Letters to the editor

‘Nucha’ and plate continents really moved apart? CEN Tech. J. normal faults, an extensional feature, 9(1):14, 1995. Snelling references Humphreys are now known to be common along as saying that he had no option but to accept tectonics that reversals of the earth’s magnetic field must these convergent margins: have occurred. ‘Listric normal faulting is a com­ Michael J. Oard has previously 5. Psalm 89:11–12, KJV. mon feature of passive margins, revealed a personal bias against the 6. Perspectives, CEN Tech. J. 14(1):3–13, where fault movement contributes 1 plate tectonics hypothesis. It is small 2000. to crustal thinning and margin wonder then, that he fails to realize subsidence. Extension and normal that the ‘Nucha’ find2 on Vancouver faulting are also a fairly common Island, British Columbia, Canada, far phenomenon on convergent from posing a paleontological enigma, margins throughout the world is proof positive that the east coast ... . Discovery of these extensional of Australia formerly butted hard up structures requires a reevaluation against the west coast of Canada! of structures previously interpreted Possibly Oard’s faux pas stems from as folds and faults related to plate Dietz and Holden playing loose with convergence [emphasis mine].’3 the scientific method, as witnessed by The folds and faults on the their geological monstrosity, viz. the lower continental or arc slope could illustration on page 8 of the Journal.3 easily be large-scale slumps or mass It really behoves Oard to take a wasting features. I am taking a fresh 4 world map, and a pair of scissors, and Plate tectonic theory involves the subduction look at plate tectonics, as are others. to begin to arrange the continents into of one crustal plate beneath another. It was the match between geology a conglomeration that acknowledges and across the Atlantic Ocean ‘Pangaea’ and the paleontologist find­ Michael Oard replies: that was early offered as proof of ings. Oard can waive the necessity plate tectonics. Now we are finding of maintaining magnetic orientation It is always difficult to know which geologic and matches in quite of the continental fragments now that uniformitarian data and interpretations a few different areas and, by the same paleomagnetic reversals have reached to accept. Mr Tompkins is correct that logic, that also suggests a connection. authoritative scientific status.4 I I have a bias against the plate tectonics The possibility that eastern Australia have very likely misinterpreted the paradigm. This bias has developed once abutted against western North Scripture which says, ‘ … as for the after examining the paradigm for 25 America has been suggested by some world and the fullness thereof, thou years. I find many serious problems geologists, but is not widely accepted. hast founded them. The north and the with it that I have recently catalogued.1 Fossils of the Alexander terrane of south thou hast created them’.5 Now Newer geophysical data are touted as Alaska are strikingly similar to those in that continental drift and magnetic re­ supporting plate tectonics when actu­ the northern Ural Mountains of Russia. versals are currently in vogue with the ally many aspects of the newer data It is now suggested that the Alexander scientific community, it is evident that are antagonistic to the paradigm. Uni­ terrane broke off from the ‘Uralian sea­ neither the world, nor north and south, formitarian scientists are constantly way’, instead of Australia.5 Geologist, were very well founded or created. multiplying hypotheses to account for Anita Harris (formerly Anita Epstein), Meanwhile, let me say I really ap­ this newer, discrepant data. wrote papers supporting plate tectonics preciated this issue’s ‘Perspectives’.6 For instance, DSDP (Deep Sea by showing a conodont match across Drilling Program) bore holes and the North Atlantic, but she says it is William L. Tompkins seismic data often show that con­ meaningless now, since she has found Toronto, Ontario vergent margins, regions where two the same conodonts in Nevada.6 She CANADA plates are supposedly colliding with has become mildly skeptical of plate tectonics. References one subduction underneath the other, are areas of ubiquitous extensional Much more can be said, but I sug­ 2 1. Oard, M.J., Ariel attack: welcome weapon, tectonics. Also, the backarc basin and gest that the interested reader obtain CEN Tech. J. 13(1):28, 1999. outer trench slopes are zones of exten­ Plate Tectonics: A Different View 1 that 2. Oard, M.J., How well do paleontologists know sion. Sometimes the island arc itself will be published soon. fossil distribution, CEN Tech. J. 14(1):7–8, shows extensional feature. Trenches 2000, describes a new find on Vancouver Island of the sponge, Nucha, which had previ­ show a graben profile—an extensional Michael J. Oard ously only been found in eastern Australia. feature. The evidence for convergence Great Falls, Montana 3. Oard, Ref. 2, p. 8. is supposed to be at the forearc, the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 4. Snelling, A.A., Plate tectonics: have the supposed accretion wedge. However,

58 TJ 15(1) 2001 Letters

References to SD we gather that it means a state of cally rose from the dead on the third disunion between the Creator and indi­ day after his crucifixion. 1. Oard, M.J., Literature criticisms of plate vidual created spirit beings. SD does The relatively rapid succession tectonics; in: Reed, J. (Ed.), Plate Tectonics: not require annihilation of the spirit of events on the Cross involving the A Different View, Creation Research Society Books, St. Joseph, 2000 (in press). concerned. Thus Satan in Biblical whole person of reveals the in­ terms is spiritually dead but continues extricable link between sin and , 2. Oard, M.J., Subduction unlikely—Plate tec­ tonics improbable; in: Reed, J. (Ed.), Plate to exist as God’s archenemy. both spiritual and physical, all of Tectonics: A Different View, Creation Research And so Ross and Bradley are right which He conquered through His one Society Books, St. Joseph, 2000 (in press). to assert that the spiritual death of supreme for all time. 3. McNeill, L.C., Piper, K.A., Goldfinger, C., Adam occurred immediately when he Kulm, L.D. and Yeats, R.S., Listric normal ate the forbidden fruit, but wrong to Peter W.V. Gurney faulting on the Cascadia continental margin, J. Geophysical Res. 102(B6):12, 123, 1997. maintain that Adam’s physical death Wolverhampton did not inevitably result also. Besides UNITED KINGDOM 4. Reed, J. (Ed.), Plate Tectonics: A Different the points made by Van Bebber/Tay­ View, Creation Research Society Books, St. Reference Joseph, 2000, (in press). lor, refuting Ross’ notion that Adam’s physical degeneration ending in death 5. Bergeron, L., Alaska’s ancient link to Urals, 1. Kulikovsky, A., Three views on creation and New Scientist 154(2086):17, 1997. were not a consequence of his sin, evolution, CEN Tech. J. 14(1):23–27, 2000. 6. McPhee, J., In Suspect Terrain, Farrar, Straus, may I offer an additional argument and Giroux, New York, p. 127, 1983. supporting their conclusion. It struck me many years ago that Andrew Kulikovsky replies: the sequence of events that happened to the first Adam was exactly paralleled I would like to thank Mr Gurney by what happened to Christ the last for his letter, and the opportunity to Spiritual death Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), this underlin­ clarify my comments relating to the ing how completely He identified idea of ‘spiritual death’. Having read Ross’ book, Creation Himself with mankind in securing our Gurney questions why I have trou­ and Time, and its excellent critique by salvation. ble accepting a concept that he calls Van Bebber/Taylor entitled Creation Firstly, just as Adam died spirit­ ‘spiritual death’, a concept he claims is and Time: A Report on the Progressive ually in the Garden but remained clearly taught in Scripture. However, Creationist Book by Hugh Ross, I was alive physically when he disobeyed, what I actually object to is the use of interested to read what Kulikovsky so Christ was spiritually dead on the the term ‘spiritual death’ to describe had to say in his review of the book Cross while darkness enveloped the the spiritual state of non-believers. entitled Creation and Evolution, which Earth for 3 hours, signifying His al­ First, it is important to understand purports to give the three main views ienation from the Father for our sakes exactly what is meant by ‘spiritual on this general topic.1 but remained alive physically (Matt. death’. If we take the term literally, While agreeing with most of what 27:45–46; Gal. 3:13). it can only reasonably mean that the Kulikovsky says, I was surprised to Secondly, Adam then regained spirit of a non-believer is dead. Such find that he had difficulty accepting life spiritually through saving faith in a conclusion, however, would imply the concept of spiritual death since this God’s mercy and His plan of redemp­ that a non-believer is essentially spirit­ is clearly stated in Scripture. Paul’s tion through a future descendant. less and therefore no different from an reference to it is explicit (Ephesians Christ regained life spiritually on the animal. Thus, the idea of the image of 2:1, 5); and Jesus refers to it using Cross when he was reunited with the God in all mankind (Gen. 1:26–27) is different words, namely the necessity Father at the end of that period of destroyed. for a man to be ‘born again’ (John darkness. It was then that Jesus could Second, the Scriptures Gurney cites 3:3–7) as also did Paul (Titus 3:5). declare, ‘It is finished’ (John 19:28–30; as proof for the concept of spiritual Although the phrase ‘spiritual death’ Luke 23:46). death do not even mention that term (SD) does not appear in Scripture, Thirdly, Adam died physically (as Gurney himself admits). Indeed, this does not invalidate the concept many years after the Fall and his ex­ these verses mean something quite any more than does the absence from pulsion from the Garden. Christ died different from what Gurney believes Scripture of a word such as ‘trinity’ physically on the Cross when he ‘gave they teach. rule out the truth of the latter’s mean­ up the Spirit’ (Luke 23:46). Ephesians 2:1 teaches that we were ing. Just as the Bible gives no formal Fourthly, Adam will physically rise dead in our sin, but what exactly does definition of physical death, this having from the dead with all believers that that mean? Obviously it doesn’t refer to be inferred, so there is none for SD. have died in Christ (1 Thess. 4:16) to physical death and, as I explained From statements in Scripture alluding when Jesus returns. Jesus, the firstborn above, taking this to refer to ‘spiritual from dead (Col. 1:18; Rev. 1:5), physi­ death’ is highly problematic. There­

TJ 15(1) 2001 59