Perspective: Problems With Adventist Creationism

Given the complexity OF THE ARGUMENT one has to rely on three things to validate it

1 - does it match the fossil record and the cladistics studies. The answer is, no it does not.

2 - does it convince other experts in the field. The answer is, no it does not.

3 - is it based on well established principals and using clear reasoning. The answer is, no it does not.

I see this kind of “evidence” all the time from YEC - “it is complex, I don’t understand it, it gets the result I want, therefore it must be right”

Lastly, one can check his associates. “Sanford, J.C., Baumgardner, J., Brewer, W., Gibson, P., ReMine, W. (2007). Mendel’s Accountant: a biologically realistic forward-time population genetics program. SCPE 8(2): 147-165.” Look at this guy’s history - - being an associate of his makes one automatically suspect.

Consider the nonsense that is “Mendel’s Accountant, which seeks to accurately model the accumulation of mutations in a genome”. Garbage-in garbage-out. The program’s results will be no better than the programmers ability to model ALL the relevant issues. Given how much we are still discovering about the process whereby DNA and RNA mutate and are expressed, you can bet ypur bottom dollar that the accountant is not accounting for a huge number of important details.

But it sounds convincing to those non-experts who want to be convinced.



I am curious on why you are certain that there is one Adventist view. Even the view you have provided of an old universe and a young earth seems to be hedging your bets. You seem to be at least consistent with YLC which is not traditional Adventist view.

The dominant view in North American Adventism is probably YLC which seems to like you, accept some uncertainy on the age of the earth and the universe. At least if one takes Andrew Universities most vocal as the benchmark. Ted Wilson is still YEC and I suspect this is likely the view in the developing world. I do not think it surprising Ted Wilson is a YEC supporter given that EG White statements on infidel geologists make no sense at all except in the context of YEC. YEC is the view of CMI and other creationist groups derivative of Price that at least in Australia seem to regularly present at Adventist churches. GRI and many educated Adventist however trend toward YLC and eclectically take components of ID athough they reject most of the ideas on evolution accepted by predominant proponents at the Discovery Institute.

I can only conclude that Adventist views on the theory of creation have already evolved as have yours. There is no Adventist view other than acceptance of a doctrine of creation which rather than conflating with a theory of creation should be allowed to cover any possible theories of the mechanism of Creation which Christians and Adventist might like to pursue or argue about. That I think is the context of mcLarty’s discussion.


Impressive technician not so much scientitist

Why is it so impossible for those who have doubts about the historical accuracy of Genesis (but who also wish to suspend judgment on the “truth” of modern science concerning the age of earth) to be Adventists as well as teachers in our schools? Why can’t they say that there is a tension between traditional Scriptural interpretation and current scientific thinking and leave it at that? Must they say that science is “wrong” and Scripture (as we see it) is “right,” no matter what? I do not understand this mindset at all.


There are Bible scholars who believe that the first chapter of Genesis is much later than the 2nd and that priests added the description of days to review the Jewish heritage and call them back to observing the Law which had been almost forgotten. Sabbath was one that had been almost forgotten and God allowed them to be taken in captivity; and if they returned to God and His Law they would receive His blessing.

1 Like

“Uneducated” does not necessarily mean lack of formal education. Everyone has access to books and libraries. But accepting what someone who is uneducated in science who disputes scientific finding is the same as someone uneducated in medical knowledge diagnosing and treating disease. If this is the way someone evaluates expert knowledge in a special area, it only demonstrates an equal lack of respect for knowledge which has been publicly recognized by reputable universities. Yes, there are still some who seek shamans and quacks.

Much more than specific knowledge is needed: critical thinking to differentiate true facts from hokum.


Usher at its best!
EGW followed Usher’s calculations, and we know how problematic that is.

1 Like

No way I will go. The probable population that will be sent out there is too dangerous, and is most certainly untreatable. Going there could have “grave consequences.”


You are right, paulus. My enthusiasm regarding Dr. Sanford got a little generalized. A life-time achievement of Associate Professor does not support the appellation ‘accomplished scientist’ in the academic world. It would have been better were I to have used, ‘well informed scientist.’ You have to be pretty well informed to have researched and produced 70 publications in peer-reviewed journals and to have created 32 issued patents, and founded two biotech companies during over a brief 18-year career at Cornell, from where Sanford retired in his 40’s from the sale of those two biotech companies.

I readily admit that applied scientists,like Dr. Sanford, rarely get the attention of the Nobel committee, let along their vote, though Dr. Barry Marshall proved the rare exception to the rule precisely, I’m thinking, because he prevailed in his work against all odds in the face of withering denunciations by the far more accomplished scientific community as measured, as it turns out, more by the depth of their cohesiveness in denouncing Dr. Marshall than their interest in understanding of the issues at hand.


You have stepped in it again ( wiki sucks).

Methinks you should start looking at the science instead of wiki.


John R. Baumgardner, Ph.D. Geophysics/Space Physics

B.S. Electrical Engineering, Texas Tech University - 1968
M.S. Electrical Engineering, Princeton University - 1970
M.S. Geophysics and Space Physics, UCLA - 1981
Ph.D. Geophysics and Space Physics, UCLA - 1983

American Geophysical Union
Mineralogical Society of America
Professional Experience:
Technical Staff Member/Scientist - Los Alamos National Laboratory, Theoretical Division, New Mexico (1984 - Present).
Member of Technical Staff and Consultant - Rockwell International, Rocketdyne Division, Laser Department (1978-1979, 1981-1984).
Graduate Research Assistant - University of California, Los Angeles, Dept. of Earth and Space Sciences (1979-1983).
Consultant - R & D Associates (1980-1981).
Project Officer - U. S. Air Force, Air Force Weapons Laboratory, Laser Division, Kirtland AFB, New Mexico (1971-1975).
Current Research Interests:
Three-dimensional numerical simulation of planetary mantle dynamics, global climate change, and nonlinear rheological behavior.
Development of efficient hydrodynamics methods, suitable for 3-D, both explicit and implicit, for massively parallel supercomputers.
Selected Publications
J. R. Baumgardner, “Catastrophic Plate Tectonics: The Physics Behind the Genesis Flood,” in Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Creationism,
R. Ivey, Ed., Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA, 2003.

J. R. Baumgardner, D. R. Humphreys, A. A. Snelling, and S. A. Austin, “Measurable 14C in fossilized organic materials: Confirming the young earth creation/Flood model,” in Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Creationism, R. Ivey, Ed., Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA, 2003.
D. R. Humphreys, J. R. Baumgardner, S. A. Austin, and A. A., Snelling, “Helium diffusion rates support accelerated nuclear decay,” in Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Creationism, R. Ivey, Ed., Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA, 2003.
D. R. Stegman, A.M. Jellinek, S. A. Zatman, J. R. Baumgardner, and M. A. Richards, “An early lunar core dynamo driven by thermochemical mantle convection,” Nature, 421, 143-146, 2003.
J. R. Baumgardner, “Catastrophic plate tectonics: the geophysical context of the Genesis Flood,” “Dealing carefully with the data,” and “A constructive quest for truth,” all contributions to a “Forum on Catastrophic Plate Tectonics,” Ex Nihilo Technical Journal, 16, Vol. 1, 57-85, 2002.
( )
H.-P. Bunge, M. A. Richards, and J. R. Baumgardner, “Mantle-circulation models with sequential data assimilation: inferring present-day mantle structure from plate-motion histories,” Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A., 360, 2545-2567, 2002. ( )
D. A. Randall, T. D. Ringler, R. P. Heikes, P. Jones, and J. Baumgardner, “Climate Modeling with Spherical Geodesic Grids,” Computing in Science and Engineering, 4(5), 32-41, 2002.
C. C. Reese, V. S. Solomatov, and J. R. Baumgardner, “Survival of impact-induced thermal anomalies in the Martian mantle,” J. Geophys. Res.- Planets, 107(10), 5082-5092, 2002.
D. Majewski, D. Liermann, P. Prohl, B. Ritter, M. Buchhold, T. Hanisch, G. Paul, W. Wergen, and J. Baumgardner, “The global icosahedral-hexagonal grid point model GME: Operational version and high resolution tests,” Mon. Wea. Rev., 130, 319-338, 2002. ( )
M. A. Richards, W.-S. Yang, and J. R. Baumgardner, “The role of a low viscosity zone in stabilizing plate tectonics: implications for comparative terrestrial planetology,” Geochem., Geophys., Geosys., 2, 2001.
( )
J. R. Baumgardner, “Distribution of Radioactive Isotopes in the Earth” in Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: A Young Earth Creation Research Initiative, Larry Vardiman, Andrew A. Snelling, and Eugene F. Chaffin, editors, Institute for Creation Research, Santee, CA, 49-94, 2000.
J. K. Dukowicz and J. R. Baumgardner, Incremental remapping as a transport/advection algorithm," J. Comp. Phys., 160, 318-335, 2000.
( )
W.-S. Yang and J. R. Baumgardner, “Matrix-dependent transfer multigrid method for strongly variable viscosity infinite Prandtl number thermal convection,” Geophys. and Astrophys. Fluid Dyn., 92, 151-195, 2000.
H. R. Wenk, J. R. Baumgardner, C. N. Tome, and R. Lebensohn, “A deformation model to explain anisotropy of the inner core,” J. Geophys. Res., 105, 5663-5677, 2000.
M. A. Richards, H.-P. Bunge, C. Lithgow-Bertelloni, and J. R. Baumgardner, “Mantle convection and plate motion history: Toward general circulation models,” History and Dynamics of Global Plate Motions, AGU Monograph Series, 1999.
M. A. Richards, H.-P. Bunge, Y. Ricard, and J.R. Baumgardner, “Polar wandering in mantle convection models,” Geophys. Res. Lett., 26, 1777-1780, 1999.
J. R. Baumgardner and W.-S. Yang, “Earthlike mantle convection from relatively simple rheology,” (abstract) Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 80, (1999 Fall Meeting Supplement), F26, 1999.
M. A. Richards, W.-S. Yang, and J. R. Baumgardner, “The effectiveness of finite yield stress in obtaining platelike surface velocities,” (abstract) Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 80, (1999 Fall Meeting Supplement), F962, 1999.
W.-S. Yang and J. R. Baumgardner, “Feasibility of the lava lamp model for the Earth’s mantle,” (abstract) Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 80, (1999 Fall Meeting Supplement), F941, 1999.
D. R. Stegman, M. A. Richards, and J. R. Baumgardner, “A parallel implementation of Lagrangian tracers in TERRA,” (abstract) Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 80, (1999 Fall Meeting Supplement), F950, 1999.
C. C. Reese, V. S. Solomatov, and J. R. Baumgardner, “Impacts and the thermal evolution of Mars,” (abstract) Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 80, (1999 Fall Meeting Supplement), F618, 1999.
John R. Baumgardner, Mark A. Richards, Woo-Sun Yang, and Carolina R. Lithgow-Bertelloni, “3-D Spherical Models of Plate Motion With Laterally Varying Rheology,” (abstract) Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 79, (1998 Fall Meeting Supplement), F911, 1998.
H.-P. Bunge, M. A. Richards, C. Lithgow-Bertelloni, J. R. Baumgardner, S. P. Grand, and B. A. Romanowicz, “Time scales and heterogeneity structure in geodynamic earth models,” Science, 280, 91-95, 1998.
Hans-Peter Bunge, Mark A. Richards, and John R. Baumgardner, “A sensitivity study of 3-D spherical mantle convection at 108 Rayleigh number: effects of depth-dependent viscosity, heating mode, and an endothermic phase change,” J. Geophys. Res., 102, B6, 11991-12007, 1997.
John R. Baumgardner and Woo-Sun Yang, “A finite element multigrid formulation for variable viscosity in 3-D spherical geometry,” (abstract) Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 77, (Fall Meeting Supplement), F750, 1996.

Hans-Peter Bunge, Mark A. Richards, and John R. Baumgardner, “The effect of depth-dependent viscosity on the planform of mantle convection,” Nature, 379, 436-438, 1996.
Hans-Peter Bunge and John R. Baumgardner, “Mantle convection modeling on parallel virtual machines,” Computers in Physics, 9, 207-215, 1995.
J. R. Baumgardner, “Thermal runaway in the mantle” (abstract) Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 75, 687, 1994.
S. A. Austin, J. R. Baumgardner, D. R. Humphreys, A. A. Snelling, L. Vardiman, and K. P. Wise, “Catastrophic Plate Tectonics: A Global Flood Model of Earth History,” Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism, Technical Symposium Sessions, R. E. Walsh, ed., Creation Science Fellowship, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA, 609-621, 1994.
J. R. Baumgardner, “Computer Modeling of the Large-Scale Tectonics Associated with the Genesis Flood,” Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism, Technical Symposium Sessions, R. E. Walsh, ed., Creation Science Fellowship, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA, 49-62, 1994.
J. R. Baumgardner, “Runaway Subduction as the Driving Mechanism for the Genesis Flood,” Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism, Technical Symposium Sessions, R. E. Walsh, ed., Creation Science Fellowship, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA, 63-75, 1994.
J. R. Baumgardner and D. W. Barnette, “Patterns of Ocean Circulation over the Continents During Noah’s Flood,” Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism, Technical Symposium Sessions, R. E. Walsh, ed., Creation Science Fellowship, Inc., Pittsburgh, PA, 77-86, 1994.
D. B. Kothe, J. R. Baumgardner, J. H. Cerutti, B. J. Daly, K. S. Holian, E. M. Kober, S. J. Mosso, J. W. Painter, R. D. Smith, and M. D. Torrey, “PAGOSA: A massively-parallel, multi-material hydrodynamics model for three-dimensional high-speed flow and high-rate material deformation,” Proceedings of the 1993 Conference on High Performance Computing: Grand Challenges in Computer Simulation, Society for Computer Simulation, 9-14, 1993.
John R. Baumgardner, “3-D numerical investigation of the mantle dynamics associated with the breakup of Pangea,” in Flow and Creep in the Solar System: Observations, Modeling, and Theory, D. B. Stone and S. K. Runcorn, eds., NATO ASI Series C, Vol. 391, 207-224, 1993.
John Baumgardner, “3-D numerical investigation of the mantle dynamics associated with the breakup of Pangea,” (abstract) Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 73, 1992 Fall Meeting Abstract Volume, 576-577, 1992.
M. A. Moreno, G. Schubert, J. Baumgardner, M. G. Kivelson, and D. A. Paige, “Io’s volcanic and sublimation atmospheres,” Icarus, 93, 63-81, 1991.
John R. Baumgardner, “Application of supercomputers to 3-D mantle convection,” in The Physics of the Planets, S. K. Runcorn, ed., John Wiley and Sons, 199-231, 1988.
J. Baumgardner, M. A. Moreno, G. Schubert, and M. G. Kivelson, “Two classes of volcanic eruptions and their corresponding atmospheres on Io,” Bull. Am. Astr. Assoc., 19(3), 856, 1987.
John R. Baumgardner, “Three-dimensional treatment of convective flow in the earth’s mantle,” J. Stat. Phys., 39, 501-511, 1985.
John R. Baumgardner and Paul O. Frederickson, “Icosahedral discretization of the two-sphere,” SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 22, 1107-1115, 1985.
Peter Bird and John Baumgardner, “Fault friction, regional stress, and crust-mantle coupling in southern California from finite element models,” J. Geophys. Res., 89, No. B3, 1932-1944, 1984.
John R. Baumgardner and Paul O. Frederickson, “Three-dimensional treatment of mantle convection,” (abstract) Eos, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, 63, 1105, 1982.


Dr Wesley Brewer, head of the Electrical and Computer Engineering Department at PUST, is a part-time associate and contributor to the MENDEL and CLIMATE projects at the Institute for Creation Research.

1 Like

Dr John Sanford, Ph.D. (University of Wisconsin)
Dr John Sanford, A Cornell University Professor for more than 25 years, John has been semi-retired since 1998. His Ph.D. was in plant breeding and plant genetics. While a professor at Cornell, John has trained graduate students and conducted genetic research at the New York State Agricultural Experiment Station in Geneva, NY. During this time, John bred new crop varieties using conventional breeding and then became heavily involved in the newly-emerging field of plant genetic engineering. John has published over 80 scientific publications and has been granted over 30 patents. His most significant scientific contributions involve three inventions, the biolistic (“gene gun”) process, pathogen-derived resistance, and genetic immunization. A large fraction of the transgenic crops (in terms of numbers and acreage) grown in the world today were genetically engineered using the gene gun technology developed by John and his collaborators. John also started two biotech enterprises derived from his research, Biolistics, Inc., and Sanford Scientific, Inc. John still holds a position at Cornell (Courtesy Associate Professor), but has largely retired from Cornell and has started a small non-profit organization, Feed My Sheep Foundation.
A scientific convert to six-day creation, his groundbreaking new book Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome demonstrates why human DNA is inexorably deteriorating at an alarming rate, thus cannot be millions of years old.

1 Like


You should be so lucky to be associated with scientists of this caliber.


What are qualifications that makes your opinion of these men credible??

Did you stay at the Holiday Inn by chance??

Walter ReMine
Walter received an M.Sc. in Electrical Engineering (MSEE) from the University of Minnesota, and worked in mathematical fields of signal processing and pattern recognition, where he holds four patents. His book The Biotic Message has been well received for its novel insights and arguments against evolutionary theory, and for offering a creationary alternative—a scientifically testable theory of life’s major patterns. The book also provided new avenues in Discontinuity Systematics, creationary genetics, and re-opened the issue of Haldane’s Dilemma as a long-unsolved evolutionary problem.

Your characterization of science which accepts the theory of evolution is unfair. I would be far more impressed if you would stop availing yourself of the work of these scientists which you currently benefit from.

how are we benefiting from evolutionists…

this is a really long list of publications…

Jim Londis is correct. Even Gerhard Pfandl in one of his essays in which he discusses these quotations agrees. Look it up. It’s on the Ellen White website. It is a hermeneutical error to interpret the quotations as constituting assertions by Ellen White that the world is six thousand years old.


You have to remember here that Willie White was not the prophet, his mother was. Also, people think that with all the extra knowledge we have about biblical chronology that Ussher has been blown out the window. Not so. A few tweaks here and there, accession year and non-accession year dating etc do not blow Ussher out of the water. It changes a few years here and there, but the final result is still “about 6000 years”. Ellen White wasn’t trying to formulate a biblical chronology and set out exact dates and time periods (except when necessary for explanation of prophecy). But when she wrote 6000 years she meant 6000. “About 6000 years” could mean 6100, 6200, maybe even 6500, but it couldn’t easily mean even 7000, let alone anything greater.


The Bible is pretty clear that the earth is around 6000 years old. And the life that goes with it. It is not clear on the age of the universe itself. The age of the starting materials that God used to “make” the earth (i.e. separating the waters, separating dry land from the water etc) is debatable, but it makes no logical sense for God to have this formless blob sitting there for billions of years with no life on it. I believe a clear reading of the Bible is a 6000-year old Solar System and life, and an unknown age for the universe itself.

John McLarty does make the point that there are differing views of these things in Adventism, but I feel he is too inclusive, as he includes views which are not “Seventh-Day Adventist” per se, but held by SOME who call themselves Seventh-Day Adventist but who’s confessions prove otherwise. Remember La Sierra? They do not hold nor teach the “Seventh-Day Adventist” position, no matter that they are a Seventh-Day Adventist university staffed largely by Seventh-Day Adventists. Plus, he goes beyond the question to include his take on the problems with the various positions.