000 years old) claims. In 1829, just a few months before the first volume of Principles of Geology was published, Lyell wrote:

I trust I shall make my sketch of the progress of geology popular. Old [Rev. John] Fleming is frightened and thinks the age will not stand my anti-Mosaical conclusions and at least that the subject will for a time become unpopular and awkward for the clergy, but I am not afraid. I shall out with the whole but in as conciliatory a manner as possible.

AS I SEE IT
Principles of Geology. They reveal his real motivation and his willingness

Courtesy of natural-dog-remedies.com

Courtesy of natural-dog-remedies.com

to abandon true scientific research which approaches the subject, whatever it may be, with an open mind, searching for the truth, regardless of its source. Starting with a presupposition that you have not proven only takes you farther from the truth the deeper you go (unless, of course, your presupposition happened to be correct).

We have learned that he set out to prove that all geologic processes were due to natural events rather than supernatural events (like a worldwide flood). In his day, many held to the biblical account of creation,Noah & Ark 2 attributing earth’s creation and subsequent changes to God or another higher being. Lyell set out disprove the Bible’s claims by coming up with a theory that would demand an old earth to explain what we observe in the rock strata. He wanted to convince the world that the processes that resulted in what we see today happened very slowly, and that the Earth was extremely ancient rather than the 6,000-year age most Bible scholars purposed. His letters prove that his agenda was to “free the science from Moses”.

According to Creation.com (the source of much of the information in this article), Lyell, the lawyer par excellence, was involved, not in scientific investigation but political game playing to ensure his uniformitarian ideas would be accepted by the church, even though he knew they clearly contradicted the plain teaching of Scripture. Lyell’s secretive scheming not only deceived the church to accept his false ideas that undermined the gospel, but he set geology on a wrong path for over a century.

Lyell also sold geology some snake oil. He convinced geologists that … all past processes acted at essentially their current rates (that is, those observed in historical time). This extreme gradualism has led to numerous unfortunate consequences, including the rejection of sudden or catastrophic events in the face of positive evidence for them, for no reason other than that they were not gradual.

I have just watched a video that vividly shows just how wrong Charles diamondLyell was. It shows how diamonds can be manufactured in a lab in just 4 days. The narrative in the video reminds the viewer several times that it takes nature millions of years to accomplish what they do regularly in only four days. Without realizing it, they give tremendous credibility to the biblical account, showing that all that is required is heat and pressure (the heat and pressure a world-wide flood would produce), not eons of time. If the most basic premise of modern geology is wrong, can we trust its other claims? The same applies to many other branches of science whose bedrock foundation is an old-earth assumption.

Imagine the scientific advances we would be enjoying if researchers started with biblical truth instead of a lie as the foundation! Click here to read the details of Lyell’s “free science from Moses” bias.

RELATED ARTICLES

ON THE LIGHTER SIDE
How is it that we put man on the moon before we figured out it would be a good idea to put wheels on luggage?

Be Sociable, Share!

Leave a Reply

xx