TB writes:
The possibilities of fraud aside, the quotes nevertheless indicate the confidence prominent geologists and paleontologists ascribe to the work. Berthault has two recent (2002) mainstream publications on this work as well as a pair of 1980s publication. I wouldn't be surprised if the flood geology conotations have put off many mainstream geologists.
I wasn't implying fraud. Berthault is welcome to blow his own horn as much as he likes, but Piveteau has been dead over a decade, and Millot, if still alive, hasn't helped Berthault get the geological world to embrace his ideas, not only not "unhesitatingly" but not at all. That's why I asked why nothing has happened. I wasn't trying to discredit the supposed quotes from the personal correspondence. I say "supposed" not because I believe the letters don't exist, but because there is no way we can know which ideas they were actually responding to.
But what is actually going on here is a very old Creationist tactic, namely quoting mainstream scientists apparently saying things that clearly aren't mainstream, or quoting a Creation scientist while letting people think he's a mainstream scientist. I think this is certainly the case with Millot, since his students have published a book dedicated to him which includes both the words "Genesis" and "Geochemistry". The goal of this tactic is to make people believe that mainstream scientists are gradually coming to accept Creationist ideas.
This approach is a sub-tactic of the appeal to authority fallacy, and I would have preferred seeing you actually address the issues raised by edge and wehappy.
--Percy