Real Science Radio

RSR'S Timesaving Google Creation ToolMultiple Creation Site Search!

Welcome to Real Science Radio: Co-hosts Fred Williams and Doug McBurney talk about science to debunk evolution and to show the evidence for the creator God including from biology, genetics, geology, history, paleontology, archaeology, astronomy, philosophy, cosmology, math, and physics. (For example, mutations will give you bad legs long before you'd get good wings.) We get to debate Darwinists and atheists like Lawrence Krauss, AronRa, and Eugenie Scott. We easily take potshots from popular evolutionists like PZ Myers, Phil Plait, and Jerry Coyne. The RSR Archive contains our popular List Shows! And we interview the outstanding scientists who dare to challenge today's accepted creed that nothing created everything.

RSR airs every Friday at 3pm MST on AM 670 KLTT in Denver, Colorado. For rebroadcast times and podcast platforms, see our Affiliates page.

RSR is now on YouTube

 

Doug Axe on RSR on his Historic Discovery of Protein Structure

* A Place in the History of Molecular Biology: At Cambridge University, anti-Darwinist Douglas Axe worked for some of the world's leading molecular biologists in the laboratory established by four Nobel laureates including the guys who discovered DNA's double-helix. Decades after Watson and Crick broke the field of molecular biology wide open, evolutionists at Cambridge were still publishing the claim that the recipe for building proteins had just a couple of rudimentary requirements. Doug's groundbreaking research showed that the "simple model" of protein construction was false. Further, shocking to evolutionists, Axe showed that the very particular order of hundreds of various amino acids was a very specific sequence needed for standard protein function (with a specific, different sequence needed for each kind of protein). Real Science Radio host Bob Enyart is honored to interview Dr. Axe!

* To Get the Book: You can purchase Doug's fabulous book wherever great boooks are sold including at Amazon.com or elsewhere as listed at the book's website, UndeniableDesign.com!

* Other RSR Discovery Institute Interviews: To hear our other fun and information interviews with Discovery Institute scientists and scholars, just click on over to rsr.org/di

* The Richard Dawkins 3-to-1 Evolution Challenge: Research for a debate on the Bible led Bob Enyart and his associate Will Duffy to Oxford University. While there, thinking about the popularity of RSR's graphical evolution challenges, such as the Evolution Vision Challenge and about the success of our PZ Myers Trochlea Challenge (click for that evolutionist's reply), the guys decided to hand deliver to the Oxford office of professor emeritus Richard Dawkins a printed copy of RSR's Dawkins 3-to-1 Challenge. (Dawkins still lectures there for a course titled, Science Literacy: Evolution for Non-Scientists.) Intelligent Design arguments based on complexity, like the flagellum argument offered by Michael Behe, are powerful yet that very complexity provides opportunities for opponents to obfuscate. (For example, if a cellular component is assembled from twenty parts, an evolutionist can make somewhat irrelevant comments about two or three of those parts, and get millions of evolutionists to claim that he has refuted that design challenge.) Thus Real Science Radio has been testing arguments based on the simpler, rather than the more complex, aspects of organisms. It appears that these inherently simpler arguments may more effectively demonstrate the inability of the materialist worldview to explain biology. (Our Myers Trochlea Challenge is just such an argument, focusing on one of the simplest parts of the human vision system.) So the graphic that we delivered to New College asserts that neither Richard Dawkins, nor any materialist, will ever be able to answer this simple Dawkins 3-to-1 Evolution Challenge:

DAWKIN'S 3-to-1 EVOLUTION CHALLENGE from RSR

 

Patrick Henry College Geology Prof. David Lee on RSR

* Patrick Henry College Prof: Real Science Radio hosts Bob Enyart and Fred Williams interview Prof. David Lee from Patrick Henry College. The guys talk about the founder of geology, Nicolas Steno, the order of the fossil record, and what is it like to be a creationist in a secular academic university.

Fathers of the Natural Sciences Anti-Natural Origins: Many leading fathers of the physical sciences, both before and after Darwin, rejected atheistic origins, like Copernicus, Bacon, Kepler, Galileo, Pascal, Boyle, Newton, Cuvier, Dalton before, and after Darwin including Faraday, Pasteur, Joule, Kelvin, Lister, Carver, who continued to advocate for special creation and reject evolution. At rsr.org/fathers, we have this list...

* Fathers of Science who Believed in the Creator God
Philip Paracelsus, died 1541, Chemical Medicine
Nicolas Copernicus, 1543, Scientific Revolution
Francis Bacon, 1626, Scientific Method
Johann Kepler, 1630, Physical Astronomy
Galileo Galilei, 1642, Law of falling bodies
William Harvey, 1657, Circulatory System
Blaise Pascal, 1662, Probability and Calculators
Robert Boyle, 1691, Chemistry
Christiaan Huygens, 1695, Physical Optics 
Isaac Newton, 1727, Gravitation
Carolus Linnaeus, 1778, Taxonomy, Modern Biology
George Cuvier, 1832, Anatomy/Paleontology
John Dalton, 1844, Atomic Theory

For those who object that these brilliant men lived prior to the 1859 publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species, consider the following scientific giants all of whom in a time of more open debate, publicly rejected natural origins and Darwinian evolution, and indicated that the evidence supports belief in a supernatural Creator:

Michael Faraday, died 1867, Electromagnetism
Matthew Maury, 1873, Oceanography
James Clerk Maxwell, 1879, Electromagnetic Radiation
Louis Pasteur, 1885, Microbiology
James Joule, 1889, Thermodynamics
Lord Kelvin, 1907, Thermodynamics (preferred ID over Darwinism; see below)
Joseph Lister, 1912, Modern Surgery
G. W. Carver, 1943, Modern Agriculture

* SEE ALSO the 600,000 Ph.D.s, Profs, and MDs Doubting Darwin: For the research on how many U.S. professionals in the operational sciences, medicine, professors, etc., do not accept the general claim of materialistic origins, see Real Science Radio's List of Scholars Doubting Darwin & the Big Bang.

Ray Comfort on The Atheist Delusion on RSR

Hell's Best Kept Secret* Ray Comfort Interviews and Resources Here at BEL:
- 2009 Ray Comfort on Leading an Atheist to Evidence
- 2011 Ray Comfort about his stunning abortion film, "180" The Movie
- 2013 Ray Comfort on BEL about his film Evolution vs God
- 2015 Embedded atop our rsr.org/homosexuality page see Ray's film: Audacity
- 2016 Ray Comfort on his film The Atheist Delusion: Why Millions Deny the Obvious.

Today's Resource: Here at RSR, we offer Ray Comfort's video, produced with Kirk Cameron, Hell's Best Kept Secret. BTW, one of our dearest friends, pro-life missionary Cal Zastrow smuggled into China boxes of Ray's Way of the Master book! And check out this list of atheists whom we've debated here at Real Science Radio.

Albright's Flood Model Controversy Pt 3: VCT, CPT, & HPT

* Interview-based Review of Flood Models: Jane Albright concludes her report to RSR on the 16 interviews she conducted with creation scientists and leaders for her article series exploring the leading flood models, the science, the Scripture, and the controversy. In today's Real Science Radio broadcast, Bob Enyart and Albright, who is a working professional engineer formerly with the U.S. Navy nuclear engineering program, discuss the personal and organizational relationships surrounding the controversy over the three leading flood models, the Vapor Canopy Theory (VCT), the Hydroplate Theory (HPT), and Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (CPT).

* See More About the Controversy:
- Grand Canyon Month at RSR opens relating the Steve Austin/ICR plagiarism mess
The Steve Austin/Walt Brown "Grand Lake" Plagiarism Mess to see the original documentation
- RSR's List of Answers to HPT Objections today's Albright program is the 9th in the series
- And the comparative HPT/CPT/VCT spreadsheets (below) mentioned on today's program.

False Accusations, Always Easily Corrected, Against Walt Brown from ICR, AiG, and CRS:

An Excerpt: Dr. [John] Baumgardner [long an ICR scientist], wrote me [Albright], "From the nasty interactions that Brown had with ICR in the 1990’s, including threats of lawsuits … I personally have no desire to deal with such nastiness." After reading for myself all the correspondence on the "lawsuit issue" and sharing with Dr. Baumgardner the actual history, he then replied, "I admit my understanding of the interactions between Walt Brown and ICR was all based on second-hand sources on my part." Shockingly, even the president of the Creation Research Society, Dr. Don DeYoung, said to me, "You may even be aware that there have been lawsuits between Walt Brown and ICR. Saying that they have stolen each other’s ideas." I respectfully challenged him on this because I knew that it was not true. He claimed to have documentation proving that is was true, but declined to produce it. I then asked him to speak directly with Brown and me on this subject, but again he refused.

Another example of this comes from Mark Looy at Answers in Genesis. In 2013 a nuclear engineer (who today works at one of our nation's national labs and since 2016 has become a close friend of RSR) asked Mark why AiG doesn't carry Dr. Brown's book. The following is an example of what we know from extrapolation has been said by many creation leaders hundreds of times:

And since I wrote my last email to you, I discovered that Walt had not only threatened to sue an ICR scientist, but ICR's president as well... It appears that you condone such behavior (unless you don't believe the threats were actually made). You don't have to associate yourself with us if you wish, but why defend such a person who would even consider violating I Cor. 6 and Galatians 5?

Wow. Bob Enyart has a long-standing appreciation for Mr. Looy and confirms that he would not knowingly spread this slander. However, Mark did not do his due diligence and accepted misinformation likely from some other trusted Christian leader. If Dr. DeYoung, Mr. Looy, or Dr. Baumgardner offer an apology to Walt Brown, we will post such apologies at rsr.org/hpt-retractions and remove their quotes from here.

* Help Bob Build a List of Scientists and Engineers Supporting HPT: If you are a degreed scientist or a professional engineer (or if you know of one) who supports Dr. Walt Brown's Hydroplate Theory, please email Bob@rsr.org! As of September 2020 Bob's list, still currently private, expands on Walt's previously published endorsements.  

* Enjoy Jane Albright's Series: Right here on RSR...
albright-flood-series-1-VCT.pdf
albright-flood-series-2-HPT.pdf
albright-flood-series-3-CPT.pdf
albright-flood-series-4-controversy.pdf


* RSR's Albright Broadcast Series: Bob and Jane discuss her article series on these three programs:
Pt. 1: The Vapor Canopy and the Hydroplate Theory (covering Albright's first two articles)
Pt. 2: Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (Albright's 3rd article)
Pt. 3: The Controversy over VCT, CPT, & the HPT (this program, Albright's 4th article)

* Today's Resource: For online resources, go to rsr.org/flood. But to order RSR's #1 best-selling video, just click...

Bob asks you: If you love RSR, could you purchase this to help us stay on the air?

The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory
Blu-ray, 2-DVD Set, Stream or HD Download!

Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart presents the scientific evidence for Dr. Walt Brown’s model of the global flood, along with the relevant biblical material. Enyart also discusses Brown's opponents and contrasts both the vapor canopy and catastrophic plate tectonics with the hydroplate theory.

DVD Vol. 1
1. Walt Brown, Creation Leaders, and Scripture
2. Hydroplate Theory & Scientific Evidence

DVD Vol. 2
3. Hydroplates vs. Plate Tectonics
Bonus: Origin of Earth's Radioactivity

The Blu-ray disc contains all parts on one disc. And for now, save $10 with our special introductory pricing which discounts the $50 retail price to $39.99!

What is significant however is that Walt Brown predicted the presence of salt water on Mars, now confirmed! Further, water on Mars does not imply that life could have originated there, for that ubiquitous atheistic claim ignores basic science. Water can sustain life. Yet because water is the universal solvent, it relentlessly dissolves the biological compounds needed to form the most basic biological structures like amino acids and polymers. So, water sustains life, but it is the enemy of a materialistic origin of life.

* Shared RSR Google Spreadsheets on Flood Models: Our List of Answers to HPT Objections includes two spreadsheets. Click these links or screenshots to see them at Google Docs and to see them being discussed click the video times below.
- Bible Material Uniquely Supporting Various Flood Models aka Flood Models & Bible Verses
- Physical Features Requiring Explanation and Flood Models aka Flood Models & Features to Explain.

Bible verses uniquely supportive of various flood modelsPhysical features requiring explanation and competing flood models

Bob discusses these two charts in RSR's flood video, at 2:06:00 for the Bible Verses chart and 3:06:45 for the Physical Features chart.

* Get the Best Creation Science Book Ever Written: Just click on the cover of the book to purchase it from RSR (which also helps us to continue broadcasting)...

CPT - Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (Albright's Flood Models Controversy Series Pt 2)

* Interview-Based Review of Flood Models: Jane Albright continues her report on the 16 interviews she conducted with creation scientists and leaders for her article series exploring the leading flood models, the science, the Scripture, and the controversy. In today's Real Science Radio broadcast, Bob Enyart and Albright, who is a working professional engineer formerly with the U.S. Navy nuclear engineering program, discuss Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (CPT), the flood model based on the secular Plate Tectonics model and affirmed by the leading creation groups. Virtually all observers (including of course creationists), acknowledge that Earth's crustal plates move in relation to one another. Specifically, however, Plate Tectonics (PT) is the model based on seafloor spreading and subduction. So the PT model stands or falls (as does CPT) based upon whether those two claimed mechanisms are actual.

* Help Bob Identify HPT Scientists & Engineers: Please email Bob@rsr.org if you are a pro-HPT scientist or engineer.

* Enjoy Jane Albright's Series: Right here on RSR...
albright-flood-series-1-VCT.pdf
albright-flood-series-2-HPT.pdf
albright-flood-series-3-CPT.pdf
albright-flood-series-4-controversy.pdf

* RSR's Albright Broadcast Series: Bob and Jane discuss her article series on these three programs:
Pt. 1: The Vapor Canopy and the Hydroplate Theory (covering Albright's first two articles)
Pt. 2: Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (this program, Albright's 3rd article)
Pt. 3: The Controversy over VCT, CPT, & the HPT (Albright's 4th article)

* Sediments vs. CPT: Earth's crust contains about 100 million cubic miles of sediments. The HPT very naturally accounts for the eroision of that rock from the underground chamber and along the cliff sides of the globe-encircling crack. On the other hand, Catastrophic Plate Tectonics cannot explain how all that rock was eroded. For example:

After the first half-mile of sediments are eroded (and sitting on the earth) how does the next half mile get eroded?

Click on that screenshot to watch the sediments segment from RSR's HPT video. Then watch as you see the kind of extraterrestrial  intervention that CPT's lead author acknowledges that his model requires to erode the world's sediments:

Recognizing the problem's severity, in 2013 at the International Conference on Creationism the lead author of Catastrophic Plate Tectonics, unbiblically and unreasonably "proposed that six near encounters with a moon-sized body temporarily captured by the earth… provide[d] the [energy] for the water motions and the resulting erosion, sediment transport and deposition processes."

And what for? As with CPT's supernatural accelerated radioactive decay, and CPT's supernatural erosion of sediments, why? Such physical features of the Earth, decay and erosion, were obviously not part of the perfection of the creation week. And yet they also were not necessary in a CPT-world to judge the Earth by water. Further, by CPT, accelerated radioactive decay requires another supernatural intervention, to remove the massive amount of heat generated. CPT doesn't add water to flood the Earth, for it claims (of all things) that the fountains of the deep were MAGMA! And it claims that the water that flooded the Earth was already on the surface, in the oceans! For Dr. John Baumgardener responding to questions that arose during the Flood Science Review, answered the question, "Is it possible that the water which emerged from the 'fountains of the great deep' was from a subterranean source?" as follows:

In this CPT framework the steam in these spectacular fountain-like jets as well as the water that becomes entrained in the fringes of the jets and lofted high into the atmosphere is ocean water.

So CPT doesn't add water, but regarding supernatural interventions not implied in the Bible, it sure does add quite a few miracles.

* Has CPT Been Peer-Reviewed?: No. CPT has not been peer reviewed. You cannot peer-review miracles. Miracles of convenience, not implied in Scripture, can solve any physics problem of any theory that otherwise claims to be scientific. Any theory relying on miracles cannot actually be peer reviewed. Why not? Because miracles can solve any physical problem and they can likewise be used to equally "validate" opposing theories. So peer review of CPT in it's current form (as of 2020) is meaningless. Therefore, as you peruse the following list of CPT miracles, ask yourself, might this "peer review" indicate nothing more than extreme bias among creationists? The "peer-reviewers" openly and uncritically accepted various miracles for no other reason than to answser the physical impossibilities of CPT. By "reviewing" these ad-hoc supernatural components of the sped-up  plate tectonics model, the reviewers were embracing a secular superstar (for a geophysicist, anyway) John Baumgardner and helping to bring his prestigious credentials into the movement. And how about Dr. Walt Brown's Hydroplate Theory peer review? A long-standing criticism of HPT is that it has not been peer reviewed in scientific creation journals. Ironically, one of the most extraordinary and unique aspects of Dr. Brown's HPT, that trans-Neptunian objects originated recently in the inner solar system, has been peer reviewed in one of the world's first and most prestigious astronomy journals, the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. (Hear about this at rsr.org/TNOs.) Real Science Radio plans to broadcast in December 2020, Lord-willing, a program addressing HPT, CPT, and peer review. Until then, at rsr.org/TNOs#hpt-peer-review you can see a brief response to the criticism, which, perhaps surprisingly, involves the Vapor Canopy Theory, radioactivity, and plagiarism.

* CPT Claims of Miracles Not Implied in Scripture: God created and has supernaturally intervened. But that does not justify appealing to miracles to solve a scientific model's problems. Repeated appeals to miracles by the leading authors and supporters of Catastrophic Plate Tectonics overtly demonstrate its failure to explain the evidence. They require supernatural intervention for CPT's primary mechanisms, to erode sediments (see just above), and to remove it's catastrophic heat.

- CPT Miracle Claim #1: "The physical laws were somehow altered by God to cause ['plate tectonics and the flood'] to unfold..." Baumgardner, 1990, The Imperative of Non-Stationary Natural Law in Relation to Noah's Flood, CRSQ pp. 98-100 

CPT peer-reviewed claim that supernatural intervention altered the physical laws for the flood...

Baumgardner's Journal of Creation 2002 paper- CPT Miracle Claim #2: Edges of supercontinent get 720oF colder so they'd sink into the mantle to get catastrophic plate tectonics going. "An initial temperature perturbation is required to initiate motions within the spherical shell domain that represents the earth’s mantle. For this, a temperature perturbation of -400 K to a depth of a few hundred kilometers is introduced around most of the perimeter of the supercontinent.” Baumgardner, 2002, Journal of Creation (see the two papers published together, Catastrophic plate tectonics: the geophysical context of the Genesis Flood and A constructive quest for truth).

- CPT Miracle Claim #3: Earth's mantle gets mushier or firmer. "…the mantle’s viscosity at [the time of the flood] was lower than at present to permit rapid sinking of the lithosphere into the mantle...” Baumgardner, 1990, Proceedings of the Second Int'l Conference on Creationism (3-D finite element simulation of the global tectonic changes accompanying Noah's flood)

- CPT Miracle Claim #4: God brought a second moon to erode Earth's sediments as "six near encounters with a moon-sized body temporarily captured by the earth can plausibly account for" Earth's sediments. Baumgardner, 2013, Explaining the continental fossil-bearing sediment record in terms of the Genesis flood: Insights from numerical modeling of erosion, sediment transport, and deposition processes on a global scale, 7th ICC. [In 2016, instead of publishing a retraction, Dr. Baumgardner published a "revision" of his paper, though we believe with an equally unworkable explanation for Earth's massive sediments.]

- CPT Miracle Claim #5: God supernaturally accelerated nuclear decay as described in the RATE Project. (While CPT flood mechanics do not require accelerated nuclear decay, the miraculous speeding up of nuclear decay is part of their overall model.)

- CPT Miracle Claim #6: God removed the heat of accelerated radioactive decay. "The Heat Problem: … God was directly involved in all of these events, so it is possible that He employed some supernatural process which does not occur today or cannot be detected." Vardiman, Austin, Baumgardner, et al., 2005, Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, Vol. II, ICR, pp. 761-763 (See RSR's flood video for one proposed method of this supernatural heat removal)

- The Anti-Miracle: (See the two-minute segment on this just below. Clicking play begins the video at 2:46:15.) In Pittsburgh in 2013 the CPT lead author John Baumgardner and advocate Dr. Mark Horstemeyer claimed in front of a plenary audience at the International Conference on Creationism, and in direct opposition to Genesis, that the Moon must have been created before Day 4.

CPT author & advocate propose moon created prior to Day 4


Thankfully, Answers in Genesis' Dr. Danny Faulkner stood up to respectfully but firmly rebuke Dr. Baumgardner. See the video for more information. The secular plate tectonics model was the intellectual framework in which geophysicist Baumgardner spent years earning his Ph.D. He modeled his creationist theory, catastropic plate tectonics, on the secular theory in a way similar, though not as egregious, to basing theistic evolution on the secular theory of evolution. At RSR we believe that Dr. Baumgardner's theistic plate tectonics theory is flawed for the same fundamental reason that theistic evolution is flawed, and like theistic evolution, CPT too can be falisfied in innumerable ways including biblically, because it's specifics, unlike the HPT, are not based on Scripture (see chart, below).

* CPT Miracle Retractions: Miracle by miracle, if any of the creation groups or lead CPT authors issue a retraction of any of the miracles used over a quarter century to introduce and to sustain their support for that unscientific model, we will link to those retractions right here. (rsr.org/cpt#miracle-retractions)
- Retracted Miracle #1: pending link
- Retracted Miracle #2: pending link
- Retracted Miracle #3: pending link
- Retracted Miracle #4: "revision"
- Retracted Miracle #5: pending link
We are aware of no explicit retractions as of our latest update on Dec 1, 2020 although the Miracle #4 "revision" does eliminate the "second moon", replacing it with a proposal that we believe is equally inadequate at explaining the distribution, and especially the source, of Earth's massive sedimentary deposits.

* RSR to AIG, ICR, CMI, & CRS: ARD melts CPT.
(See also rsr.org/heat-4.)

* Many Geologists are Rejecting Plate Tectonics: See this example list at rsr.org/plate-tectonics#opponents. There is tremendous observational evidence in the vicinity of the ocean trenches that contradicts the subduction claims of plate tectonics. The work of marine geology expert Chris Smoot has been summarized by RSR our friend and textbook author Ellen McHenry.

* Correcting the Tropical Polar Motivation for Plate Tectonics: Consider also ICR's Larry Vardiman in 1984 observed that, "The evidence of [previously] warm polar regions is so extensive that the theory of continental drift was developed by evolutionary geologists to help explain how tropical fossil material can be accounted for at the poles [i.e., in the polar regions]." Consider though the biblical explanation for so much buried vegetation in the polar regions: Earth's Big Roll. That is the "biblical" explanation because the Bible teaches (what young earth creationists and flood geologists all affirm), that the world's major mountain ranges were raised up in a day! When that happened, because of the planet's extreme angular momentum, these new mountain ranges would require a re-orienting of the rotation of the globe so that it would come back into equilibrium. Consider, if the Himilayans rose up nearer to the north pole, then the Earth's rotation would swing them down, 30 degrees or so, closer to the equator. (This also explains a geological oddity, the virtually straight-line 3,000 mile-long crack in the Earth's crust called 90 East Ridge, discovered below the Indian Ocean and pointing toward the Himalayas. See this explained in Walt Brown's Figure 82, Earth's Big Roll and in Bryan Nickel's HPT Tutorial on DVD & Blu-ray (great for sharing) and online

* The CPT Model Completely Lacks Unique Biblical Support: For the 2011 Flood Science Review project, model authors were asked to present any scriptural support for their particular flood theory. The chart below shows the results obtained from model authors Walt Brown and John Baumgardner and vapor canopy theory proponent Dr. Larry Vardiman. See the spreadsheet behind this screenshot at Bible Material Uniquely Supporting Various Flood Models (aka Flood Models & Bible Verses ) and see this also as presented in the queued up video just below.

Bible verses uniquely supportive of various flood models


* The CPT Model Has Minimal Explanatory Power: The following chart illustrates the breadth of the explanatory power of the hydroplate theory as compared to catastrophic plate tectonics. See the spreadsheet behind this screenshot at Physical Features Requiring Explanation and Flood Models (aka Flood Models & Features to Explain). And see this also in RSR's flood video beginning at 3:06:45.

Physical features requiring explanation and competing flood models


* Lava Water Swim & CPT. As reported at rsr.org/hotspots, CPT suggests that massive quantities of magma breaking out onto the ocean floor would produce supersonic steam jets shooting into the upper atmosphere. This video doesn't show "massive quantities" of magma but, nonetheless, we think it's a reminder of a major feature of the model that cannot be successfully simulated as it is one of CPT's many falsehoods...

Warning: Aside from the other obvious dangers with swimming where lava enters the sea, people have been killed by the steam produced, which geologists call laze, which contains hydrocloric acid and fine particles of volcanic glass.

* Popularity: If you Google in quotes, "Catastrophic Plate Tectonics" the search engine identifies 17,500 pages, but if you Google "hydroplate theory", you get 55,000 pages. Clearly Dr. Brown's fountains-of-the-great-deep flood model has caught the attention of rank-and-file creationists! 

HPT vs CPT online popularity, 55,000 vs 17,500 webpages

* Hear, See, and Read RSR's Related Resources:
Fountains of MAGMA (?) of the Great Deep. Huh?
Deep Magma Can't Rise: The Crossover Depth!
Hotspot Hypothesis (for Hawaii, etc.) Widely Discredited
Plate Tectonics: Subduction Doesn't Happen 
Plate Tectonics: Convection Doesn't Happen
Catastrophic Plate Tectonics Miracles (just above)
rsr.org/catastrophic-plate-tectonics (this show page)
- RSR Answers Hydroplate Theory Objections
- RSR Answers Baumgardner on Geometry, Crust, Heat, & Voltage
rsr.org/hydroplate-theory
rsr.org/bryan-nickel
- Bible verses uniquely supporting various flood models (also above)
Physical features crying out for explanation (also above).

* HPT Objections from the CPT Lead Author: Included in our ongoing rsr.org/answers series are these programs (some renamed here for clarity).
- Compressing Granite Produces Voltages addressing John Baumgardner's HPT criticism that observations do not show that compressing granite produces voltages (with RSR presenting exactly such findings, significantly, in the literature)
- Secular QuakeFinder Official on Electromagnetics Tom Bleier on electromagnetic earthquake forecasting (interview conducted by RSR toward further answering geophysicist Baumgardner)
Objections to HPT's Origin of Radioactivity answered by Joshua Spencer, Ph.D. in nuclear engineering answering Dr. Baumgardner
- Nuclear Engineer HPT Supporter on Objections and CPT Miracles Dr. Spencer, professionally employed in his field, exposing CPT's reliance on miracles (as listed above, and as he and Bob Enyart defend the hydroplate theory)
- Answering the "Geometry Problem"  HPT expert and graduate of (and then instructor for) the U.S. Naval Nuclear Power Program, Pastor Kevin Lea, answers the objection from Dr. Baumgardner regarding the hydroplate theory increasing over time its estimate of the thickness of the crust (from 10 kilometers in the first seven editions, to 10 miles in the 8th edition, to approximately 60 miles in the 9th edition)
Photo of Bryan Nickel's hands around a butane torch to show directed energy- The "Pacific Crust" Objection answered by Lea (with a July 2020 update from Fred Williams and Bob Enyart at rsr.org/zealandia)
- Creation Groups' Opposition to Brown addressed by professional engineer Jane Albright including regarding Dr. Baumgardner
- The HPT Heat Problem objections from Dr. Baumgardner and others answered by HPT expert and mechanical engineer Bryan Nickel.

* Comment from an RSR Listener: A Lutheran Sunday School teacher with 15 years of experience who teaches kids from 5th to 8th grade sent in the following message:

Dear Bob and Fred and the RSR Crew,

The kinds of scientific discoveries that you guys report, much of it published in leading science journals that support young-earth creation, is the only thing that I have found that actually reaches the young kids that I work with. In the 7th grade, these boys and girls go through the Lutheran confirmation process. Afterward, I quiz them. They have learned almost nothing. More significant though is that the entire experience is meaningless to them. It's not that it has no meaning. It's worse than that. To them it is meaningless. The only way that I have found to break through to them about the importance of God's Word and the Gospel of Jesus Christ is with the amazing scientific discoveries that Real Science Radio shares that demonstrate that God is indeed our Creator! Thank you so very much for your work! And may God bless your continued outreach!

In Christ,

_ _ _ _ _   _ _ _ _ _


Lutheran Sunday School Teacher

* Help with RSR Research? At Real Science Radio, we always have way more research than we have the time or money to accomplish. You can help with one or both if you'd like to! For example, you can consider purchasing a book from our Amazon.com Research Wish List. Watch out though! They're not inexpensive. You could either read the book yourself to prepare a report (to send off to us at Bob@rsr.org of your assessment of what information may be helpful in our apologetics outreach) or you can just let Amazon deliver the book right to us (where our crack staff, namely Bob or Doug, will give the book an initial read to evaluate its information). So, if you can, please help! And whether you can or not, thanks and may God continue to bless you!

* Today's Resource: For online resources, go to rsr.org/flood. But to order RSR's #1 best-selling video, just click...

Bob asks you: If you love RSR, could you purchase this to help us stay on the air?

The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory
Blu-ray, 2-DVD Set, Stream or HD Download!

Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart presents the scientific evidence for Dr. Walt Brown’s model of the global flood, along with the relevant biblical material. Enyart also discusses Brown's opponents and contrasts both the vapor canopy and catastrophic plate tectonics with the hydroplate theory.

DVD Vol. 1
1. Walt Brown, Creation Leaders, and Scripture
2. Hydroplate Theory & Scientific Evidence

DVD Vol. 2
3. Hydroplates vs. Plate Tectonics
Bonus: Origin of Earth's Radioactivity

Walt Brown's In the BeginningThe Blu-ray disc contains all parts on one disc. And for now, save $10 with our special introductory pricing which discounts the $50 retail price to $39.99!

* Get the Best Creation Science Book Ever Written: Just click on the cover of the book to purchase it from RSR (which also helps us to continue broadcasting)...

Vapor Canopy and the Hydroplate Theory (Albright's Flood Models Controversy Series)

* Interview-Based Review of Flood Models: (Updated 8/8/21) Jane Albright interviewed 16 creation scientists and leaders for this project. Another 17 declined to be interviewed. Now, Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart interviews Albright, a working professional engineer formerly with the U.S. Navy nuclear engineering program, on her resulting articles about the most prominent flood models.
- The Vapor Canopy Theory (VCT, built on a secular theory and now rejected by the leading creation groups)
- The Hydroplate Theory (HPT, built on the floodwaters coming from just beneath the crust)
- Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (CPT, built on the secular PT model and affirmed by the leading creation groups)

Help Bob Identify Scientists & Engineers Supporting HPT: Please email Bob@rsr.org if you are a scientist or an engineer (or you can tell us of one) supporting Dr. Brown's Hydroplate Theory!

* Enjoy Jane Albright's Series: Right here on RSR...
- albright-flood-series-1-VCT.pdf (see its visibility problem, below)
- albright-flood-series-2-HPT.pdf
- albright-flood-series-3-CPT.pdf
- albright-flood-series-4-controversy.pdf

* RSR's Albright Broadcast Series: Bob and Jane discuss her article series on these three programs:
- Pt. 1: The Vapor Canopy and the Hydroplate Theory (this program, discussing Albright's first two articles)
- Pt. 2: Catastrophic Plate Tectonics (discussing Albright's 3rd article)
- Pt. 3: The Controversy over VCT, CPT, & the HPT (discussing Albright's 4th article)

Baseball graphic morphed into an image of the mid-oceanic ridge on the globe* Flood Waters Continued Rising from Day 41 to Day 150: The waters for the flood came not from the atmosphere or above it but from "the fountains of the great deep". This explains how the floodwaters could continue to rise for another 110 days after the rain stopped at the end of the fortieth day. Genesis explains that the fountains that flooded the entire earth broke forth within hours. Physics explains why this occurred so rapidly and where this occurred. The crustal crack of the fountains wrapped around the world like the seam on a baseball. Such an event would leave a scar. And of course, the scar from that crack is the globe-encircling 40,000-mile long crack called the mid-oceanic ridge. Essentially, the MOR was formed by the crack below the crack that resulted when the weight of the overlying crust was removed, eroded and carried away with the escaping floodwaters. As with isostatic rebound, pressure from gravity forced the mantle beneath the crack to catastrophically bend upward creating a tension crack (not unlike the Grand Canyon's inner gorge and Marble Canyon). See this explained by mechanical engineer Bryan Nickel from 1:10:40 to 1:22:00 of his HPT overview video...

Rob Yardley, Tim Clarey, and other creation leaders...* How the Canopy Got Walt Brown Sideways with the Movement: Dr. Henry Morris, Virginia Tech hydraulics professor, founded the creation movement and promoted the vapor canopy theory which had been adopted by the major organizations. At 17 minutes into RSR's global flood video see how Dr. Morris introduced Walt Brown to his readers. And at 26:30 you can hear Rob Yardley, a friend of both men (and board member of J. Vernon McGee's Thru the Bible Radio Network) agree that Dr. Brown "took one for the team" by helping the creation movement see the error in its beloved vapor canopy theory. Also, at 18:50 see Dr. Morris himself indirectly cite Walt's opposition to the canopy theory, his "geophysical causes... of the Flood", as a reason for "problems". Over the decades though the creation movement followed Walt's lead and abandoned the canopy theory and its scientific misdirection. But as the messenger, Walt paid the price and once relationships sour they're difficult to mend. However, remember that through all the tension between the Apostles, at the end Peter honored Paul (2 Pet. 3:15-16). Likewise, at a high-profile moment at the end of his carrer, as you can see him doing at 31:30 in our video, Dr. Morris honors Dr. Walt Brown (or just click play...)

* ICR's Dr. John Morris on the Canopy: Hear also at 24:32 Dr. Morris regarding, "a huge canopy that covered the globe... we don't have the evidence, and the evidence we do have doesn't allow the canopy. If there were such a canopy, it would cause such a heat problem on the surface that it would be boiling temperature. Nothing could survive such a canopy. That's the problem... The more scientists have looked at that canopy theory, there are almost no creation scientists anymore who have studied it, who still hold to that traditional view of the canopy that was presented in [my father's book] The Genesis Flood... The Scripture doesn't say it. And the geological evidence doesn't support it."

* On Bob's 2018 Bible Tour of Italy: When in Rome Do Romans... 

Bob & Cheryl Enyart in Italy with Jane Albright and our friend Abraham
Bob & Cheryl in Italy with Jane, left, and our friend Abraham

* RSR Flood Model Resources including Shared Google Spreadsheets:
- Bible Material Uniquely Supporting Various Flood Models
- Physical Features Requiring Explanation and Flood Models 
- HPT Confirmed Predictions here at rsr.org/predictions#walt-brown 
- All of Real Science Radio's HPT resources collected over at rsr.org/global-flood.

* Higher Oxygen Levels, Greater Air Pressure, the Vapor Canopy, and HPT: A major argument for the vapor canopy has been the evidence that the pre-flood Earth had greater atmospheric pressure and a higher oxygen content. Whereas the VCT has been rejected by the major groups that promoted it, the Hydroplate Theory itself can explain why atmospheric pressure dropped. The HPT's eruption of the fountains ejected into space a significant percentage of the preflood atmosphere, immediately lowering atmospheric pressure. So the first HPT factor was that some of the air that stood immediately above the globe-encircling crack was carried into space by the erupting fountains. The second HPT factor is an effect that operates even today, gravitationally keeping atmospheric pressure lower as compared to the antediluvian world. The debris ejected from the Earth impacted the Moon (mostly the near side), Mercury, Venus, Mars, etc. and comprises the solar system's meteorites, asteroids, comets, irregular moons, and trans-Neptunian objects (TNOs). The loss of all this water and debris reduced by a few percent the mass of the Earth. Less mass means less gravity and that means that the atmosphere is not pulled down as tightly to the surface as before the flood. Therefore less atmospheric oxygen is held within Earth's narrow biosphere, with a higher percent of our atmosphere's oxygen at a higher elevation and so out of reach of our flora and fauna.

Chart showing exponential decay of lifespan after the Flood* Decrease in Human (and other) Lifespans: Another major argument for the vapor canopy has been the longer lifespans of the antediluvians, of people and of other organisms. Hydroplate Theory events may explain even better than the Canopy Theory why people, plants, animals, and insects may not live as long today as they did prior to the flood. Since the flood the Earth's crust has been loaded with radioactive (unstable) elements. Radioactive decay is dangerous to biological organisms for it not only harms the individual but degrades the functionality of the overall genome of an entire species. Today, multiple mutations occur with every single cell division, trillions of times over within, for example, a human body. See rsr.org/radioactivity and rsr.org/uranium for an introduction to the Hydroplate Theory's explanation for the origin of Earth's radioactivity. If the reduction of atmospheric pressure and reduced oxygen content were the primary reason for decreased health and lifespan, the consequences might have been seen in a more immediate drop (to current levels). Instead, charting the reduced lifespans shows an exponential decay over a few centuries which seems to fit better with the gradual deterioration of the genome that took the edge off the extraordinary precision biology that had continued to function in the post-Fall world. (See rsr.org/genetic-entropy, rsr.org/evidence#abrahams-marriage, and consider that relatively great longevity persisted till the flood even without the help of the leaves and fruit of the Tree of Life). So rather than a decrease in atmospheric pressure, the flood's origin of Earth's radioactivity explains better mankind's decreasing biological lifespan.

* Vapor Canopy Theory Visibility Problem: Every gas, at a given pressure and temperature, has an "optical depth" which measures how far or how much light can pass into a gas at a given pressure and temperature. Moses wrote in Genesis that God put, "lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth." So at night, star light had to pass through Earth's entire atmosphere. Yet consider how much water a vapor canopy would need to hold to allow it contribute a significant amount to the flooding of the entire Earth. Claiming that much water could be suspended in such a canopy is to claim almost infinite optical depth for water vapor. However, the thicker and denser the gas, the smaller its optical depth, that is, the less light can pass through it. A gas would have to be completely transparent to have infinite optical depth, and that's simply not the case for water vapor, or for any gas.

* Vapor Canopy Theory Heat Problem: In 1874 Isaac Newton Vail, who believed the Bible to be mythological, introduced the canopy theory and early supporters included Jehovah Witness founder Charles T. Russell. By 1984, the creation movement was considering a version of the model that held enough water to produce 40 feet of rain on the Earth. Yet after the early modern creationists had widely popularized the canopy, taken as a group, they later dropped this idea, primarily after Dr. Walt Brown publicized the biblical and physical evidence against it. The Bible mentions first the "fountains of the great deep" (some of which fell down as rain) yet after the first 40 days, the waters continued to rise on the Earth for another 110 days until they covered the mountains. This shows that indeed the primary source for the floodwaters came from below. Also, U.S. Air Force atmospheric simulation software confirmed what Dr. Brown had warned was obvious, that such a canopy would turn the Earth into an impossibly hot terrarium, even with only enough vapor to fall as just two inches of rain. Thus decades later, as above, Dr. Morris can state, "If there were such a canopy, it would cause such a heat problem on the surface that it would be boiling temperature. Nothing could survive... there are almost no creation scientists anymore who have studied it, who still hold to that traditional view of the canopy... The Scripture doesn't say it. And the geological evidence doesn't support it." The early creationists though were claiming, against physics and without need, a vapor canopy that would be nearly infinitely transparent. All material attenuates light to some degree. Matter (atoms and molecules) scatter, absorb, and reflect light. No material is perfectly transparent. And that should be obvious to everyone.

* Today's Resource: For online resources, go to rsr.org/flood. But to order RSR's #1 best-selling video, just click...

Bob asks you: If you love RSR, could you purchase this to help us stay on the air?

The Global Flood and the Hydroplate Theory
Blu-ray, 2-DVD Set, Stream or HD Download!

Real Science Radio co-host Bob Enyart presents the scientific evidence for Dr. Walt Brown’s model of the global flood, along with the relevant biblical material. Enyart also discusses Brown's opponents and contrasts both the vapor canopy and catastrophic plate tectonics with the hydroplate theory.

DVD Vol. 1
1. Walt Brown, Creation Leaders, and Scripture
2. Hydroplate Theory & Scientific Evidence

DVD Vol. 2
3. Hydroplates vs. Plate Tectonics
Bonus: Origin of Earth's Radioactivity

The Blu-ray disc contains all parts on one disc. And for now, save $10 with our special introductory pricing which discounts the $50 retail price to $39.99!

* Get the Best Creation Science Book Ever Written: Just click on the cover of the book to purchase it from RSR (which also helps us to continue broadcasting)...

Hey Brian Thomas, "Why Is Carbon 14 everywhere it shouldn't be?"

* Hey Brian: Real Science Radio host Bob Enyart interviews in studio fossil expert Brian Thomas. Even though radiocarbon only lasts thousands of years, and not millions, Carbon 14 is found everywhere it shouldn't be! About the extraordinary persistence of 14c in marble, coal, oil, natural gas, dinosaur bones, and diamonds, Bob asks this Institute for Creation Research fossil expert about possible contamination as compared to endogenous 14c. The discussion is fascinating!

* Please Support ICR: To help the biblical creation movement continue to grow, please consider purchasing some of their fabulous resources for yourself and to give as gifts to others! You can do this at store.icr.org!

* Another RSR Prediction: On today's program, Bob Enyart and Brian Thomas predict that chert, even though it is often dated at more than a billion years old, will contain short-lived Carbon 14!

* Learn About Carbon 13 in Fossil Bones: If you love science and learning about fossils, you'll just love what Brian Thomas explains to us about the various Carbon isotopes in fossils, and the ratio of Carbon 12 and Carbon 13, and what that tells us about the diet of a dinosaur (or other creatures) and whether or not these Carbon isotopes reveal contamination, or a lack of contamination, in fossils that also include endogenous biological material

* RSR HIGHLY Recommends this Special CRSQ Edition: Long-time RSR listeners may recall Bob Enyart's paper published in the peer-reviewed journal, Creation Research Society Quarterly, Dobzhansy: 40 Years Later Nothing Makes Sense. Now, see the highly recommended iDINO Project Special Report that includes a fabulous radiocarbon paper by Vance Nelson and Brian Thomas! You can click to view the abstracts but RSR highly recommends purchasing this important and historic issue, which you can find also at tiny.cc/crsq-dino-soft-tissue-ed.

* Compound Interest: (post-show note) "If you're interested in economics, or you just want to understand your own finances, you just might love this book fascinating little book, Compound Interest, by Will Duffy." - Bob Enyart

* Post-show Statement: Bob Enyart and his guest Brian Thomas join the world grieving over the murder of scores of innocent people in Nice, France. Today's program, incidentally, was recorded before yesterday's horrific crime occurred.

Brian Thomas: Two Bird Wings in Amber Means...

* Technical Note: An initial glitch with today's program has been fixed. We apologize for the inconvenience.

* Post-show Statement: Bob Enyart and his guest Brian Thomas join the nation and much of the world grieving over the murder of five police officers in Brian's city of Dallas, Texas. Today's program, incidentally, was recorded just before this horrific crime occurred.

* Bird Wings in Amber: Real Science Radio host Bob Enyart interviews in studio fossil expert Brian Thomas on the two bird wings that have been found in two pieces of amber. Thomas, from the Dallas-based Institute for Creation Research, presents the various ways that these preserved specimens falsify the alleged 100-million-year age of these fossils. And Bob invites those in the Denver area to join him this evening at 7 p.m. to hear Brian speak to the Rocky Mountain Creation Fellowship at 5900 E. Yale Ave about the widespread discovery of original biological tissue that has survived within dinosaur bones for the thousands of years since so many of those creatures were destroyed in the global flood of Noah's day.

Molecular Biologist Kevin Anderson on iDino and Target Antibodies

By popular demand (actually, Doug McBurney said that he loved the first show we did a couple weeks ago), Dr. Kevin Anderson is back with Bob Enyart on Real Science Radio!

Bob Enyart interviews molecular biologist and dinosaur researcher Dr. Kevin Anderson, director of the Van Andel Research Center in Chino Valley, Arizona about the iDino Project he is running for the Creation Research Society. Kevin is one of the history-making scientists who have published in prestigious scientific journals their discoveries of dinosaur soft tissue! See also Kevin's work at rsr.org/triceratops and get his book, Echoes of the Jurassic, online at the CRS Bookstore! Finally, Bob asked Kevin, as a molecular biologist, about one of RSR's latest favorite topics, the targeted antibodies cancer treatment revolution!

* RSR HIGHLY Recommends this Special CRSQ Edition: Long-time RSR listeners may recall Bob Enyart's paper published in the peer-reviewed journal, Creation Research Society Quarterly, Dobzhansy: 40 Years Later Nothing Makes Sense. Now, see the highly recommended iDINO Project Special Report from CRSQ! You can click to view the abstracts but RSR highly recommends purchasing this important and historic issue, which you can find also at tiny.cc/crsq-dino-soft-tissue-ed.

* Compound Interest: (post-show note) "If you're interested in economics, or you just want to understand your own finances, you just might love this book fascinating little book, Compound Interest, by Will Duffy." - Bob Enyart

West Virginia's Best-Known Enemy of Evolution on RSR

1980 Eyed Hawk-moth (Smerinthus ocellata)* INSECTMAN: Some years ago a respected math teacher in West Virginia got the attention of the infamous evolutionist Richard Dawkins over in England. The Charleston Gazette wrote about the proposal of local math teacher Karl Priest, whom they referred to as "West Virginia’s best-known enemy of evolution." After hooking Dawkins but then losing him on the reel in, Mr. Priest now joins Real Science Radio host Bob Enyart to talk about insects (as curator of insectman.us, this is one of Karl's favorite topics). The guys explore just a few of the countless ways that insects disprove Darwin's theory of evolution!

Eyed Hawk-moth: Bob Enyart just took the moth photo above and asked the Insectman to identify it. Mr. Priest replied that it is a member of the species Smerinthus ocellata, part of the family of insects known as the eyed hawk-moths.