Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: JW's claim of a "Water Canopy"
From: skroger@zeus.calpoly.edu (Seth L. Kroger)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 00:56:14 GMT
Organization: California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

corey@sdf.lonestar.org (Corey Carroll) writes:
>Well, here's an interesting theory I found in one of the Jehovah's
>Witnesses' older (1967) books.  It was the old version of their
>current book, _Life : How did it get here?  By evolution or by
>creation?_  In it you will find such wonderful things as claims
>that the proposed transitional fossils in the horse lineage are
>'in the wrong order', theories of catastrophism and the flood of
>Noah's day may have accounted for some of the world's features, and
>it is hinted at that evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics
>(they never mention the law specifically, just in generalized terms).
>
>
>BTW, the book is called _Did Man Get Here by Evolution or by Creation?_

I found this book in my school's library a while back and decided to take a
look at it.  It was good for a few laughs.

>	What is often ignored, too, is the fact that there
>	was a much greater shielding of the atmosphere
>	from cosmic rays 4,300 years ago.  The Bible explains
>	that prior to that time a vast water canopy was
>	suspended high above the earth, and that its fall
>	caused a global delube in the days of Noah, who wrote
>	an eyewitness account of the event. (Psalm 104:6,7;
>	Genesis 1:6,7; 7:11,12)  This water canopy shielded
>	the atmosphere from cosmic rays to a greater extent
>	than is true today, thus *reducing the formation of
>	radiocarbon.*  That is why objects dated from before
>	that time appear older than they really are, for
>	they did not absorb as much C-14 as objects have
>	absorbed since then.
>
>	(Emphasis mine)
>
>Now, what I want to know, is what this "theory" would predict.
>Certainly such a major chance must have been recorded somewhere
>in the earth's history..the rocks, magnetic fields, etc?
>
>Are there other methods INDEPENDENT of C-14 dating that could
>be used to check the validity of these claims?

While it might affect C-14 dating, C-14 dating is only good to ~50,000 years[
(and that's only recently.)  This is only a small fraction of the time
hominids have been around.  There is always K-Ar and St-Rb dating.  I think
there other ways of dating; some dealing with the how fast bones accumulate
various minerals.

(C-14 dating would be one of the only dating methods affected by cosmic ray
shielding.)

>What exactly would a 'shield of water' do?  How much would it
>protect the earth from radiation?

Not sure.

>P.S. While this claim of the water canopy changing the apparent dates of
>rocks is found in their old creation book, it was left out of the new
>creation book.  In fact, although the old book has no color pictures,
>it was written much better and made a stronger case.  It seems that as

Well, if this book made a strong case, its successor _Life_ isn't worth its
weight in toilet paper. :-)  The book made some pretty glaring mistakes in
science.  For example, it claimed that the elements were inert and stable,
mixing up chemical stability with nuclear stability.  They should see what
happens when you put a little bit of sodium (an element) in to water. :-)
(NOTE: It is illegal to do that in public schools in many states.)

>time goes by and the Witnesses try to appeal to the mass uneducated
>populations, they simplify their literature more and more.  It's my
>guess that their current _Life_ book is written on an 8th grade level,
>whereas their older one was much more sophisticated.  Incidentally,
>the 'water canopy' is briefly mentioned in their book _Insight on the
>Scriptures_, but it isn't said for sure whether or not this changed
>the dates of objects older than the flood.
>corey@sdf.lonestar.org                       ..!uunet!convex!egsner!sdf!corey


|======================================================================|
| Seth Kroger                       "If God made us in His image we    |
| skroger@pan.calpoly.edu               have certianly returned the    |
| Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo             compliment."  -Voltaire        |
Newsgroups: talk.origins