It seems to me that YECists have gone to a lot of trouble to fight evolutionary biology and geology, with a reasonable degree of success. They have even had a go at tackling cosmology. But when it comes to planetology and the study of the solar system, they seem to be at a bit of a loss.
On AiG we find the following dialogue between 2 creationist astronomers:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v13/i1/crater.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/cratering.asp
Personally, I find this dialogue incredible. If nothing else, it reveals that YECism runs into a terrible dead end in the science of planetology.
Do YECists have any comments to make? Have you thought much about this issue, and how it might be solved?
Do TEs have any comments to make? What are the scientific and theological problems with the debate between Spencer and Faulkner?
What do OECs and Gap theorists have to contribute to this area of study?
On AiG we find the following dialogue between 2 creationist astronomers:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v13/i1/crater.asp
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/cratering.asp
Personally, I find this dialogue incredible. If nothing else, it reveals that YECism runs into a terrible dead end in the science of planetology.
Do YECists have any comments to make? Have you thought much about this issue, and how it might be solved?
Do TEs have any comments to make? What are the scientific and theological problems with the debate between Spencer and Faulkner?
What do OECs and Gap theorists have to contribute to this area of study?