Noah's Ark Found...in Northern Kentucky!

Today is a special day for The Answer in Genesis group headed up by its founder, Ken Ham: The organization has finally finished building a replica of Noah's Ark. Although I have not heard of it referred to as Ham's Folly, I'm sure Ken Ham has!

As a public interface for the Answer in Genesis apologetics ministry, Noah's Ark is very much an interactive spectacle that first and foremost convinces the public that Noah's Ark of the Bible truly did exist and truly could have been used to saved all of the land animals at the time of the Great Flood!

The group has absorbed considerable criticism from various religious groups and even misrepresentation from the state. Yet, today, around the world, news anchors have been reporting on the grand opening of Noah's Ark and the entertainment value such a spectacle can provide for the American public. Contrary to published reports, the venture did not cost taxpayers anything although it did mean employment for the state and additional revenues for the region. Of course, many science organizations were critical of the venture because of what they perceive as a very unscientific exhibit conflicting with their evolutionary view of ancient history.

There is a huge amount of hypocrisy with any criticism of the ark and even more ignorance about earth history and our origins. See if you agree.

To begin with, if a science centre, zoo, or Disney World had chosen to locate in Northern Kentucky, it would seem to me that no one would dare criticize it. It is the fine distinction that this particular theme park is based around a biblical event, the Great Flood, and a popular biblical icon surrounding that momentous event, an Ark whose construction and measurements were specifically laid out in the Old Testament scriptures by the God of traditional Judeo-Christianity.

But Noah's Ark also stands out as an important link to larger questions regarding (1) the historicity of the Bible, (2) an alternative geological concept of our earth's history, (3) the most recently recorded survival of humankind, and (4) the ultimate question of humankind's beginnings and a momentous close to an ancient world that is no longer widely acknowledged. You may feel secure in thinking modern science has all the answers. You would be very mistaken I think.

We would be much better served to feel confident about a true science which is supposed to be observable science. Our confidence in historic science should be very reserved for historic science becomes more inaccurate the further back we project it. Radiometric measurements do not agree with each other and must be suspiciously tweaked to appear to agree. The two major factors they assume is no parent element and a constant rate of decay, both of which have been disproved since the 1950's. For example, a sample of magma dome from Mount St. Helen's that erupted in 1980 was taken to a radiometric lab and dated at 350 thousand years old with some of its elements dating back to 2.8 million years! (The magma dome had formed in the aftermath of the eruption and settled in 1986.) Ice cores showing Greenland's ice shield to be 180 thousand years old have been observably contradicted by six American P38 airplanes crashed in 1942 and excavated in 1988 to be found under 270 feet of ice. Such a rate of accumulation would make Greenland's thickest glacier (est. 5000 feet) to have been absent only 1000 years ago! There are at least some 68 age-determinants that make the earth far younger than 6 billion years and some 14 of these indicated an age of only a few thousand. Helium diffusion rates from zircons containing radioisotopes produce, as a by-product, helium indicating an age for these oldest rocks as being only 6000 years +/- 2000 years. Even the universe bears the sign of youth: Of only some 225 super nova remnants and an explosion rate of one every 25-50 years, the number of super novas indicate a universe, too, that is only thousands of years old and not billions. The Faint Sun Paradox is another proof of a young universe. And there are many others. The recent discovery of soft T.Rex tissue is already making many doubt the vast ages and deep time treated as fact by mainstream science. Besides, the very origin of time has never been answered by science. Although Stephen Hawking admitted there had to have been a beginning, he only offered a meaningless tautology as a solution: That time perhaps originated with a singularity. And what did he mean by a singularity? Space-time. This is like saying that rain came from water falling down from the sky! The possibility that random chance produced our anthropic planet and our perfectly designed universe is even more unbelievable. The probabilities that such a sequence of developments occurring in just the right order by the millions (or billions? trillions?) would be unfathomably small.

The Ark also stands as a mute testimony that a true understanding of earth history is not a timeless gradual one but rather a history marked by dramatic geological upheavals, not the least of which, is a huge universal flood still not recognized today because of its immensity. A true in-depth look at such an ancient world would reveal a time of animal and human giantism with remarkable longevity because of a water vapour barrier surrounding the earth's atmosphere and delaying growth and aging. It even allows for a super continent to have existed only to have been separated into our continents because of deep "fountains of the deep" opening up the earth's mantle through massive tectonic shifts and thrusts. It would also explain the strange phenomenon of finding fossils on the top of the highest mountains inhabiting the earth today.

I am not convinced that Noah's Ark in Kentucky will ever sway the orthodoxy of science. Scientists are always the last to adopt the truth and the history of science itself has shown this. Look into the opposition faced by our fathers of science and try to imagine it no longer exists in our day and age, too.

I do not believe that the religious beliefs of the Answers in Genesis group is total agreement with the Bible, either. I notice that they are willing to accept the literal six days of creation without embracing its literal seventh-day creation--the Saturday Sabbath! They are, admittedly, an evangelical, baptist group that has only a few correct hobby horses they rock back and forth on, the primary truth being a young earth creation. Given their understanding though, why shouldn't they spend their money influencing a world today so devoid of values and skeptical of the Bible's inerrancy? Maybe they have alerted us to something greater than the Ark itself, that the Bible is true after all!

The Zeitgeist Factor in Global Developments

On the heels of the Brexit vote and the disappointment of many Brits came the Chilcot Report. Whatever political instability the Brexit caused was only exceeded by the devastating effects on Prime Minister's Blair already dwindling popularity and the decision he and his government made in supporting the U.S. war on Iraq. What many pundits thought was missing from the report was the outright condemnation of the bad intelligence Britain was given in supporting its Atlantic partner. The bitter aftertaste the public felt was a further distaste and distrust of its politicians. 

Yet the report somehow seem to have missed something that few historians notice but is as real as water vapour:  The role of the zeitgeist in world affairs and making our history. The spirit of the times is as mysterious factor know one can really explain but is major thread that must be recognized historically.

So while the Chilcot Report said that the final efforts of a peaceful resolution had not been taken, it also ignored the fact that Saddam Hussein had ignored 17 UN resolutions and flaunted its lawlessness upon the world stage. What it also ignored was the anger felt by many in those year immediately after the 911 tragedy. Tony Blair was immensely popular at that time and, in a way, so was President Bush for having steered the country through the aftermath of 911. Therefore, it should be no surprise that the US chose war against Iraq. What I didn't realize before was that Mr. Bush himself was very hesitant to go to war and that it was certain members of his cabinet and military that urged the conflict. The wrong intelligence was certainly known beforehand because Canada under its prime minister, Mr. Chretien, chose to ignore it.  But it really seemed the right thing to do. In other words, the zeitgeist of those years made the decision inevitable. I do remember, too, that the Bush administration brought with it a certain bluster in the wake of 911 and the determination someone would pay. There was a sense of desperation and a yearning for America to make good on its military preeminence in the world. 

The spirit of the times is difficult to explain. We look at the peaceful Scandinavian peoples today and wonder how they behaved as ruthless Vikings pillaging, plundering and terrorizing much of Europe in the middle ages. 

We ponder the start of World War One knowing full well that the mere assassination of the Archduke Ferdinand and the alliance system was not the ultimate reason for the launch of this terrible era in our past. One documentary I saw explained the real cause of the First World War as a corrupted form of Social Darwinism gone astray. The bluster between Germany and its European neighbours, especially the UK, is a major factor leading up to the conflict. But how unfathomable yet real was the spirit of the times that produced this global development. 

I remember the mid-1970's when pet rocks became a fad--a replacement for real pets apparently! Today we look back and wonder what on earth got into us to make this fad so popular. But the spirit of the times allowed it to catch on. Was it a reaction to something that came before or just something new that tickled our fancy? Whatever it was, no one can deny it was a phenomenon. 

For that matter, what got into our male ancestors to wear fur coats in the 30's, swallow goldfish, and say, "Twenty-three skiddoo, small change"? Bizarre. The zeitgeist I suppose.

And when we think of the centre of European culture, refinement and academic brilliance being Germany during the twentieth century, how did it evolve into the most horrendous massacre of peoples in recent history? Zeitgeist. For that matter, what got into Stalin to possibly put to death some 20 million of his own citizens in the Soviet Union? 

The zeitgeist of history should never be underestimated. The zeitgeist of the times are spirits let loose that may be harmless but may also be a terror.

Although I may be shortsighted for the moment, I somehow feel the zeitgeist of our world is in the middle of transformation right now. Watch out for it! 

The Uncoupling of the West

The fiscal stability of recent times was questionable enough with the burden of international debt and excessive borrowing, but now the times are suddenly taking on a new political instability.

I first noticed it with the excessive political extremes of the American scene. It turns out that a new historical record has been broken. No candidates running before have suffered such low public popularity leading up to a national election. Currently Mrs. Clinton has a 42% popularity rating against Mr. Trump's 40%. Surely this is a sign of a declining political culture. It is also a sign that Americans are frustrated with their politicians and the "business-as-usual" approach to pandering, getting elected, and then breaking your promises like pie crusts.

This new zeitgeist is spreading like wildfire around the world. 

The Brexit has caused the dethronement of many political figures and continuing to threaten others. Prime Minister Cameron was the first, followed by Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage. And no one would bet Jeremy Corbyn will be able to stick it out with such a loss of support recently, including a vote of confidence from his own party. It has been rumoured to be the worst crisis for the Labour party in its 116-year-old history. 

The entire fallout of the Brexit is coming in waves, both financially and politically. So Mark Carney announced recently in an interview. Politically, Hungary is now opting for a referendum, too, to leave the European Union and many are concerned that its far-right Jobbik party will opt for closer ties with Putin's Russia.

Russia, as it turns out, is doing quite well and, besides losing a certain market share of its exports going to Britain through its EU membership, is succeeding in Putin's ultimate goal of breaking up the EU and the influence of NATO. While South Ossetia, Georgia, Moldova, and east Ukraine are now well established under Russian hegemony, there is little doubt that Lithuania, Poland and other eastern European countries are coming under pressure to re-join the former Warsaw Pact arrangement.

The Unseen Hand of history is playing out predictions made 2500 years ago. As the King of the North, a Russian leadership is seeking to unite Eurasia with its heritage religious traditions and resurrect a d latter-day United States of Eurasia, a neo-Holy Roman Empire. Putin is the clever man who will accomplish this. Keep your eyes on the news. The developments are progressing almost every week in the news. Yet all of this must occur to fulfill the providential hand of prophecy! It is the decline of the West and its political and financial preeminence that will allow Russia to ascend and fulfill its destiny as an end-time world power that is heartless yet mighty.