Proceedings of the First Conference on Creation Geology (July 26-28, 2007)

wikipedia seems to know his real name. concievably, we could actually confirm that education. but google is very little help at the moment.

---

According to wiki, he has a B.S. in Biology and an M.S. in Geology from Northeastern Illinois University.Creowiki says the same.AiG says he has those degrees (plus a B.A. in geology) but doesn't state from where.All other sites I find either have no bio info or copy from AiG or the wikis.Is it possible to find out from NE Ill Uni. if a Jan Peczkis went there and got several degrees from there?

This thread might become useful, interesting and educational if the jovial science apprised participants would actually cite some segments and explain specifically in laymen's terms where the errors lie.So far the thread reminds me of the crows lined up on the telephone line, loudly scolding the gardner below planting the seeds they hope to consume after he leaves.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

At the bottom of message 1: "Links and Information" topics are problematic. While in debate topic it is improper to post bare links, essentially the "LaI" forum is a place to post essentially bare links.Some comments are probably good and proper. But any real debate does not belong in "LaI". But it's not easy for anyone to be able to define the dividing line between proper and improper.All I can say, is if anyone REALLY wants to discuss the content of one of the abstracts, please propose a new topic.Adminnemooseus

---

No, the crows are laughing themselves silly because there will be no seeds. The gardener has announced his intention to plant jelly beans. It might be more educational, Buz, if instead of a straight lecture format we try 'learning by doing.'Instead of asking everyone to explain all the jokes to you, why not put your head to all the errors that have already been pointed out in laymen's terms, even if humorously? You've got citations. Use what you know, or can learn, of basic science to catch the problems. See if you can get the jokes.Here are three questions to get you started on the material in my own posts. (Note that I'm not a scientist; if I can catch these howlers, you can.)1. Is earth's mantle rigid or molten?2. If a 'kind' equals a biological Family, how many species belong to Noah's own 'kind'?3. How many animals can you think of that breathe land?___Edited by Archer Opterix, : html.Edited by Archer Opterix, : brev.

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Hey! Where's Oetzi?A bona fide relic from Adam's day (6,000 years ago) and the creation experts aren't even curious?

I'll bite. Neither. It's a common misconception that the mantle is like the lava we see. However, it's not entirely rigid.The mantle is indeed solid, but it's at the point where it's plastic (I think that's the term I need). It can flow.This article by wiki is pretty good. Does a much better job than me at explaining that the mantle is not rigid or molten.
Mantle (geology) - WikipediaPerhaps a bad question to throw to Buz. Maybe:
"Is the mantle molten or incredibly viscous?"
or
"Is the mantle rigid or incredibly viscous?"Edited by kuresu, : when you say you're giving a link, it helps to actually put said link in. oops.

Thanks for the reference, ku. I hadn't thought of the mantle as 'molten' in the same sense as lava is, but that's the word they used in Earth Science for Non-Majors. Enormous pressures are at work, but the mantle is still fluid enough that the crust can slide around on it and be subsumed by it. This is not a texture that allows cracking radially from crust to core like sectioning a citrus fruit.Good thing, too. Do that and you're breaking up a planet, not starting a flood.___

---

ArcherAll species are transitional.

Could you elaborate in layman's terms (since most of us are laymen) as to the specifics of your criticism on halos as per the conference?

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.

What I'm trying to say, I guess, is that we creos being mostly laymen, until you secularist science apprised folks can translate & elaborate your critical comments into logical laymen language, you're pretty much preaching to the choir as the proverbial saying applies.

---

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present is forever consuming the eternal future and extending the infinite past.