Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Arguments for the existence of God

2012-02-14T18:17:41Z

SusanP: /* Descartes' ontological argument */

'''Arguments for the existence of God''' involve carefully crafted reasoning to force an individual to accept the undeniable truth that [[God]] exists.

== Overview ==

Also known as '''proofs''' for God's existence, these arguments have not always come with full acceptance. Those opposed to [[natural theology]] claim that God's existence cannot be proven by human reason or the natural world, and that any attempt to do so runs the risk of becoming a [[God of the Gaps]] argument. However, [[Oxford]] scholar Roger Penrose states that [[materialism]] is now the faith of the gaps (see: [[Atheism of the gaps]]).<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9511/revessay.html</ref> Viewpoints vary, but responses tend to conclude that God can only be known by supernatural [[special revelation|revelation]] or [[Scripture alone]]. [[Karl Barth]] is a classic example of this as he believed that God is exclusively revealed in [[Jesus Christ]], and Jesus is only revealed in the [[Bible]]. Proponents of natural theology vary as well, but most conclude that the existence of God can be known through human reason although it is not salvific (not a saving knowledge of God). [[Thomas Aquinas]] is characteristic of this view, holding to the understanding that the created world reflects aspects of its creator that are apparent to all. Nonetheless, arguments for the existence of God have been formed throughout [[church history]] and continue to be used today, namely in the area of [[Christian apologetics]].

These arguments do not generally tell us much about God, and certainly not the details that is revealed in the Bible.
Rather, they argue for the basics, such that God<ref>The term "God" is a reference to the ultimate being, not necessarily the Christian God. There term is here capitalised as it is a reference to ''the'' ultimate being, not a counterfeit or lesser "god-like" being.</ref> exists, although some characteristics of God can be deduced from the nature of His creation.

==Cosmological arguments==
(the "unmade maker")

===Kalam cosmological argument===
The aim of this argument is to show that the universe had a beginning in the finite past. The argument battles against the existence of an [[infinite regression]] of past events which implies a universe that has infinitely existed. This argument implies the existence of a First Cause.

The form of the argument is:
# Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
# The universe began to exist.
# Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Note that the key phrase here is "''begins'' to exist". The question is not "whatever exists".

The atheistic counter argument has traditionally been to point 2, taking the position that the universe has always existed. With the advent of the [[Big Bang theory]] pointing towards a starting point, this line of defense has become rather shaky. It should also be noted that the Kalam argument removes one of the knee jerk reactions to any discussion on creation involving God which is "Then who created God?" Since God has no beginning, the question becomes meaningless. The Bible makes clear that God exists outside of our construct of time in many locations, including 1 Corinthians 2:7, 2 Timothy 1:9, and Titus 1:2.

===[[Thomism|Thomistic]] cosmological argument===
# What we observe in this universe is contingent (i.e. dependent, or conditional)
# A sequence of causally related contingent things cannot be infinite
# The sequence of causally dependent contingent things must be finite
Conclusion: There must be a first cause in the sequence of contingent causes

===Leibnizian cosmological argument===
The argument comes from a German polymath, Gottfriend Wilhelm Leibniz. Leibniz wrote, "The first question which should rightly be asked is this: why is there something rather than nothing?"

The argument runs as follows:
# Every existing thing has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own [[nature]] or in an external cause.
# If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.
# The universe is an existing thing.
# Therefore the explanation of the universe is God.

Some [[Atheism|atheists]] object to premise 2 in that God does not have to be the explanation, but that the universe can be what is called a necessary being (one which exists of its own nature and have no external cause). This was a suggestion of [[David Hume]] who demanded, "Why may not the material universe be the necessarily existent being?" (Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, part 9).
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is helpful. If Hume (and other atheists) is right in saying that the universe is a necessary being/thing, then this implies that the universe is eternal. This is exactly what the Kalam argument seeks to disprove. Thus, the Kalam is a valuable supplement to the Leibnizian argument.

==Teleological argument==
(the "unmoved mover")

Probably the most popular argument for God's existence is the teleological argument. Derived from the Greek word ''telos'', which refers to purpose or end, this argument hinges on the idea that the world gives evidence of being designed, and concludes that a divine designer must be posited to account for the orderly world we encounter. Although the teleological argument dates at least as far back as Plato, it is perhaps most memorable today from the work of [[William Paley]] (1743-1805), in his ''Natural Theology'' (1802). Recently, the teleological argument has gained renewed interest as a core element of the theory of [[Intelligent design|Intelligent Design]] and the related efforts to reconcile science and faith.

Although there are variations, the basic argument goes something like this:

# ''X'' is too complex to have occurred randomly or naturally.
# Therefore, ''X'' must have been created by an intelligent being, ''Y''.
# God is that intelligent being.
# Therefore, God exists.

Often, X is life, but there are other values for which the argument works. For example, scientists have found that if the universal constants (such as the speed of light or the Planck constant) were only a tiny bit different life could not exist.

===Comments on the teleological argument===
'''The first and second premises''' assume that one can infer the existence of intelligent design merely by examining an object. This is the same principle that archaeology uses to determine if, for example, a piece of stone is a stone tool.

The teleological argument assumes that because life is complex, it must have been designed. This is based on observations that complexity is not the outcome of random processes. Some object that life or objects are described as, “orderly” or “ordered”, and that this implies that an intelligent designer has ordered them. These objector claim that a system can be non-random or ordered simply because it is following impersonal physical processes, for example diamonds or snowflakes. However, such "ordered" systems do not have ''complexity'', which life has.

'''The third premise''' is rejected by some even if the first and second premises are accepted, as the implied designer (Y) might be an unknown force or mere demiurge, not God as God is commonly understood. It is argued in defense that the outside force through which Y came into being might then be explained as a more powerful being resulting in either an omnipotent being or infinite regression.

Critics often argue that the teleological argument would apply to the designer, arguing any designer must be at least as complex and purposeful as the designed object. This, they say, would create the absurdity of an infinite series of designers. However, the counter-argument of an "undesigned designer," akin to Aristotle's uncaused causer, is common. Furthermore, it has been argued that God is ''not'' complex, that is, He is not composed of many interrelated parts, so the complexity argument does not apply. However, such a response would refute itself, for how could something simple create something complex, intelligently?

==Anthropological argument==
The anthropological (anthropos meaning "man") argument is made on the basis of the condition of humanity, of mankind's basic moral standards and the thread a search for a higher being. It is related to the cosmological and teleological arguments in that it if man has a yearning for God and a conscience when offending him, ostensibly these have their origin and cause in God and not in man. The argument was perhaps most famously posited by [[Blaise Pascal]], who reasoned that it was better "bet" to believe in God than not to do so.

==Ontological argument==
The ontological argument attempts to prove God's existence through abstract reasoning alone. The argument is entirely ''[[a priori]],'' i.e. it involves no empirical evidence at all. Rather, the argument begins with an explication of the concept of God, and seeks to demonstrate that God exists on the basis of that concept alone.
{{cquote|"The argument is ingenious. It has the appearance of a linguistic trick, but it is a difficult task to say precisely what, if anything, is wrong with it. All forms of the argument make some association between three concepts: the concepts of God, of perfection, and of existence. Very roughly, they state that perfection is a part of the concept of God, and that perfection entails existence, and so that the concept of God entails God's existence." <ref>http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/ontological.html</ref>}}

The ontological argument was first formulated by [[Anselm]] of Canterbury (1033-1109), one of the great medieval philosopher-theologians, in his ''Proslogium'', Chapter 2. Anselm’s ontological argument rests on the identification of God as “that than which no greater can be conceived”. Once it is understood that God is that of which no greater can be conceived, Anselm suggests, it becomes evident that God must exist.

A problem with this argument is that it merely defines God into existence. It is unclear if the concept of being able to conceive of a perfect being has any connection to actual existence. Without being able to make this connection, the merit of the argument can become questionable.

===Descartes' ontological argument===
We have the idea of an infinitely perfect Being. Since we are finite, and everything around us is finite, the idea of an infinitely perfect Being could not have originated with us or with the nature around us. Therefore the idea of an infinitely perfect Being must have come from such a being - God. <ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes-ontological/</ref>
Of course, such a idea, is shoehorning the idea that something must be infinite.

==Free will argument==

* There can be no free will in a totally naturalistic system
* Free will exists
* Therefore God exists

Oxygen and hydrogen don't 'choose' to combine, they do so due to natural laws. In a naturalistic system every component that makes us up obeys similar natural laws. The concept of freewill or choice would therefore not exist.

=== Objections ===
Some challenge this argument on the basis that premises one and two have not been proven. They argue:
* In challenging premise 1, those ascribing to [[compatibilism]] believe that our experience of free will is still compatible with naturalistic causes even if the mechanism that causes this to be is not yet known and no viable explanation can be postulated apart from acting as if it is so.<ref>"The Astonishing Hypothesis is that "You," your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and '''free will''', are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules ... Free Will is located in or near the anterior cingulate sulcus." Francis Crick, ''The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search for the Soul'', Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, NY, 1993, p. 3, 268. </ref> Since this can not be disproven, it is possible that free will exists in a naturalistic system.
* In challenging premise 2, those ascribing to [[determinism]] simply believe that free will does not exist and no one has free will. Therefore there is no importance to the concept of God.

==Consciousness==

* Nature consists of a finite number of elements.
* We (our physical bodies) consist of those elements.
* The elements themselves which we consist of, and nature itself, have no consciousness.
* Despite our elements themselves having no consciousness, we do.
* Consciousness can not happen by chance, therefore there must be a being who supply that to us.
* Infinite regress of beings is illogical, therefore a single, uncaused causer must be the causer of consciousness.
* This uncaused causer of the conscience is [[God]]

===Objections===

* This argument fails to address [[gestalt consciousness]].
* [[Evolutionists]] typically argue that consciousness may happen by chance, and that for this reason, the argument is invalid. However, this is highly illogical and unlikely, so is yet another weak argument for atheism.
* Infinite regress is allowable both in modern mathematics and physics.
* The last point (that the uncaused causer is God) is unsupported unless it is taken as a statement of definition. If this is the case, the prior arguments are unnecessary.

== Argument from beauty ==

*[[Argument from beauty]]

==Resources==
* ''God, Are you There? Five Reasons God Exists and Three Reasons it Makes a Difference'', by [[William Lane Craig]] (from the [http://www.rzim.org RZIM] Critical Questions Booklet Series)
* ''Does God Exist? The Debate between Theists and Atheists'', by [[J.P. Moreland]] (theist) and [[Kai Nielsen]] (atheist). Prometheus Books, 1993.

==See also==

* [[Christian apologetics]]
* [[Apologetics]]
* [[Creation science]]
* [[Atheism]]
* [[Thomas Aquinas]]

==References==
*''This article is based off the Theopedia.com [http://www.theopedia.com/Arguments_for_the_existence_of_God article] which is in the public domain.''
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [http://www.apologetics.com/default.jsp?bodycontent=/articles/theistic_apologetics/kreeft-arguments.html Twenty Arguments For The Existence Of God], by [[Peter Kreeft]] & Ronald K. Tacelli
* [http://www.homestead.com/philofreligion/files/Theisticarguments.html Two Dozen (or so) Theistic Arguments] by [[Alvin Plantinga]]; Lecture presented at the 33rd Annual Philosophy Converence, Wheaton College, Oct 23-25, 1986
* [http://www.apologetics.com/default.jsp?bodycontent=/articles/theistic_apologetics/beck-cosmology.html The Cosmological Argument: A Current Bibliographical Appraisal], by W. David Beck
* [http://theologica.blogspot.com/2005/11/evil-as-evidence-for-god.html Evil as Evidence for God], by Justin Taylor
* [http://www.theologicalstudies.citymax.com/page/page/1572404.htm The 4 Primary Arguments for God's Existence], by Michael J. Vlach

===Multimedia===
* [http://biblicaltraining.org/audio/TH503/theology_1_11001.mp3 Theism; Proof of God's existence], by [[Bruce Ware]] (MP3)
* [http://www.veritas.org/mediafiles/Craig%20DoesGodExist%20Fresno.aiff.mp3 Does God Exist?] (MP3), by William Lane Craig
* [http://www.veritas.org/3.0_media/topics/17 Existence of God Audio Lectures] (The Veritas Forum)
* [http://www.believerschapeldallas.org/audio/slj-69_systematic-theology/002_SLJ_69_32K.mp3 Is There a Supreme Being?, or the Existence of God] (MP3), by S. Lewis Johnson
* [http://biblicaltraining.org/audio/TH601/apologetics_08c_MSTR.mov Cosmological Argument] (QuickTime), by Ronald Nash
'''ApologeticsPress.org''' (RealPlayer) 
* [http://www.apologeticspress.org/audio/rsf1-l05.rm The Case for the Existence of God] (Part I)
* [http://www.apologeticspress.org/audio/rsf1-l06.rm The Case for the Existence of God] (Part II)
* [http://www.apologeticspress.org/audio/rsf1-l07.rm The Case for the Existence of God] (Part III)

[[Category:Christian Apologetics]]
[[Category:Arguments for the existence of God| ]]
[[Category:Theology]]
[[Category:Philosophy]]

Arguments for the existence of God

2012-02-14T18:16:49Z

SusanP: /* Comments on the teleological argument */

'''Arguments for the existence of God''' involve carefully crafted reasoning to force an individual to accept the undeniable truth that [[God]] exists.

== Overview ==

Also known as '''proofs''' for God's existence, these arguments have not always come with full acceptance. Those opposed to [[natural theology]] claim that God's existence cannot be proven by human reason or the natural world, and that any attempt to do so runs the risk of becoming a [[God of the Gaps]] argument. However, [[Oxford]] scholar Roger Penrose states that [[materialism]] is now the faith of the gaps (see: [[Atheism of the gaps]]).<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/ftissues/ft9511/revessay.html</ref> Viewpoints vary, but responses tend to conclude that God can only be known by supernatural [[special revelation|revelation]] or [[Scripture alone]]. [[Karl Barth]] is a classic example of this as he believed that God is exclusively revealed in [[Jesus Christ]], and Jesus is only revealed in the [[Bible]]. Proponents of natural theology vary as well, but most conclude that the existence of God can be known through human reason although it is not salvific (not a saving knowledge of God). [[Thomas Aquinas]] is characteristic of this view, holding to the understanding that the created world reflects aspects of its creator that are apparent to all. Nonetheless, arguments for the existence of God have been formed throughout [[church history]] and continue to be used today, namely in the area of [[Christian apologetics]].

These arguments do not generally tell us much about God, and certainly not the details that is revealed in the Bible.
Rather, they argue for the basics, such that God<ref>The term "God" is a reference to the ultimate being, not necessarily the Christian God. There term is here capitalised as it is a reference to ''the'' ultimate being, not a counterfeit or lesser "god-like" being.</ref> exists, although some characteristics of God can be deduced from the nature of His creation.

==Cosmological arguments==
(the "unmade maker")

===Kalam cosmological argument===
The aim of this argument is to show that the universe had a beginning in the finite past. The argument battles against the existence of an [[infinite regression]] of past events which implies a universe that has infinitely existed. This argument implies the existence of a First Cause.

The form of the argument is:
# Whatever begins to exist has a cause.
# The universe began to exist.
# Therefore, the universe has a cause.
Note that the key phrase here is "''begins'' to exist". The question is not "whatever exists".

The atheistic counter argument has traditionally been to point 2, taking the position that the universe has always existed. With the advent of the [[Big Bang theory]] pointing towards a starting point, this line of defense has become rather shaky. It should also be noted that the Kalam argument removes one of the knee jerk reactions to any discussion on creation involving God which is "Then who created God?" Since God has no beginning, the question becomes meaningless. The Bible makes clear that God exists outside of our construct of time in many locations, including 1 Corinthians 2:7, 2 Timothy 1:9, and Titus 1:2.

===[[Thomism|Thomistic]] cosmological argument===
# What we observe in this universe is contingent (i.e. dependent, or conditional)
# A sequence of causally related contingent things cannot be infinite
# The sequence of causally dependent contingent things must be finite
Conclusion: There must be a first cause in the sequence of contingent causes

===Leibnizian cosmological argument===
The argument comes from a German polymath, Gottfriend Wilhelm Leibniz. Leibniz wrote, "The first question which should rightly be asked is this: why is there something rather than nothing?"

The argument runs as follows:
# Every existing thing has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own [[nature]] or in an external cause.
# If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.
# The universe is an existing thing.
# Therefore the explanation of the universe is God.

Some [[Atheism|atheists]] object to premise 2 in that God does not have to be the explanation, but that the universe can be what is called a necessary being (one which exists of its own nature and have no external cause). This was a suggestion of [[David Hume]] who demanded, "Why may not the material universe be the necessarily existent being?" (Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion, part 9).
The Kalam Cosmological Argument is helpful. If Hume (and other atheists) is right in saying that the universe is a necessary being/thing, then this implies that the universe is eternal. This is exactly what the Kalam argument seeks to disprove. Thus, the Kalam is a valuable supplement to the Leibnizian argument.

==Teleological argument==
(the "unmoved mover")

Probably the most popular argument for God's existence is the teleological argument. Derived from the Greek word ''telos'', which refers to purpose or end, this argument hinges on the idea that the world gives evidence of being designed, and concludes that a divine designer must be posited to account for the orderly world we encounter. Although the teleological argument dates at least as far back as Plato, it is perhaps most memorable today from the work of [[William Paley]] (1743-1805), in his ''Natural Theology'' (1802). Recently, the teleological argument has gained renewed interest as a core element of the theory of [[Intelligent design|Intelligent Design]] and the related efforts to reconcile science and faith.

Although there are variations, the basic argument goes something like this:

# ''X'' is too complex to have occurred randomly or naturally.
# Therefore, ''X'' must have been created by an intelligent being, ''Y''.
# God is that intelligent being.
# Therefore, God exists.

Often, X is life, but there are other values for which the argument works. For example, scientists have found that if the universal constants (such as the speed of light or the Planck constant) were only a tiny bit different life could not exist.

===Comments on the teleological argument===
'''The first and second premises''' assume that one can infer the existence of intelligent design merely by examining an object. This is the same principle that archaeology uses to determine if, for example, a piece of stone is a stone tool.

The teleological argument assumes that because life is complex, it must have been designed. This is based on observations that complexity is not the outcome of random processes. Some object that life or objects are described as, “orderly” or “ordered”, and that this implies that an intelligent designer has ordered them. These objector claim that a system can be non-random or ordered simply because it is following impersonal physical processes, for example diamonds or snowflakes. However, such "ordered" systems do not have ''complexity'', which life has.

'''The third premise''' is rejected by some even if the first and second premises are accepted, as the implied designer (Y) might be an unknown force or mere demiurge, not God as God is commonly understood. It is argued in defense that the outside force through which Y came into being might then be explained as a more powerful being resulting in either an omnipotent being or infinite regression.

Critics often argue that the teleological argument would apply to the designer, arguing any designer must be at least as complex and purposeful as the designed object. This, they say, would create the absurdity of an infinite series of designers. However, the counter-argument of an "undesigned designer," akin to Aristotle's uncaused causer, is common. Furthermore, it has been argued that God is ''not'' complex, that is, He is not composed of many interrelated parts, so the complexity argument does not apply. However, such a response would refute itself, for how could something simple create something complex, intelligently?

==Anthropological argument==
The anthropological (anthropos meaning "man") argument is made on the basis of the condition of humanity, of mankind's basic moral standards and the thread a search for a higher being. It is related to the cosmological and teleological arguments in that it if man has a yearning for God and a conscience when offending him, ostensibly these have their origin and cause in God and not in man. The argument was perhaps most famously posited by [[Blaise Pascal]], who reasoned that it was better "bet" to believe in God than not to do so.

==Ontological argument==
The ontological argument attempts to prove God's existence through abstract reasoning alone. The argument is entirely ''[[a priori]],'' i.e. it involves no empirical evidence at all. Rather, the argument begins with an explication of the concept of God, and seeks to demonstrate that God exists on the basis of that concept alone.
{{cquote|"The argument is ingenious. It has the appearance of a linguistic trick, but it is a difficult task to say precisely what, if anything, is wrong with it. All forms of the argument make some association between three concepts: the concepts of God, of perfection, and of existence. Very roughly, they state that perfection is a part of the concept of God, and that perfection entails existence, and so that the concept of God entails God's existence." <ref>http://www.philosophyofreligion.info/ontological.html</ref>}}

The ontological argument was first formulated by [[Anselm]] of Canterbury (1033-1109), one of the great medieval philosopher-theologians, in his ''Proslogium'', Chapter 2. Anselm’s ontological argument rests on the identification of God as “that than which no greater can be conceived”. Once it is understood that God is that of which no greater can be conceived, Anselm suggests, it becomes evident that God must exist.

A problem with this argument is that it merely defines God into existence. It is unclear if the concept of being able to conceive of a perfect being has any connection to actual existence. Without being able to make this connection, the merit of the argument can become questionable.

===Descartes' ontological argument===
We have the idea of an infinitely perfect Being. Since we are finite, and everything around us is finite, the idea of an infinitely perfect Being could not have originated with us or with the nature around us. Therefore the idea of an infinitely perfect Being must have come from such a being - God. <ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descartes-ontological/</ref>

==Free will argument==

* There can be no free will in a totally naturalistic system
* Free will exists
* Therefore God exists

Oxygen and hydrogen don't 'choose' to combine, they do so due to natural laws. In a naturalistic system every component that makes us up obeys similar natural laws. The concept of freewill or choice would therefore not exist.

=== Objections ===
Some challenge this argument on the basis that premises one and two have not been proven. They argue:
* In challenging premise 1, those ascribing to [[compatibilism]] believe that our experience of free will is still compatible with naturalistic causes even if the mechanism that causes this to be is not yet known and no viable explanation can be postulated apart from acting as if it is so.<ref>"The Astonishing Hypothesis is that "You," your joys and your sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and '''free will''', are in fact no more than the behavior of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules ... Free Will is located in or near the anterior cingulate sulcus." Francis Crick, ''The Astonishing Hypothesis: The Scientific Search for the Soul'', Charles Scribner's Sons, New York, NY, 1993, p. 3, 268. </ref> Since this can not be disproven, it is possible that free will exists in a naturalistic system.
* In challenging premise 2, those ascribing to [[determinism]] simply believe that free will does not exist and no one has free will. Therefore there is no importance to the concept of God.

==Consciousness==

* Nature consists of a finite number of elements.
* We (our physical bodies) consist of those elements.
* The elements themselves which we consist of, and nature itself, have no consciousness.
* Despite our elements themselves having no consciousness, we do.
* Consciousness can not happen by chance, therefore there must be a being who supply that to us.
* Infinite regress of beings is illogical, therefore a single, uncaused causer must be the causer of consciousness.
* This uncaused causer of the conscience is [[God]]

===Objections===

* This argument fails to address [[gestalt consciousness]].
* [[Evolutionists]] typically argue that consciousness may happen by chance, and that for this reason, the argument is invalid. However, this is highly illogical and unlikely, so is yet another weak argument for atheism.
* Infinite regress is allowable both in modern mathematics and physics.
* The last point (that the uncaused causer is God) is unsupported unless it is taken as a statement of definition. If this is the case, the prior arguments are unnecessary.

== Argument from beauty ==

*[[Argument from beauty]]

==Resources==
* ''God, Are you There? Five Reasons God Exists and Three Reasons it Makes a Difference'', by [[William Lane Craig]] (from the [http://www.rzim.org RZIM] Critical Questions Booklet Series)
* ''Does God Exist? The Debate between Theists and Atheists'', by [[J.P. Moreland]] (theist) and [[Kai Nielsen]] (atheist). Prometheus Books, 1993.

==See also==

* [[Christian apologetics]]
* [[Apologetics]]
* [[Creation science]]
* [[Atheism]]
* [[Thomas Aquinas]]

==References==
*''This article is based off the Theopedia.com [http://www.theopedia.com/Arguments_for_the_existence_of_God article] which is in the public domain.''
{{reflist|2}}

==External links==
* [http://www.apologetics.com/default.jsp?bodycontent=/articles/theistic_apologetics/kreeft-arguments.html Twenty Arguments For The Existence Of God], by [[Peter Kreeft]] & Ronald K. Tacelli
* [http://www.homestead.com/philofreligion/files/Theisticarguments.html Two Dozen (or so) Theistic Arguments] by [[Alvin Plantinga]]; Lecture presented at the 33rd Annual Philosophy Converence, Wheaton College, Oct 23-25, 1986
* [http://www.apologetics.com/default.jsp?bodycontent=/articles/theistic_apologetics/beck-cosmology.html The Cosmological Argument: A Current Bibliographical Appraisal], by W. David Beck
* [http://theologica.blogspot.com/2005/11/evil-as-evidence-for-god.html Evil as Evidence for God], by Justin Taylor
* [http://www.theologicalstudies.citymax.com/page/page/1572404.htm The 4 Primary Arguments for God's Existence], by Michael J. Vlach

===Multimedia===
* [http://biblicaltraining.org/audio/TH503/theology_1_11001.mp3 Theism; Proof of God's existence], by [[Bruce Ware]] (MP3)
* [http://www.veritas.org/mediafiles/Craig%20DoesGodExist%20Fresno.aiff.mp3 Does God Exist?] (MP3), by William Lane Craig
* [http://www.veritas.org/3.0_media/topics/17 Existence of God Audio Lectures] (The Veritas Forum)
* [http://www.believerschapeldallas.org/audio/slj-69_systematic-theology/002_SLJ_69_32K.mp3 Is There a Supreme Being?, or the Existence of God] (MP3), by S. Lewis Johnson
* [http://biblicaltraining.org/audio/TH601/apologetics_08c_MSTR.mov Cosmological Argument] (QuickTime), by Ronald Nash
'''ApologeticsPress.org''' (RealPlayer) 
* [http://www.apologeticspress.org/audio/rsf1-l05.rm The Case for the Existence of God] (Part I)
* [http://www.apologeticspress.org/audio/rsf1-l06.rm The Case for the Existence of God] (Part II)
* [http://www.apologeticspress.org/audio/rsf1-l07.rm The Case for the Existence of God] (Part III)

[[Category:Christian Apologetics]]
[[Category:Arguments for the existence of God| ]]
[[Category:Theology]]
[[Category:Philosophy]]

Flood Geology

2012-02-14T18:11:06Z

SusanP: /* Evidence */

'''Flood geology''' is the study of the Earth's geology from the point of view that the Earth's geology was radically redefined by a [[Great Flood|global flood]] in the relatively recent past, as recorded in [[Genesis]], as well as the scores of flood stories in other cultures throughout the world.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/570/</ref>

== Genesis Flood account ==
Genesis provides the most detailed account of the global deluge, including specific dates, measurements, and even some key geological events during the flood. Consequently, flood geologists use it as a starting point for understanding the events of the deluge. Based on the Genesis account, flood geologists argue that the flood resulted from subterranean water erupting to the surface ("the springs of the great deep burst forth" <ref>Genesis 7:11, NIV</ref>), combined with 40 days and nights of rain. That is impossible, as the only way water can escape from the deep earth, is as steam, which would proceed to sterilize the entire planet. Furthermore, the atmosphere can only hold up to 160,000 liters of water per day, far lower than required to "cover the highest mountains". Although the rain stopped after 40 days, the flood waters continued to rise for 150 days, and lasted just over a year before Noah and the others on the boat were able to leave. During the flood, there was massive tectonic activity, including some land rising up and other land dropping, such that the waters ended up in newly-deepened oceans. All the animals and birds (except those on the ark), and large numbers of sea creatures perished, and many of them were buried so quickly that they became fossils, accounting for the vast majority of fossils existing today.

== Evidence ==
Flood geologists base their belief in a relatively recent global deluge on several strands of evidence. While none of these strands alone is sufficient to ''prove'' that a global flood occurred.

=== Sedimentary rock ===
Some sedimentary rocks are formed by sand and other sediments which precipitate from solution, and undergo [[lithification]]. Although only about 5% of the earth's rocks are sedimentary, 75%-80% of the Earth's land area is covered in sedimentary rock.[http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/distance/gg101/Programs/program21%20SedimentaryRocks/program21.html] Therefore, flood geologists point out, there is irrefutable evidence that at least 75% of the Earth's land was once covered in water.

Cross-bedded dune sandstone was formed only on dry land, and only occurs in 7 distinct strata, separated by water-deposited layers.

=== Sufficient water ===
There is enough water on Earth today to cover the entire surface to a depth of 2.7 kilometres (1.7 miles), if the surface was levelled out.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter12.pdf Noah’s Flood—what about all that water?], Chapter 4 of the ''Creation Answers Book'', Dr. Don Batten (Ed.)</ref> Continents emerge because the average ocean depth is 3.7 km.<ref>http://www.mos.org/oceans/planet/features.html</ref>. Flood geologists argue that geological activity during and after the flood lowered the ocean basins, causing water to flow from the continents into the basins, and leaving dry land.<ref>{{Bible ref|Psalms|104|6-9|version=NASB}} "You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. '''The mountains rose; the valleys sank down''' To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth."</ref>However, such an event would have generated earthquakes of unimaginable magnitudes, causing further salination of what remains of the land.<ref>http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/natural-disasters/tsunami-profile/</ref>

=== Fossils ===
Fossilization requires rapid burial in a sedimentary solution, and subsequent rapid lithification of the solution. Slow burial does not result in fossilization, because the remains decay prior to being fossilized. Therefore, every fossil was buried in rapidly deposited sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone.

=== Fossil fuels ===
Fossil fuel formation requires the burial of enormous amounts of organic matter under a sedimentary solution, and the application of heat and pressure. Slow burial processes do not produce fossil fuels, because the organic matter decays prior to conversion into a fossil fuel. Therefore, all fossil fuels on earth were quickly buried under sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone;

Similar processes have been observed in [[Spirit Lake]] following the eruption of [[Mount St. Helens]] in 1980.

=== Rock strata ===
Most sedimentary rocks are layered, forming sharply defined lines at varying depths. Were these formed over long periods, erosion would have softened these lines. The sharpness of the lines implies rapid deposition and lithification.

=== Pure sedimentary layers ===
If sedimentary layers were laid down over millenia, they would have experienced mixing. However, many rock strata are pure -- for example, the [[St. Peter Sandstone]], covering 500,000 sq miles of the United States, is 99.94% pure silica. While uniformitarian scientists state that it was deposited by the shore of a sea, they cannot explain how it remained so pure if it was laid out over a long period of time. However, the sorting processes of [[liquefaction]], consistent with a global flood, can make such an explanation. Despite that, it ignores the fact that each layer has the time to be compressed by the sediment into stone, and thus not mix. In the event of a catastrophic global flood, the sediment would have mixed, because there was no time to turn to stone.

=== Submarine canyons ===
Canyons can be found under the sea at the end of many major world rivers, including the Congo, Amazon, Ganges, and Hudson. They extend for thousands of miles underwater, thousands of feet under the sea; they are as deep as the Grand Canyon in places, and although not well understood by the mainstream scientific community, they are generally understood to have developed when sea-levels were significantly lower than today. Flood geologists argue that as the continents divided and the flood subsided, these major rivers drained the new continents, and the water flowed into the new low-lying areas, which would fill to become seas, leaving the sediments to dry out of their [[liquefaction|liquefied]] state. Secular scientists respond by citing sediment flows, which have the ability to act as a stream of sand, that has the ability to over millions of years, erode the underwater continental shelf.

=== Land canyons ===
As explanation for great land canyons such as the [[Grand Canyon]], flood geologists point to canyon formation events such as the catastrophic hot mud slides observed during the eruption of Mt. St. Helens. One particular hot mud slide at Mt. St. Helens carved a canyon 140 ft. deep and 17 miles long in a single day. Only a thin creek remains at the bottom of the canyon today, which would likely be interpreted as having carved the canyon "over millions of years," if it were not known first-hand that the canyon was carved in a single day. However, such an assumption relies on water moving at impossible speeds, for an extended period of time. This would have cut the ark into bits, as though it was under a water cutter.

=== Ancient accounts of a navigable Atlantic ===
Plato's ''Timaeus'' states:
: "In those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles [Straight of Gibraltar] ... and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent."<ref>http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html</ref>

=== Plate tectonics ===

A clear problem with a global flood is that of repopulation: after the flood, very few non-marine species would survive. In particular, most of those observed today could not possibly have survived - this includes all insects, the vast majority of birds (Some species of albatross may have survived), the vast majority of mammals, and possibly freshwater fish depending on the salinity of the floodwaters.

Flood geology models include a means for these species to survive, most typically via artificial assistance - an Ark, as described in [[Genesis]].

An often-proposed explanation is that of continental drift - that the continents may once have been united in a single supercontinent, which broke into fragments and drifted into the formations seen today during the time between the start of repopulation and today. Continental drift in principle is nearly universally accepted by all geologists, with flood geology differing only in time: While conventional geology estimates the breakup of the supercontinent to have occurred over approximately sixty million years, flood geologists mostly claim that the process occurred during the flood year, whilst a few claim that it occurred at the time of [[Peleg]].

Flood geologists propose several models which would explain how continental drift could proceed at the rapid pace required to allow the rearrangement of continents during or shortly after the flood, then slow to the currently observed rate. One of the best known of these is the runaway subduction model of Dr. [[John Baumgardner]].<ref>http://www.globalflood.org/platetec/about.html</ref>

=== Total destruction ===

Flood geologists argue that the scale of destruction of the Flood, especially if rapid plate tectonics was involved, would mean almost certain total destruction of the pre-Flood world, including any evidence of civilisations predating the Flood, along with the destruction of the [[Garden of Eden]].
After the Flood, and particularly after the [[Tower of Babel]], new civilisations developed, that either survive to this day or that we find archaeological evidence of today.

== Dating ==

Flood geologists date the flood to around 2350 B.C., based on [[biblical chronology]].
They argue that archaeological dates which purport to show civilisations and artifacts being older than the Flood (see Criticisms) are incorrect because they are based on the presumption that none of these methods would be altered by the effects of a global flood in such a way as to render conclusions drawn from them invalid.<ref>One example is Carbon Dating which is calibrated according to known background levels of C14 in the atmosphere, but this calibration does not account for likely altered levels due to extensive volcanism during the Flood. See [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5026/ Carbon dating into the future] (Creation Ministries International).</ref> [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetists]] state that the biblical flood would have occurred before the Egyptian pyramids were built and that the commonly cited Egyptian chronology is errant and built upon poor foundations. <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2503</ref> Also, Christian apologists argue that ancient Sumerian history supports the flood account given in the Bible. <ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a009.html</ref> In addition, ancient Sumerian literature speaks of a world wide flood. <ref>http://home.comcast.net/~chris.s/sumer-faq.html#A1.6</ref>

[[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists also state that the chronology used to dispute a worldwide flood based on tree rings is invalid.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=381</ref> <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp</ref><ref>http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_treerings.php</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/21066.htm</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/26/26_1a.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/sum29_4.html</ref>

==Creationist Scientists Defense of Flood Geology ==
Creationist scientists assert that there are multiple lines of evidence from the field of geology showing that flood geology is correct. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationism.org/topbar/geology.htm</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref><ref>http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html</ref><ref>http://globalflood.org/</ref> Creationist scientists also state that there was enough water to cause a worldwide flood and various other objections to a worldwide flood are invalid. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/flood.asp</ref> Despite that, Creation Scientists cannot prove Flood Geology, without using God of the blank arguments.

== Common Criticisms ==

Critics claim that there is not enough water on the Earth to actually cause a worldwide flood, or ever has been; in addition, many archaeological records (notably tree-ring records and the records of various early civilizations, including Egypt and Sumeria) stretch through the period of time most often given as that of the Great Flood, without any actual reference to such an event.<ref>For a summary of other criticisms, see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html</ref>

== History ==

Until the rise of uniformitarian [[geology]] in the early 19th century, most geologists accepted the Noahic deluge as part of geology. But [[James Hutton]] proposed in 1795 that geology ought to be based on the processes that we see happening now, thereby automatically ruling the Flood out of consideration. During the 19th century a number of "[[scriptural geologist]]s" held out against the rising acceptance of Hutton's principles, but they fought a losing battle and interest in flood geology virtually died out by the end of the 19th century.

However, in the second half of the 20th century, interest was revived amongst people keen to show that the biblical account was correct, and a small but growing number of geologists are now studying this field again, although the vast majority of geologists still reject the idea of a global flood on Earth. At the same time, there has been a recent resurgence of [[catastrophism]] in geological interpretation. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref>

Interest in Flood Geology was stimulated by the 1961 publication of ''[[The Genesis Flood]]'', by [[Henry Morris]] and [[John Whitcomb]]. Dr. Henry Morris had a number of arguments for geology supporting a worldwide flood. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/842/</ref>
{{Creation vs. evolution}}
== External Links ==
*[http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54 Geology and the Flood] by [[Henry Morris]], Ph.D.
*[http://www.creationism.org/symposium/symp3no2.htm Stratigraphic Evidence of the Flood] by Stuart E. Nevins.
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/flood_models.asp Flood models: the need for an integrated approach] by A.C. McIntosh, T. Edmondson & S. Taylor.
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html#anchorgeologycreationist Global Flood Geology from Creation Science Perspectives]
*[http://www.biblicalgeology.net/content/view/46 Biblical Geology: Properly Understanding the Rocks]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category: Young Earth Creationism]]
[[Category: Geology]]

Flood Geology

2012-02-14T18:09:40Z

SusanP: /* Land canyons */

'''Flood geology''' is the study of the Earth's geology from the point of view that the Earth's geology was radically redefined by a [[Great Flood|global flood]] in the relatively recent past, as recorded in [[Genesis]], as well as the scores of flood stories in other cultures throughout the world.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/570/</ref>

== Genesis Flood account ==
Genesis provides the most detailed account of the global deluge, including specific dates, measurements, and even some key geological events during the flood. Consequently, flood geologists use it as a starting point for understanding the events of the deluge. Based on the Genesis account, flood geologists argue that the flood resulted from subterranean water erupting to the surface ("the springs of the great deep burst forth" <ref>Genesis 7:11, NIV</ref>), combined with 40 days and nights of rain. That is impossible, as the only way water can escape from the deep earth, is as steam, which would proceed to sterilize the entire planet. Furthermore, the atmosphere can only hold up to 160,000 liters of water per day, far lower than required to "cover the highest mountains". Although the rain stopped after 40 days, the flood waters continued to rise for 150 days, and lasted just over a year before Noah and the others on the boat were able to leave. During the flood, there was massive tectonic activity, including some land rising up and other land dropping, such that the waters ended up in newly-deepened oceans. All the animals and birds (except those on the ark), and large numbers of sea creatures perished, and many of them were buried so quickly that they became fossils, accounting for the vast majority of fossils existing today.

== Evidence ==
Flood geologists base their belief in a relatively recent global deluge on several strands of evidence. While none of these strands alone is sufficient to ''prove'' that a global flood occurred, flood geologists argue that a global deluge is the most reasonable and [[parsimonious]] explanation for the evidence.

=== Sedimentary rock ===
Some sedimentary rocks are formed by sand and other sediments which precipitate from solution, and undergo [[lithification]]. Although only about 5% of the earth's rocks are sedimentary, 75%-80% of the Earth's land area is covered in sedimentary rock.[http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/distance/gg101/Programs/program21%20SedimentaryRocks/program21.html] Therefore, flood geologists point out, there is irrefutable evidence that at least 75% of the Earth's land was once covered in water.

Cross-bedded dune sandstone was formed only on dry land, and only occurs in 7 distinct strata, separated by water-deposited layers.

=== Sufficient water ===
There is enough water on Earth today to cover the entire surface to a depth of 2.7 kilometres (1.7 miles), if the surface was levelled out.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter12.pdf Noah’s Flood—what about all that water?], Chapter 4 of the ''Creation Answers Book'', Dr. Don Batten (Ed.)</ref> Continents emerge because the average ocean depth is 3.7 km.<ref>http://www.mos.org/oceans/planet/features.html</ref>. Flood geologists argue that geological activity during and after the flood lowered the ocean basins, causing water to flow from the continents into the basins, and leaving dry land.<ref>{{Bible ref|Psalms|104|6-9|version=NASB}} "You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. '''The mountains rose; the valleys sank down''' To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth."</ref>However, such an event would have generated earthquakes of unimaginable magnitudes, causing further salination of what remains of the land.<ref>http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/natural-disasters/tsunami-profile/</ref>

=== Fossils ===
Fossilization requires rapid burial in a sedimentary solution, and subsequent rapid lithification of the solution. Slow burial does not result in fossilization, because the remains decay prior to being fossilized. Therefore, every fossil was buried in rapidly deposited sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone.

=== Fossil fuels ===
Fossil fuel formation requires the burial of enormous amounts of organic matter under a sedimentary solution, and the application of heat and pressure. Slow burial processes do not produce fossil fuels, because the organic matter decays prior to conversion into a fossil fuel. Therefore, all fossil fuels on earth were quickly buried under sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone;

Similar processes have been observed in [[Spirit Lake]] following the eruption of [[Mount St. Helens]] in 1980.

=== Rock strata ===
Most sedimentary rocks are layered, forming sharply defined lines at varying depths. Were these formed over long periods, erosion would have softened these lines. The sharpness of the lines implies rapid deposition and lithification.

=== Pure sedimentary layers ===
If sedimentary layers were laid down over millenia, they would have experienced mixing. However, many rock strata are pure -- for example, the [[St. Peter Sandstone]], covering 500,000 sq miles of the United States, is 99.94% pure silica. While uniformitarian scientists state that it was deposited by the shore of a sea, they cannot explain how it remained so pure if it was laid out over a long period of time. However, the sorting processes of [[liquefaction]], consistent with a global flood, can make such an explanation. Despite that, it ignores the fact that each layer has the time to be compressed by the sediment into stone, and thus not mix. In the event of a catastrophic global flood, the sediment would have mixed, because there was no time to turn to stone.

=== Submarine canyons ===
Canyons can be found under the sea at the end of many major world rivers, including the Congo, Amazon, Ganges, and Hudson. They extend for thousands of miles underwater, thousands of feet under the sea; they are as deep as the Grand Canyon in places, and although not well understood by the mainstream scientific community, they are generally understood to have developed when sea-levels were significantly lower than today. Flood geologists argue that as the continents divided and the flood subsided, these major rivers drained the new continents, and the water flowed into the new low-lying areas, which would fill to become seas, leaving the sediments to dry out of their [[liquefaction|liquefied]] state. Secular scientists respond by citing sediment flows, which have the ability to act as a stream of sand, that has the ability to over millions of years, erode the underwater continental shelf.

=== Land canyons ===
As explanation for great land canyons such as the [[Grand Canyon]], flood geologists point to canyon formation events such as the catastrophic hot mud slides observed during the eruption of Mt. St. Helens. One particular hot mud slide at Mt. St. Helens carved a canyon 140 ft. deep and 17 miles long in a single day. Only a thin creek remains at the bottom of the canyon today, which would likely be interpreted as having carved the canyon "over millions of years," if it were not known first-hand that the canyon was carved in a single day. However, such an assumption relies on water moving at impossible speeds, for an extended period of time. This would have cut the ark into bits, as though it was under a water cutter.

=== Ancient accounts of a navigable Atlantic ===
Plato's ''Timaeus'' states:
: "In those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles [Straight of Gibraltar] ... and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent."<ref>http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html</ref>

=== Plate tectonics ===

A clear problem with a global flood is that of repopulation: after the flood, very few non-marine species would survive. In particular, most of those observed today could not possibly have survived - this includes all insects, the vast majority of birds (Some species of albatross may have survived), the vast majority of mammals, and possibly freshwater fish depending on the salinity of the floodwaters.

Flood geology models include a means for these species to survive, most typically via artificial assistance - an Ark, as described in [[Genesis]].

An often-proposed explanation is that of continental drift - that the continents may once have been united in a single supercontinent, which broke into fragments and drifted into the formations seen today during the time between the start of repopulation and today. Continental drift in principle is nearly universally accepted by all geologists, with flood geology differing only in time: While conventional geology estimates the breakup of the supercontinent to have occurred over approximately sixty million years, flood geologists mostly claim that the process occurred during the flood year, whilst a few claim that it occurred at the time of [[Peleg]].

Flood geologists propose several models which would explain how continental drift could proceed at the rapid pace required to allow the rearrangement of continents during or shortly after the flood, then slow to the currently observed rate. One of the best known of these is the runaway subduction model of Dr. [[John Baumgardner]].<ref>http://www.globalflood.org/platetec/about.html</ref>

=== Total destruction ===

Flood geologists argue that the scale of destruction of the Flood, especially if rapid plate tectonics was involved, would mean almost certain total destruction of the pre-Flood world, including any evidence of civilisations predating the Flood, along with the destruction of the [[Garden of Eden]].
After the Flood, and particularly after the [[Tower of Babel]], new civilisations developed, that either survive to this day or that we find archaeological evidence of today.

== Dating ==

Flood geologists date the flood to around 2350 B.C., based on [[biblical chronology]].
They argue that archaeological dates which purport to show civilisations and artifacts being older than the Flood (see Criticisms) are incorrect because they are based on the presumption that none of these methods would be altered by the effects of a global flood in such a way as to render conclusions drawn from them invalid.<ref>One example is Carbon Dating which is calibrated according to known background levels of C14 in the atmosphere, but this calibration does not account for likely altered levels due to extensive volcanism during the Flood. See [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5026/ Carbon dating into the future] (Creation Ministries International).</ref> [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetists]] state that the biblical flood would have occurred before the Egyptian pyramids were built and that the commonly cited Egyptian chronology is errant and built upon poor foundations. <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2503</ref> Also, Christian apologists argue that ancient Sumerian history supports the flood account given in the Bible. <ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a009.html</ref> In addition, ancient Sumerian literature speaks of a world wide flood. <ref>http://home.comcast.net/~chris.s/sumer-faq.html#A1.6</ref>

[[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists also state that the chronology used to dispute a worldwide flood based on tree rings is invalid.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=381</ref> <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp</ref><ref>http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_treerings.php</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/21066.htm</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/26/26_1a.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/sum29_4.html</ref>

==Creationist Scientists Defense of Flood Geology ==
Creationist scientists assert that there are multiple lines of evidence from the field of geology showing that flood geology is correct. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationism.org/topbar/geology.htm</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref><ref>http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html</ref><ref>http://globalflood.org/</ref> Creationist scientists also state that there was enough water to cause a worldwide flood and various other objections to a worldwide flood are invalid. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/flood.asp</ref> Despite that, Creation Scientists cannot prove Flood Geology, without using God of the blank arguments.

== Common Criticisms ==

Critics claim that there is not enough water on the Earth to actually cause a worldwide flood, or ever has been; in addition, many archaeological records (notably tree-ring records and the records of various early civilizations, including Egypt and Sumeria) stretch through the period of time most often given as that of the Great Flood, without any actual reference to such an event.<ref>For a summary of other criticisms, see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html</ref>

== History ==

Until the rise of uniformitarian [[geology]] in the early 19th century, most geologists accepted the Noahic deluge as part of geology. But [[James Hutton]] proposed in 1795 that geology ought to be based on the processes that we see happening now, thereby automatically ruling the Flood out of consideration. During the 19th century a number of "[[scriptural geologist]]s" held out against the rising acceptance of Hutton's principles, but they fought a losing battle and interest in flood geology virtually died out by the end of the 19th century.

However, in the second half of the 20th century, interest was revived amongst people keen to show that the biblical account was correct, and a small but growing number of geologists are now studying this field again, although the vast majority of geologists still reject the idea of a global flood on Earth. At the same time, there has been a recent resurgence of [[catastrophism]] in geological interpretation. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref>

Interest in Flood Geology was stimulated by the 1961 publication of ''[[The Genesis Flood]]'', by [[Henry Morris]] and [[John Whitcomb]]. Dr. Henry Morris had a number of arguments for geology supporting a worldwide flood. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/842/</ref>
{{Creation vs. evolution}}
== External Links ==
*[http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54 Geology and the Flood] by [[Henry Morris]], Ph.D.
*[http://www.creationism.org/symposium/symp3no2.htm Stratigraphic Evidence of the Flood] by Stuart E. Nevins.
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/flood_models.asp Flood models: the need for an integrated approach] by A.C. McIntosh, T. Edmondson & S. Taylor.
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html#anchorgeologycreationist Global Flood Geology from Creation Science Perspectives]
*[http://www.biblicalgeology.net/content/view/46 Biblical Geology: Properly Understanding the Rocks]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category: Young Earth Creationism]]
[[Category: Geology]]

Causes of the Great Flood

2012-02-14T18:06:15Z

SusanP: /* Fountains of the Great Deep */

[[Image:Michelangeloflood.jpg|thumb|right|250px|Michelangelo's depiction of the Great Flood]]

One of the largest challenges for [[Young Earth Creationists]] is providing a valid scientific explanation for the '''causes of the Great Flood'''. This flood was the means of God's judgment on mankind because of the evil in their hearts and actions. Though there is some [[Flood geology|geological evidence]] for a massive worldwide flood, one question remains: where did all that water come from?

==Comet theory==
One theory, proposed by Bruce Masse, posits that a massive comet splashed down in the [[Indian Ocean]] thousands of years ago, causing a worldwide flood that nearly wiped out all life on earth. Masse's claim relies heavily on not only the flood myths of different cultures, but also on the fact that 70% of the earth is covered by water, making observation of a crater at the bottom of the Indian Ocean very difficult.

However, along with Ted Bryant of the University of Wollongong, Masse began looking for geological signs of a "megatsunami". Scanning through satellite images of the earth, Masse and his team discovered massive chevrons — wedge-shaped sandy structures that are sometimes packed with deep-oceanic microfossils dredged up by the tsunami — 4 miles into the coast of [[Madagascar]]. Masse and his team contend that this evidence is proof of both the comet impact and the global flood.<ref>[http://discovermagazine.com/2007/nov/did-a-comet-cause-the-great-flood/article_view?b_start:int=1&-C= "Did a Comet Cause the Great Floor?", ''Discover Magazine'']</ref>
Unfortunately, such a impact event, would have sent thousands of cubic meters of dust into the air, rendering photosynthesis impossible. This also makes the flood redundant.

==Vapor Canopy theory==
The vapor canopy theory was originally posited by Isaac Vail in 1874.<ref>[http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/canopy.html#top Evidence for God]</ref> It is one of the most common amongst young earth creationists. The theory states that the earth originally had a canopy of water vapor<ref>Though some creationists claim it was a layer of ice</ref> above the troposphere. The canopy could account for the unusually long lifespans depicted in the [[Bible]]. Though the canopy is not directly mentioned in the Bible, the idea is said to arise from Genesis 1:6-8<ref>''Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” 7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.'' -- New King James Version</ref>

The vapor canopy theory has been largely abandoned by many creationists, as it is very difficult to fathom scientifically.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/e-mail/archive/AnswersWeekly/2009/0926.html AnswersinGenesis.org]</ref>

==Fountains of the Great Deep==
The fountains of the great deep are referenced in Genesis 7:11<ref>''In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.''</ref> These are believed to be massive subterranean deposits of water, which some suggest were trapped underneath the land after God made the dry land appear from under the waters.<ref>“Deep waters,” ''New Scientist'', 1997, 155(2097):22-26</ref>

The "breaking up" of the waters could refer to volcanic activity, as water vapor is the most abundant dissolved gas in magma.<ref>[http://www.cerritos.edu/esci/tutor/On-Line_lecture_notes/Volcanoes/Unit_11_Lecture_Magma.htm Magma Chemistry and Physical Properties]</ref> One such proponent of this theory is John Baumgardner, a geophysicists who studied at [[UCLA]]. He created a computer program known as ''Terra''. In his program, the magma churns and boils like water in a pot. As the cooler heavier material sinks, the hotter, lighter material rises.<ref name="flood">[http://library.thinkquest.org/29178/noahand.htm "Noah and the Flood", ''Creation vs. Evolution II'']</ref>Baumgardner believes that God stretched out the tectonic plates, causing the magma to rise into the ocean. The water displaced by this volcanic event could have sent massive tidal waves around the world, causing most or all of the land to be covered by water. After the event, the runoff of water would have been traveling at nearly 100 miles per hour, which Baumgardner states could have formed the Grand Canyon in about a week.<ref name="flood"></ref> However, water travelling at 100 mp/h would have destroyed all life, regardless, of large wooden boat or not. Furthermore, water from the earth can only come as steam, which will sterilize the entire earth, cooking them as if they were in a pressure cooker.<ref>Marjorie Gersh-Young (2011). Hot Springs and Hot Pools of the Southwest: Jayson Loam's Original Guide. Aqua Thermal Access. ISBN 1-890880-07-8.</ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Creationism]]
[[Category:Christianity]]

United Kingdom

2012-02-14T17:57:21Z

SusanP: /* United Kingdom and moral decline */ Unsourced statements by Conservative removed.

{{Country
|name =''The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland''
|map =United kingdom rel87.jpg
|map2 =UK location.png
|flag =Union_jack.jpg
|arms =UK Royal Coat of Arms.png
|capital =London
|capital-raw =
|government =Constitutional monarchy
|government-raw =
|language =English
|king =
|queen =
|monarch-raw =HM Queen [[Elizabeth II]]
|president =
|president-raw =
|chancellor =
|chancellor-raw =
|pm =David Cameron
|pm-raw =
|area =94,526 sq mi
|pop =62,698,000
|pop-basis =2011
|gdp =$2.006 trillion
|gdp-year =2006
|gdp-pc =$35,051 (2006)
|currency =Pound Sterling
|idd =
|tld =
}}
'''The United Kingdom''' ('''UK''') is a sovereign [[state]] north-west of mainland [[Europe]]. It comprises [[England]], [[Scotland]] and [[Wales]], which occupy the island of [[Great Britain]], and [[Northern Ireland]] on the island of [[Ireland]]. It attained its current identity in 1922 after most of Ireland was granted independence.

The United Kingdom is a constitutional monarchy. Its [[head of state]] is [[Elizabeth II]], and its [[head of government]] is the Prime Minister [[David Cameron]].

The United Kingdom has the fifth largest economy in the world, and is a member of the [[European Union]], [[NATO]] and the [[United Nations]]. British values, culture and institutions were spread throughout many parts of the world during the period of the [[British Empire]], 1600-1960, and British contributions to world culture include the English language, the [[parliament|parliamentary]] form of government, the [[Church of England|Anglican]] Church ("Church of England"), a tradition of personal liberty, and the common-law legal system.

==Name==
[[File:London Thames Sunset panorama 2008.jpg|thumb|left|London - Thames panorama.]]
The official name of the nation (since 1927) is ''The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland''.<ref> From 1801 to 1927 the official name was ''The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland''. </ref> The full official name is seldom used except in very formal or legal documents. The short version for historical topics is either "Britain" or "Great Britain." The short version for recent events (since the 1970s) is "United Kingdom" or "UK" The adjective is always '''"British"'''.

Britain was part of the [[British Empire]], which has become the "British Commonwealth", and is mostly a discussion club. Britain has a few scattered minor possessions, such as [[Gibraltar]], but gave up its last important colony--[[Hong Kong]]--in 1997.
[[File:Westminster in the evening.jpg|thumb|280px|Westminster in the evening.]]
* '''England''' is the largest of the four components of the United Kingdom. "England" was often used to stand for the nation in older literature published before 1970. However use of "England" to refer to the entire country is now sometimes considered offensive by many citizens of the other three member countries and is thus discouraged.
* The standard language of the UK is English; [[Welsh]] has parity in Wales, and [[Gaelic]] is widely used on official documents, roadsigns, etc in remote Gaelic-speaking areas of western Scotland.

MacColl (2008) explores the use of the term 'Britain' in English, French, and Latin texts from the 12th century to the 16th. The term was flexible, used in a variety of ways (geographically, politically, and ethnically), and not always indicative of any specific meaning. The English at first tended to conflate 'Britain' with England or the southern portion of the island of Great Britain, though the term 'Greater Britain' was applied starting in the 14th century to refer to the entire island. The Scottish, beginning in the 15th century, used the term in the modern sense - as reflective of the entire island of Great Britain and the 'polity' of England, Wales, and Scotland. This latter usage paved the way for the relatively smooth ideological transition after the 1707 Acts of Union.<ref> Alan MacColl, "The Meaning of 'Britain' in Medieval and Early Modern England." ''Journal of British Studies'' 2006 45(2): 248-269</ref>

===Anthem===
The national anthem of the UK is currently ''[[God Save the Queen]]''. Should a male heir accede to the throne, the anthem will become "God Save the King".<ref> This same melody is also sung by American schoolchildren (with different words) as "My Country, 'Tis of Thee".</ref>

The constituent nations have their own unofficial anthems. In the case of Wales, this is ''Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau'' (''Land of My Fathers''), and for Scotland it is ''Flower of Scotland''. England does not have its own distinctive anthem in the same way, but at sporting events in which England is competing as a separate nation, [[Edward Elgar]]'s patriotic song ''Land of Hope and Glory'' is sometimes used (although ''God Save the Queen'' is more commonly used). Additionally the hymn "Jerusalem" has a large number of supporters in England as an alternative to, or replacement for, the national anthem. In Northern Ireland, the Protestant and Catholic communities respectively use ''God Save the Queen'' and ''Amhran na bhFiann'', the Irish national anthem. ''Londonderry Air'' is often used as the anthem for Northern Ireland competitors in sporting events.

==People==
[[Image:Tower Bridge London.jpg|thumb|340px|Tower Bridge, London.]]
The United Kingdom's population in 2004 surpassed 60 million--the third-largest in the European Union. Its overall population density is one of the highest in the world. Almost one-third of the population lives in England's prosperous and fertile southeast and is predominantly urban and suburban--with about 7.2 million in the capital of London, which remains the largest city in Europe.

A net total of 408,000 people were added to the UK population in 2008, the largest numerical increase since 1972. This was partly due to the highest fertility rate in more than three decades. More than half of the increase in births last year was due to non-UK born mothers.

There is also an ever-increasing aging population with the number of people over 85 now at a record 1.3 million, the equivalent of one in every 50 people.

===Education===
[[File:Royal College of Music 2007.jpg|thumb|left|Royal College of Music.]]
The United Kingdom's high literacy rate (99%) is attributable to universal public education introduced for the primary level in 1870 and secondary level in 1900. Education is mandatory from ages 5 through 16, although this is in the process of being raised to 18 for England and Wales. "Public" schools are elite private prep schools, such as [[Eton]] and [[Rugby School|Rugby]], attended by youth whose families can afford to pay high tuition rates.

All state-funded schools in the UK are required to start the day with a collective assembly that is 'wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character' <ref>[http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=387464 Times Educational Supplement]</ref>, although this is not always ahered too and there are small numbers of state-funded [[Muslim]], [[Jew]]ish and [[Hindu]] schools.

About thirty six percent of British students go on to post-secondary education.

Higher education has been a speciality for over 500 years at Oxbridge ([[Oxford University|Oxford]] and [[Cambridge University|Cambridge]]), with new "red brick" universities added in the 19th century and many others in the late 20th century. Universities contribute £33 billion a year to the economy. Britain has a strong attraction for international students, with 342,000 attending in 2007 (compared to 672,000 in the U.S. and 183,000 in Australia). They spend £1.5 billion in tuition in Britain annually, plus another £0.4 billion off campus.

===Demographics===
[[File:Youth UK.JPG|thumb|British youth.]]
A group of islands close to continental Europe, the British Isles have been subject to many invasions and migrations, especially from Scandinavia and the continent, including Roman occupation for several centuries. Contemporary Britons are descended mainly from the varied ethnic stocks that settled there before the 11th century. The pre-Celtic, Celtic, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, and Norse influences were blended in Britain under the Normans, Scandinavian Vikings who had lived in Northern France. Although Celtic languages persist in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, as well as Cornwall in south-west England, the predominant language is English, which is primarily a blend of Anglo-Saxon and Norman French.
*Population (2007 est.): 60.8 million.
*Annual population growth rate (2007 est.): 0.275%.
*Major ethnic groups: British 91%, Irish 2%, West Indian and African 3%, South Asian 3%, others 1%.
*Major religions: Church of England (Anglican), Roman Catholic, Church of Scotland (Presbyterian), Muslim.
*Major languages: English
*Education: Years compulsory--12. Attendance--nearly 100%. Literacy--99%.
*Health: Infant mortality rate (2007 est.)--5.01/1,000. Life expectancy (2007 est.)--males 76.23 yrs.; females 81.3 yrs.; total 78.7 years
*Work force (2007, 31.1 million): Services--80.4%; industry--18.2%; agriculture--1.4%.

===Ethnic tensions===

Britain is home to 2.4 million Muslims from numerous ethnicities. This population is growing 10 times faster than the national average. Regarded as one of the most tolerant countries in Europe, Britain struggles with questions of integration, particularly the social exclusion of its Muslims, as well as the psychological aftermath of the July 2005 suicide bombings on London’s public transport system carried out by young Britons of Pakistani descent, which left 52 people dead and over 700 injured.

===Religion===
[[File:Canterbury Cathedral.jpg|thumb|left|350px|Canterbury Cathedral (photographed during 1890-1900).]]
Religious faith, according to a 2011 survey, has declined sharply in Britain over the last two decades. Now only 42% of people describe themselves as Christian, as opposed to 66% in 1990. Most of the decline is due to a drift away from the Church of England, it is claimed, with only 20% claiming allegiance, down from 40%.

In 2003 the Office of National Statistics estimated 29% of the population identified with Anglicanism, 10% with the Catholic Church, and 14% with other Protestant churches. A 2007 survey reported that the number of Catholics (mostly Irish) attending Sunday services has overtaken the number of Anglicans doing so. A September 2006 English Church Census reported that Methodists were decreasing as a percentage of the population, while members of the Church of Jesus Christ Latter-day Saints (Mormons), Pentecostal churches, many churches from Africa, and the Eastern Orthodox Church, almost entirely immigrants, were increasing.<ref> According to [http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2008/108478.htm U.S. State Department Report, 2008]</ref>

Individuals with no religious belief comprised 21% of the population in 2009. Muslims comprise 3% of the population. The Muslim community is predominantly South Asian in origin, but other groups from the Arabian Peninsula, Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Levant are represented. In addition, there is a growing number of indigenous converts. Although estimates vary, the Government places the number of mosques in the whole country at one thousand. Groups comprising 1% or less of the population include Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, and Buddhists. Individuals from Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, and Sikh backgrounds are concentrated in London and other large urban areas, primarily in England.

Attendance at religious services was significantly different from the number of adherents. According to a report released on May 8, 2008, by Religious Trends, only 4 million Christians attend services on a regular basis (defined as at least once a month) in the country. These figures do not include Northern Ireland, where higher%ages reportedly attend both Catholic (more than 60%) and Protestant (more than 35%) services. The Religious Trends report stated that more than 50% of Muslims regularly worship at mosques. Figures for Jews and other religious groups were unavailable.

Religious affiliation was not evenly distributed among ethnicities. According to the 2001 census, approximately 70% of the white population described themselves as Christians. Nearly 75% of black Caribbean respondents stated that they were Christians, as did 70% of black Africans. Meanwhile, 45% of Indians were Hindus and 29% were Sikhs. Approximately 92% of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis were Muslims.

In Northern Ireland, where divisions between nationalists and unionists evolved largely along religious lines, the 2001 census showed that 53.1% were Protestants and 43.8% were Catholics. Many Catholics and Protestants continued to live in segregated communities in Northern Ireland, although many middle class neighborhoods were mixed communities. The policy of the Government remained one of promotion of religious tolerance.

There are two established (or state) churches--The [[Church of England]] (Anglican) and the [[Church of Scotland]] (Presbyterian). The Act of Settlement, enacted in 1688, states that no Catholic, or person married to a Catholic, may ascend the throne.
====Religion in schools====
The Government provides financial support—up to 90% of the total capital costs of the buildings and 100% of running costs, including teachers' salaries - to sectarian educational institutions that are commonly referred to as "faith schools".
[[File:Matthew Boulton College.jpg|thumb|Matthew Boulton College.]]
The Government also helps fund the repair and maintenance of all listed places of worship for religious groups nationwide and contributes to the budget of the Church Conservation Trust, which preserves "redundant" Church of England buildings of architectural or historic significance.

The Government has not classified the Church of Scientology as a religious institution and therefore has not granted the organization recognition for charitable status.

More than 30% of state schools had a religious character. Nearly all of the 6,949 "faith schools" are associated with Christian denominations, although there are 31 Jewish, 7 Islamic, and 2 Sikh schools. An additional two Jewish, three Islamic, and two Sikh schools have also been tentatively approved by the Government to open. In addition, several hundred independent schools of a religious nature receive no state support but must meet government quality standards. Controversy arose in 2006 over 100 Islamic schools when an Office of Standards in Education (Ofsted) evaluation of these schools showed many were "little more than places where the Koran was recited." The schools were given time to correct their deficiencies. A review is due in 2010. Some Christian faith schools also faced controversy. Some were accused of not following the national curriculum in science, teaching creationism instead. During the reporting period, a further controversy erupted when it was learned that some faith schools were not following an "open" admission policy as required by law, denying admission to both special needs children and those outside the faith of the school administrators. The Catholic Church and the Church of England have an agreement to voluntarily accept up to 25% of places for pupils from another religious group or no religious group.

Almost all schools in Northern Ireland receive state support. More than 90% of students attended schools that were either predominantly Catholic or Protestant. Integrated schools served approximately 5% of school-age children whose families voluntarily chose this option, often after overcoming significant obstacles to provide the resources to start a new school and demonstrate its sustainability for 3 years before government funding begins. Demand for places in integrated schools outweighed the limited number of places available. The May 8, 2007, devolution, or granting of power, authorized the Northern Ireland Assembly to decide on academic selection. Now there are more than 50 integrated schools, and the new Government permits existing schools to petition to change from sectarian to integrated. More petition for that status than are granted it. Some have accused the Government of a go-slow approach to avoid sectarian animus.

The law requires religious education for all children, ages 3 to 19, in publicly maintained schools. In England and Wales it forms part of the core curriculum in accordance with the Education Reform Act of 1988. In Scotland, religious education of some sort is mandated by the Education Act of 1980. However, the shape and content of religious instruction throughout the country is decided on a local basis. Locally agreed syllabi are required to reflect the predominant place of Christianity while taking into account the teachings and practices of other principal religions in the country. Syllabuses must be nondenominational and refrain from attempting to convert pupils. Schools with a religious designation follow a syllabus drawn up by the school governors according to the trust deed of the school. All parents have the legal right to request that their children not participate in religious education, but the school must approve this request.

Daily collective prayer or worship of "a wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character" is practiced in schools in England and Wales, a requirement that may be waived for students who obtain permission of the school authorities. The Education and Inspections Act 2006 permits sixth form students (generally 16-19-year-olds) to withdraw themselves from worship without their parents' permission or action. This new law does not exempt sixth form students from religious education classes. Non-Christian worship is permitted with approval of the authorities. Teachers have the right not to participate in collective worship, without prejudice, unless they work for a faith school.

After several controversial court decisions prohibiting full-face veils in school (but not head scarves) and the wearing of a Christian chastity ring, the Department of Education provided guidance that advises schools to "… act reasonably in accommodating religious requirements," under human rights legislation. Some Muslim groups, including the Islamic Human Rights Commission, said it was inappropriate for the Government to provide guidance that regulated Muslim communities in matters concerning the expression of their religious beliefs. But it is also legally possible under the act, according to the guidance, to have a school uniform policy that "restricts the freedom of pupils to manifest their religion" on the grounds of health and safety and the "protection of the rights and freedoms of others." The Government's guidance is meant to remind "head teachers" to act with a degree of sensitivity when considering decisions that will impact the cultural complexion of their communities.

====Census====

According to the 2011 Census the religious make-up of the UK at that time was:

{| border="1" cellspacing=0 cellpadding=3
|+'''Religions in United Kingdom'''
!Belief
!Thousands
!Proportion
|-
|Christian ||29,000 ||51.6
|-
|No Religion ||9104 ||15.5
|-
|Muslim ||1591 ||2.7
|-
|Hindu ||559 ||1.0
|-
|Sikh ||336 ||0.6
|-
|Jewish ||267 ||0.5
|-
|Other ||179 ||0.3
|-
|Buddhist ||152 ||0.3
|-
|Pagan & Wicca ||40 ||0.1
|-
|Total religious ||45,163 ||76.8
|-
|No answer ||4289 ||7.3
|}
The answers were distorted by an internet campaign just prior to the census, encouraging people to actually question religion that claimed that if at least 50,000 people stated their religion as 'Jedi Knight' it would be officially classified as a religion. This was not true, though the Office of National Statistics does aggregate very small religions into the 'Other' category whereas a religion of 50,000 would be itemised separately. This separate listing does not constitute any form of official recognition.

It should be noted that non-practising Christians and the non-religious group are growing in the UK and Europe. At the same time, there is growth in the Islamic, Sikh and Hindu groups due to immigration.

Two of the four states of the United Kingdom, England and Scotland, have official state religions. The [[Church of England]] is the official religion of England and the (Presbyterian) Church of Scotland is the official religion of Scotland. The (Anglican) Church of Ireland was [[disestablished]] in 1871 and the (Anglican) Church of Wales was disestablished in 1920, whereupon it was renamed the [[Church in Wales]].

===Crown Dependencies===
A number of the smaller [[British Isles]], most importantly [[Jersey]], [[Guernsey]] and the [[Isle of Man]] are '[[Crown dependencies|British Crown Dependencies]]' and not members of the UK. Their governments are independent of that of the UK other than foreign and defence policy (the UK government retains the legal power to overrule the governments of the Dependencies, but this power has not been exercised since 1967), and they are not members of the [[European Union]].

==Sports and Pastimes==
[[File:Wembley Stadium.jpg|thumb|230px|Wembley Stadium.]]
Many of the most popular [[sport]]s in the world today were developed or codified in the UK. These include [[soccer|football]] (which is called ''soccer'' in North America), [[cricket]], [[Rugby (Sport)|rugby]], [[tennis]], [[hockey]], [[baseball]] and [[golf]]. The UK is represented in international competitions by the individual nations (such as in football, the one-day form of cricket and rugby) and by the whole of the UK in other sports (such as [[athletics]], golf and tennis). The Test cricket team is that of 'England & Wales' (colloquially, just 'England') but from time to time has had Scottish and Irish players.

The UK remains a major sporting force both in competition and the administration of sport. It is dominant in several Olympic sports, notably cycling, rowing and sailing and a leading force in cricket, rugby union, and golf.

Certain venues have their own distinct and historical recognition and host a number of international competitions. These include Wimbledon for tennis, Silverstone for motor racing, and St Andrews for golf. There are several major venues for football, rugby and cricket.

Domestic sport is dominated by football with one of the strongest and most popular leagues in the world - the Premier League. This league is sponsored by Barclays Bank, so has the official name "Barclays Premier League". Many of the Premier League's teams are well known outside the United Kingdom, especially the "big four" (Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool) and maintain followings around the world. Cricket and both codes of rugby also have strong and popular domestic leagues. Other popular sports include snooker, rowing, golf, tennis, athletics, cycling, darts, horse racing, and motor racing. These most popular sports are well covered by both the print press and television.

Some sports which are more popular in other countries such as volleyball, handball, American football and basketball have small but dedicated followings.

United Kingdom supporters, unlike those of the United States, will virtually never support any team that is an underdog (with the exceptions of West Ham United, Partick Thistle, Bromley, Manchester City, St Mirren, Norwich, Kilmarnock, Blackburn Rovers and the Scottish national team.<ref>http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_football.cfm?page=133</ref>) It is surmised that this is due to the high levels of atheism. <ref>See the evidence provided at [[Mystery:Why Do Atheists Dislike Underdogs?]]</ref>

The UK is also renowned for its music, and is the home of bands like [[The Beatles]] and [[Radiohead]], as well as festivals such as [[Creamfields]]

==Government==
''See also [[British politics]]''
[[File:Jewel House guard in the Tower of London.JPG|thumb|200px|Jewel House guard in the Tower of London.]]
Nationalist movements exist in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, seeking (in the case of Scottish and Welsh nationalists) to dissolve the United Kingdom and to win independence for their respective territories, and in the case of Northern Ireland nationalists and republicans to create a sovereign united Ireland. At the present time, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their own legislatures.

The United Kingdom does not have a written constitution. The equivalent body of law is based on statute, common law, and "traditional rights". Changes may come about formally through new acts of Parliament, informally through the acceptance of new practices and usage, or by judicial precedents. Although Parliament has the theoretical power to make or repeal any law, in actual practice the weight of 700 years of tradition restrains arbitrary actions.

Executive power rests nominally with the monarch but actually is exercised by a committee of ministers (cabinet) selected from among the members of the House of Commons and, less frequently, the House of Lords. The prime minister is normally the leader of the largest party in the House of Commons, and can remain in office for so long as he or she has the support of a majority in that body.

==Parliament==
[[File:Westminster palace Charles Barry.jpg|left|380px]]
Parliament was authorized in the [[Magna Carta]] (1215), and first summoned by King Edward I in 1296, the oldest governing body in the world. Parliament represents the entire country and can legislate for the whole or for any constituent part or combination of parts. Elections are called by the prime minister, but the maximum length of a parliament is usually 5 years (except in wartime). The focus of legislative power is the 646-member House of Commons, which has sole jurisdiction over finance. Normally the government--the prime minister and cabinet--have full control of the House. If they lose control and new general election is held. The House of Lords, although shorn of most of its powers, can still review, amend, or delay temporarily any bills except those relating to the budget. In 1999, the government removed the automatic right of hereditary peers to hold seats in the House of Lords. The current house consists of appointed life peers who hold their seats for life and 92 hereditary peers who will hold their seats only until final reforms have been agreed upon and implemented. The judiciary is independent of the legislative and executive branches but cannot review the constitutionality of legislation.

Members of the House of Commons are elected to represent specific geographic constituencies. Members are elected on a "First past the post" system and there is no proportional representation. The upshot is that a third party with under 25% of the vote typically obtains very few seats.

==Constituent countries==
[[File:Scottish Eilean Donan castle.jpg|thumb|300px|Scottish Eilean Donan castle.]]
The separate identities of each of the United Kingdom's constituent parts are also reflected in their respective governmental structures. Up until the recent devolution of power to Scotland and Wales, a cabinet minister (the Secretary of State for Wales) handled Welsh affairs at the national level with the advice of a broadly representative council for Wales. Scotland maintains, as it did before union with England, different systems of law (Roman-French), education, local government, judiciary, and national church (the Church of Scotland instead of the Church of England). In addition, separate departments grouped under a Secretary of State for Scotland, who also is a cabinet member, handled most domestic matters. In late 1997, however, following approval of referenda by Scottish and Welsh voters (though only narrowly in Wales), the British Government introduced legislation to establish a Scottish Parliament and a Welsh Assembly. The first elections for the two bodies were held May 6, 1999. The Welsh Assembly opened on May 26, and the Scottish Parliament opened on July 1, 1999. The devolved legislatures have largely taken over most of the functions previously performed by the Scottish and Welsh offices.

Northern Ireland had its own Parliament and prime minister from 1921 to 1973, when the British Government imposed direct rule in order to deal with the deteriorating political and security situation. From 1973, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, based in London, was responsible for the region, including efforts to resolve the issues that lay behind the "the troubles."

By the mid-1990s, gestures toward peace encouraged by successive British governments and by President Clinton began to open the door for restored local government in Northern Ireland. An Irish Republican Army (IRA) cease-fire and nearly 2 years of multiparty negotiations, led by former U.S. Senator George Mitchell, resulted in the Good Friday Agreement of 10 April 1998, which was subsequently approved by majorities in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Key elements of the agreement include devolved government, a commitment of the parties to work toward "total disarmament of all paramilitary organisations," police reform, and enhanced mechanisms to guarantee human rights and equal opportunity. The Good Friday Agreement also called for formal cooperation between the Northern Ireland institutions and the Government of the Republic of Ireland, and it established the British-Irish Council, which includes representatives of the British and Irish Governments as well as the devolved Governments of Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. Devolved government was reestablished in Northern Ireland in December 1999.

The Agreement (more commonly known as the "Good Friday Agreement", and more rarely as the Belfast Agreement<ref>http://www.nio.gov.uk/index/key-issues/the-agreement.htm</ref>) was reached on Friday, April 10 1998 in Belfast and provides for a 108-member elected Assembly, overseen by a 12-minister Executive Committee (cabinet) in which unionists and nationalists share leadership responsibility. Northern Ireland elects 18 representatives to the Westminster Parliament in London. However, the five Sinn Fein Members of Parliament (MPs), who won seats in the 2004 election, have refused to claim their seats.

===Principal Government Officials===
[[File:674uyyhju.jpg|thumb|David Cameron]]
*Head of State '''- Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith''' who, as Head of State for many other countries also holds other titles particular to her role and rule as Head of State for those countries. More commonly referred to as '''HM''' (Her Majesty) '''Queen Elizabeth II'''

The Cabinet
*Prime Minister, First Lord of the Treasury and Minister for the Civil Service '''- Rt Hon [[David Cameron]] MP'''
*Deputy Prime Minister and Lord President of the council '''- Rt Hon [[Nick Clegg]] MP'''<ref name="LibDem">Member of the [[Liberal Democrats]]</ref>
*First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs '''- Rt Hon [[William Hague]] MP'''
*Chancellor of the Exchequer '''- Rt Hon [[George Osborne]] MP'''
*Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor '''- Rt Hon Kenneth Clark QC MP'''
*Secretary of State for the Home Department and Minister for Women and Equalities '''- Rt Hon Theresa May MP'''
*Secretary of State for Defence '''- Rt Hon Dr Liam Fox MP'''
*Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and President of the Board of Trade '''- Rt Hon Dr Vince Cable MP'''<ref name = "LibDem" />
*Secretary of State for Work and Pensions '''- Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith MP'''
*Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change '''- Rt Hon Chris Huhne MP'''<ref name = "LibDem" />
*Secretary of State for Health '''- Rt Hon Andrew Lansley CBE MP'''
*Secretary of State for Education'''- Rt Hon Michael Gove MP'''
*Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government '''- Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP'''
*Secretary of State for Transport '''- Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP'''
*Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs '''- Rt Hon Caroline Spelman MP'''
*Secretary of State for International Development '''- Rt Hon Andrew Mitchell MP'''
*Secretary of State for Northern Ireland '''- Rt Hon Owen Paterson MP'''
*Secretary of State for Scotland '''- Rt Hon Michael Moore MP'''<ref name = "LibDem" />
*Secretary of State for Wales '''- Rt Hon Cheryl Gillan MP'''
*Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport '''- Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP'''
*Chief Secretary to the Treasury '''- Rt Hon Danny Alexander MP'''<ref name = "LibDem" />
*Leader of the House of Lords and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster '''- Rt Hon The Lord Strathclyde PC'''
*Minister without Portfolio '''- Rt Hon The Baroness Warsi PC

Also attend Cabinet meetings:
*Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General'''- Rt Hon Francis Maude MP'''
*Minister of State in the Cabinet Office'''- Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP'''
*Minister for Universities and Science '''- David Willetts MP'''
*Leader of the House of Commons, Lord Privy Seal '''- Rt Hon Sir George Young Bt MP'''
*Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury and Chief Whip '''- Rt Hon Patrick McLoughlin MP'''
*Attorney General '''- Rt Hon Dominic Grieve QC MP'''<ref>http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hciolists/hmg.cfm</ref>

===Political Conditions===
[[David Cameron]] became Prime Minister on May 11, 2010, after [[Gordon Brown]] resigned. Cameron leads a [[Conservative Party|Con]]-[[Liberal Democrats|Lib Dem]] coalition after failing to achieve a majority in the the 2010 general election

===Membership in the European Union===
The [[Conservative Party|Conservative]] government of [[Edward Heath|Sir Edward Heath]] took the UK into the [[European Union]] in 1973. The [[Labour Party]] under [[Harold Wilson]] won the 1974 general elections and due to splits within the party, called the only national [[referendum]] asking the people if they wanted to stay in the Union. The "yes" vote won by a margin of approximately two to one. The Labour and Conservative parties have since had deep divisions over Union membership. Labour's 1983 manifesto promised to leave the Union, and whilst the Conservative party have never pledged to leave the Union, a growing band of "Eurosceptics" threatened to tear the party apart in the 1990s. All three major parties wish to stay in the Union although disagree over the level of integration, but smaller parties such as the UK Independence Party and the Referendum Party campaigned on the single issue of sovereignty being lost to the Union.

==Defence and Foreign Relations==
[[File:11943452 115b299206.jpg|right|240px]]
The United Kingdom is a founding member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and is one of NATO's major European maritime, air, and land powers; it ranks third among NATO countries in total defence expenditure. The United Kingdom has been a member of the European Community (now European Union) since 1973. In the United Nations, the United Kingdom is a permanent member of the Security Council. The U.K. held the Presidency of the G-8 during 2005; it held the EU Presidency from July to December 2005.

The British Armed Forces are charged with protecting the United Kingdom and its overseas territories, promoting Britain's wider security interests, and supporting international peacekeeping efforts. The 37,000-member Royal Navy, which includes 6,000 Royal Marine commandos, is in charge of the United Kingdom's independent strategic nuclear arm, which consists of four Trident missile submarines. The British Army, consisting of approximately 99,200 personnel, the Royal Air Force, with 42,000 personnel, along with the Royal Navy and Royal Marines, are active and regular participants in NATO and other coalition operations. Approximately 9% of the British Armed Forces is female, and 4% of British forces represent ethnic minorities.
[[File:Royal Naval college UK.jpg|thumb|center|380px|Royal Naval College.]]
===Iraq===
The U.K. was the United States' main coalition partner under the designation Operation TELIC. Under UN Security Council Resolution 1483, the U.K. also shared with the United States responsibility for civil administration in Iraq and was an active participant in the Coalition Provisional Authority before the handover of Iraqi sovereignty on June 28, 2004. Britain's participation in the Iraq war and its aftermath remains a domestically controversial issue.

<blockquote>
Iraqi oil supply was considered to be 'vital' to British interests. The British Government saw Iraqi oil as "vital" to the UK's long-term energy security, and the effective privatisation of its oil industry was central to the post-invasion plan for the country, according to previously unseen Whitehall documents. [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/iraqi-oil-supply-was-considered-to-be-vital-to-british-interests-2270072.html] ''The Independent.''
</blockquote>

The Iraq Inquiry is conducted to identify lessons that can be learned from the Iraq conflict; the inquiry is concerned over Mr. Blair's evidence on the legal advice he received before agreeing to join the invasion, and the timing of the decision to go to war. [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/chilcot-to-grill-blair-on-how-he-misled-iraq-war-inquiry-2185725.html] The Chair of the Inquiry, Sir John Chilcot (1939) was Staff Counsellor to the Security and Intelligence Agencies (1999-2004) and the National Criminal Intelligence Service (2002-06).

===Afghanistan===
Britain stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S., and its military forces are part of the coalition force in Afghanistan. The British force in [[Afghanistan War|Afghanistan]] is at 9,000 in late 2009 and will rise by an extra 500 troops in 2010. British forces are primarily based in the Helmand region, where they are on the front line in the war against continued Taliban operations. In addition, Britain has contributed more than £500 million to Afghan reconstruction--the second-largest donor after the U.S.
===Israel===
Britain has shown a greater willingness than the United States to criticize the Israelis over settlements and what some call the disproportionate responses to provocations from Gaza and southern Lebanon. (Jewish Labour MP Gerald Kaufman is among the most vocal.) Like his predecessors, both Labour and Conservative, former Foreign Secretary Milliband has been unequivocal: "Settlements are illegal under international law," he told Parliament in 2008; "They are a major blockage to peace in the Middle East on the basis of a two-state solution." His successor William Hague, on 20 March 2011, "expressed our serious concern over the recent announcement of 400 new housing units in the West Bank. Continued settlements run contrary to peace.” A BBC poll in March 2011 found that 14% of British subjects have a generally positive opinion of Israel while 66% have a generally negative opinion.

===Relations with the United States===
The United Kingdom is one of the United States' closest allies, and British foreign policy emphasises close coordination with the United States. Bilateral cooperation reflects the common language, ideals, and democratic practices of the two nations. Relations were strengthened by the countries' alliances during both World Wars, and its role as a founding member of NATO, in the Korean conflict, in the Persian Gulf War, and in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The United Kingdom and the United States continually consult on foreign policy issues and global problems and share major foreign and security policy objectives.

The United Kingdom is the fifth-largest market for U.S. goods exports after Canada, Mexico, Japan, and China, and the sixth-largest supplier of U.S. imports after Canada, China, Mexico, Japan, and Germany. U.S. exports of goods and services to the United Kingdom in 2006 totaled $92 billion, while U.S. imports from the U.K. totaled $93 billion. The United States has had a trade deficit with the United Kingdom since 1998. The United Kingdom is a large source of foreign tourists in the United States. In 2005, 3.4 million U.S. residents visited the United Kingdom, while 4.2 million U.K. residents visited the United States.

The United States and the United Kingdom share the world's largest foreign direct investment partnership. U.S. investment in the United Kingdom reached $324 billion in 2005, while U.K. direct investment in the U.S. totaled $282 billion. This investment sustains more than 1 million American jobs.

==Economy==
[[File:London.jpg|thumb|left|280px|London's financial center.]]
Britain has been hard hit by the [[Recession of 2008]], with its major banks taken over or subsidized by the government. Real gross domestic product declined by 4.6% in 2009, and is expected to rise by 0.6% before 2010 and probably will continue to increase by 1% in 2011.

Britain has the fifth-largest economy in the world, is the second-largest economy in the European Union, and is a major international trading power. A highly developed, diversified, market-based economy with extensive social welfare services provides most residents with a high standard of living. Unemployment and inflation levels are amongst the lowest within the European Union.

Since 1979, the British Government has privatised most state-owned companies, including British Steel, British Airways, British Telecom, British Coal, British Aerospace, and British Gas, although in some cases the government retains a "golden share" in these companies. The previous Labour government continued the privatisation policy of its Conservative predecessor, particularly by encouraging "public-private partnerships" (partial privatisation) in such areas as the London Underground. The economy of the United Kingdom is now primarily based on private enterprise, accounting for approximately four-fifths of employment and output.
[[File:Bluewater Shopping Centre, Kent, England Crop 2009.jpg|thumb|440px|Bluewater Shopping Centre, Kent, 2009.]]
London ranks alongside New York as a leading international financial centre. London's financial exports contribute greatly to the United Kingdom's balance of payments. Ratings agencies rank the United Kingdom's banking sector as one of the strongest in the world and its banks are amongst the most profitable in the G-8. It is a global leader in emissions trading and is home to the Alternative Investment Market (AIM). It is also a government priority to make London the leading center of Islamic finance.

Britain is the European Union's only significant energy exporter. It is also one of the world's largest energy consumers, and most analysts predict a shift in U.K. status from net exporter to net importer of energy by 2020, possibly sooner. Oil production in the U.K. is levelling off. While North Sea natural gas production continues to rise, gains may be offset by ever-increasing consumption. North Sea oil and gas exploration activities are shifting to smaller fields and to increments of larger, developed fields, presenting opportunities for smaller, independent energy operators to become active in North Sea production.
*GDP (at current market prices, 2007 est.): US$1.93 trillion.
*Annual growth rate (2009 est.): -4.6%
*Per capita GDP (2006 est.): US$31,800.
*Natural resources: Coal, oil, natural gas.
*Agriculture (1.1% of GDP): Products--cereals, oilseed, potatoes, vegetables, cattle, sheep, poultry, fish.
*Industry: Types--steel, heavy engineering and metal manufacturing, textiles, motor vehicles and aircraft, construction (5.2% of GDP), electronics, chemicals.
*Trade (2006 est.): Exports of goods and services--US$468.8 billion: manufactured goods, fuels, chemicals; food, beverages, tobacco. Major markets--U.S., European Union. Imports of goods and services--US$603 billion: manufactured goods, machinery, fuels, foodstuffs. Major suppliers--U.S., European Union, Japan.

===Currency===
The currency of the United Kingdom is the [[Pound|Pound Sterling]], commonly called Pound and written £ or GBP, divided into 100 New Pence (now commonly just called pence or 'p'). Traditionally the UK had a complicated triple currency structure of 20 [[shilling|shillings]] to the Pound and 12 "old pence" (represented by a "d" from the Roman ''denarius'') to the shilling, making a total of 240 pence to the Pound. This system was abandoned in 1971 due to difficulties with computerised accounting systems, in favour of the current [[decimal]] system.

The UK has never joined the [[Euro]] zone.

==History==
[[File:Stonehenge.jpg|thumb|left|Stonehenge.]]
The Roman invasion of Britain in 43AD and most of Britain's subsequent incorporation into the Roman Empire stimulated development and brought more active contacts with the rest of Europe. However, there was no permanent Roman imprint apart from roads and locations for cities. As Rome's strength declined, the country again was exposed to invasion--including the pivotal incursions of the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes in the fifth and sixth centuries AD--up to the Norman conquest in 1066. Norman rule effectively ensured Britain's safety from further intrusions; certain institutions, which remain characteristic of Britain, could develop. Among these are a political, administrative, cultural, and economic centre in London; a separate but established church and distinctive and distinguished university education.

====Union====

Both Wales and Scotland were independent kingdoms that resisted English rule. The English conquest of Wales succeeded in 1282 under Edward I, and the Statute of Rhuddlan established English rule 2 years later. To appease the Welsh, Edward's son (later Edward II), who had been born in Wales, was made Prince of Wales in 1301. The tradition of bestowing this title on the eldest son of the British Monarch continues today. An act of 1536 completed the political and administrative union of England and Wales.

While maintaining separate parliaments, England and Scotland were ruled by the same king beginning in 1603, when James VI of Scotland succeeded his cousin Elizabeth I as James I of England. In the ensuing 100 years, strong religious and political differences divided the kingdoms. Finally, in 1707, England and Scotland were unified as Great Britain, sharing a single Parliament at Westminster.

Ireland's invasion by the Anglo-Normans in 1170 led to centuries of strife. Successive English kings sought to conquer Ireland. In the early 17th century, large-scale settlement of the north from Scotland and England began. After its defeat, Ireland was subjected, with varying degrees of success, to control and regulation by Britain.

The legislative union of Great Britain and Ireland was completed on January 1, 1801, under the name of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (normally shortened to "Great Britain" or "Britain"). However, armed struggle for independence continued sporadically into the 20th century. The Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921 established the Irish Free State, which subsequently left the Commonwealth and became a republic after World War II. Six northern, predominantly [[Protestant]], Irish counties have remained part of the United Kingdom.

====British Expansion and Empire====
[[Image:Sir Francis Grant's Portrait of Queen Victoria.jpg|right|200px|thumb|''Queen Victoria'', by [[Sir Francis Grant]].]]
The '''British Empire''' was the [[List of largest empires|largest empire]] in history and, for over a century, was the foremost [[Great power|global power]]. It was a product of the [[Age of Discovery]], which began with the maritime explorations of the 15th century, that sparked the era of the European [[Colonialism|colonial]] empires. By 1921, the British Empire held sway over a population of about 458 million people, approximately one-quarter of the world's population.<ref>Angus Maddison. ''The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective'' (p. 98, 242). [[Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development|OECD]], Paris, 2001.</ref> It covered about 36.7 million km² (14.2 million square miles),<ref>Bruce R. Gordon. [http://www.hostkingdom.net/earthrul.html ''To Rule the Earth...''] (See [http://www.hostkingdom.net/Bibliography.html Bibliography] for sources used.)</ref> about a quarter of Earth's total land area. As a result, its political, linguistic and cultural legacy is widespread. At the peak of its power, it was often said that "[[The empire on which the sun never sets|the sun never sets on the British Empire]]" because its span across the globe ensured that the sun was always shining on at least one of its numerous [[colonies]] or subject nations.<ref>This phrase had already been used a few centuries before by the king [[Charles I of Spain]], referring to the [[Spanish Empire]].</ref>

Begun initially to support William the Conqueror's (c. 1029-1087) holdings in France, Britain's policy of active involvement in continental European affairs endured for several hundred years. By the end of the 14th century, foreign trade, originally based on wool exports to Europe, had emerged as a cornerstone of national policy.

During the five decades following [[World War II]], most of the territories of the Empire became independent. Many went on to join the [[Commonwealth of Nations]], a free association of independent states. <ref>T. O. Lloyd, ''The British Empire, 1558-1995. 2nd ed. (1996). </ref> Some have retained the [[British monarch]] as their [[head of state]] to become independent [[Commonwealth realm]]s.

====Sea Power====
The foundations of sea power were gradually laid to protect English trade and open up new routes. Defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 firmly established England as a major sea power. Thereafter, its interests outside Europe grew steadily. Attracted by the spice trade, English mercantile interests spread first to the Far East. In search of an alternate route to the Spice Islands, John Cabot reached the North American continent in 1498. Sir Walter Raleigh organized the first, short-lived colony in Virginia in 1584, and permanent English settlement began in 1607 at Jamestown, Virginia. During the next two centuries, Britain extended its influence abroad and consolidated its political development at home, as the Royal Navy dominated the seas.
====Industrial Revolution====
[[File:Bradford Industrial Museum.jpg|thumb|left|Bradford Industrial Museum.]]
Britain's [[industrial revolution]] greatly strengthened its ability to oppose Napoleonic France. By the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815, Britain was the foremost European power, and its navy ruled the seas. Peace in Europe allowed the British to focus their interests on more remote parts of the world, and, during this period, the British Empire reached its zenith. British colonial expansion reached its height largely during the reign of Queen Victoria (1837-1901). Queen Victoria's reign witnessed the spread of British technology, commerce, language, and government throughout the British Empire, which, at its greatest extent, encompassed roughly one-fifth to one-quarter of the world's area and population. It is controversial whether British colonies accelerated or slowed Britain's economic growth, for its growth rate fell below nations without empires, especially the U.S. and germany. Democracy came in fits and starts in a series of reforms that finally, by the 1920s, allowed all adults to vote.

 

====End of Empire====
By the time of Queen Victoria's death in 1901, other nations, including the United States and Germany, had developed their own industries; Britain lost its comparative economic advantage, and the ambitions of its rivals had grown. The UK joined world war I because of the invasion of [[Belgium]], and subsequently began [[World War II]] after the invasion of [[Poland]]. The losses and destruction of [[World War I|The First World War]], the [[Great Depression]] of the 1930s, the independence of the Dominions, and decades of relatively slow growth eroded the Britain's preeminent international position of the previous century.

Nationalism became stronger in other parts of the empire, particularly in India and Egypt.

In 1926, Britain granted Australia, Canada, and New Zealand almost complete autonomy as "dominions"; beginning with the independence of India and Pakistan in 1947, the remainder of the British Empire was almost completely dismantled by the 1960s.

== See also ==
*[[English Painting]]
*[[British politics]]
*[[June 2007 UK terror attacks]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/15/sir-john-chilcot-wrong-man Sir John Chilcot 'wrong man to head Iraq invasion inquiry'.]
*[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/iraqi-oil-supply-was-considered-to-be-vital-to-british-interests-2270072.html Iraqi oil supply was considered to be 'vital' to British interests.]

== Notes ==

<references/>

{{European Union}}

[[Category:United Kingdom|United Kingdom]]
[[Category:European Countries]]
[[Category:NATO members]]
[[Category:Christian-Majority Countries]]
[[Category:British Empire]]

United Kingdom

2012-02-14T17:55:30Z

SusanP: /* Census */

{{Country
|name =''The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland''
|map =United kingdom rel87.jpg
|map2 =UK location.png
|flag =Union_jack.jpg
|arms =UK Royal Coat of Arms.png
|capital =London
|capital-raw =
|government =Constitutional monarchy
|government-raw =
|language =English
|king =
|queen =
|monarch-raw =HM Queen [[Elizabeth II]]
|president =
|president-raw =
|chancellor =
|chancellor-raw =
|pm =David Cameron
|pm-raw =
|area =94,526 sq mi
|pop =62,698,000
|pop-basis =2011
|gdp =$2.006 trillion
|gdp-year =2006
|gdp-pc =$35,051 (2006)
|currency =Pound Sterling
|idd =
|tld =
}}
'''The United Kingdom''' ('''UK''') is a sovereign [[state]] north-west of mainland [[Europe]]. It comprises [[England]], [[Scotland]] and [[Wales]], which occupy the island of [[Great Britain]], and [[Northern Ireland]] on the island of [[Ireland]]. It attained its current identity in 1922 after most of Ireland was granted independence.

The United Kingdom is a constitutional monarchy. Its [[head of state]] is [[Elizabeth II]], and its [[head of government]] is the Prime Minister [[David Cameron]].

The United Kingdom has the fifth largest economy in the world, and is a member of the [[European Union]], [[NATO]] and the [[United Nations]]. British values, culture and institutions were spread throughout many parts of the world during the period of the [[British Empire]], 1600-1960, and British contributions to world culture include the English language, the [[parliament|parliamentary]] form of government, the [[Church of England|Anglican]] Church ("Church of England"), a tradition of personal liberty, and the common-law legal system.

==Name==
[[File:London Thames Sunset panorama 2008.jpg|thumb|left|London - Thames panorama.]]
The official name of the nation (since 1927) is ''The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland''.<ref> From 1801 to 1927 the official name was ''The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland''. </ref> The full official name is seldom used except in very formal or legal documents. The short version for historical topics is either "Britain" or "Great Britain." The short version for recent events (since the 1970s) is "United Kingdom" or "UK" The adjective is always '''"British"'''.

Britain was part of the [[British Empire]], which has become the "British Commonwealth", and is mostly a discussion club. Britain has a few scattered minor possessions, such as [[Gibraltar]], but gave up its last important colony--[[Hong Kong]]--in 1997.
[[File:Westminster in the evening.jpg|thumb|280px|Westminster in the evening.]]
* '''England''' is the largest of the four components of the United Kingdom. "England" was often used to stand for the nation in older literature published before 1970. However use of "England" to refer to the entire country is now sometimes considered offensive by many citizens of the other three member countries and is thus discouraged.
* The standard language of the UK is English; [[Welsh]] has parity in Wales, and [[Gaelic]] is widely used on official documents, roadsigns, etc in remote Gaelic-speaking areas of western Scotland.

MacColl (2008) explores the use of the term 'Britain' in English, French, and Latin texts from the 12th century to the 16th. The term was flexible, used in a variety of ways (geographically, politically, and ethnically), and not always indicative of any specific meaning. The English at first tended to conflate 'Britain' with England or the southern portion of the island of Great Britain, though the term 'Greater Britain' was applied starting in the 14th century to refer to the entire island. The Scottish, beginning in the 15th century, used the term in the modern sense - as reflective of the entire island of Great Britain and the 'polity' of England, Wales, and Scotland. This latter usage paved the way for the relatively smooth ideological transition after the 1707 Acts of Union.<ref> Alan MacColl, "The Meaning of 'Britain' in Medieval and Early Modern England." ''Journal of British Studies'' 2006 45(2): 248-269</ref>

===Anthem===
The national anthem of the UK is currently ''[[God Save the Queen]]''. Should a male heir accede to the throne, the anthem will become "God Save the King".<ref> This same melody is also sung by American schoolchildren (with different words) as "My Country, 'Tis of Thee".</ref>

The constituent nations have their own unofficial anthems. In the case of Wales, this is ''Hen Wlad Fy Nhadau'' (''Land of My Fathers''), and for Scotland it is ''Flower of Scotland''. England does not have its own distinctive anthem in the same way, but at sporting events in which England is competing as a separate nation, [[Edward Elgar]]'s patriotic song ''Land of Hope and Glory'' is sometimes used (although ''God Save the Queen'' is more commonly used). Additionally the hymn "Jerusalem" has a large number of supporters in England as an alternative to, or replacement for, the national anthem. In Northern Ireland, the Protestant and Catholic communities respectively use ''God Save the Queen'' and ''Amhran na bhFiann'', the Irish national anthem. ''Londonderry Air'' is often used as the anthem for Northern Ireland competitors in sporting events.

==People==
[[Image:Tower Bridge London.jpg|thumb|340px|Tower Bridge, London.]]
The United Kingdom's population in 2004 surpassed 60 million--the third-largest in the European Union. Its overall population density is one of the highest in the world. Almost one-third of the population lives in England's prosperous and fertile southeast and is predominantly urban and suburban--with about 7.2 million in the capital of London, which remains the largest city in Europe.

A net total of 408,000 people were added to the UK population in 2008, the largest numerical increase since 1972. This was partly due to the highest fertility rate in more than three decades. More than half of the increase in births last year was due to non-UK born mothers.

There is also an ever-increasing aging population with the number of people over 85 now at a record 1.3 million, the equivalent of one in every 50 people.

===Education===
[[File:Royal College of Music 2007.jpg|thumb|left|Royal College of Music.]]
The United Kingdom's high literacy rate (99%) is attributable to universal public education introduced for the primary level in 1870 and secondary level in 1900. Education is mandatory from ages 5 through 16, although this is in the process of being raised to 18 for England and Wales. "Public" schools are elite private prep schools, such as [[Eton]] and [[Rugby School|Rugby]], attended by youth whose families can afford to pay high tuition rates.

All state-funded schools in the UK are required to start the day with a collective assembly that is 'wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character' <ref>[http://www.tes.co.uk/article.aspx?storycode=387464 Times Educational Supplement]</ref>, although this is not always ahered too and there are small numbers of state-funded [[Muslim]], [[Jew]]ish and [[Hindu]] schools.

About thirty six percent of British students go on to post-secondary education.

Higher education has been a speciality for over 500 years at Oxbridge ([[Oxford University|Oxford]] and [[Cambridge University|Cambridge]]), with new "red brick" universities added in the 19th century and many others in the late 20th century. Universities contribute £33 billion a year to the economy. Britain has a strong attraction for international students, with 342,000 attending in 2007 (compared to 672,000 in the U.S. and 183,000 in Australia). They spend £1.5 billion in tuition in Britain annually, plus another £0.4 billion off campus.

===Demographics===
[[File:Youth UK.JPG|thumb|British youth.]]
A group of islands close to continental Europe, the British Isles have been subject to many invasions and migrations, especially from Scandinavia and the continent, including Roman occupation for several centuries. Contemporary Britons are descended mainly from the varied ethnic stocks that settled there before the 11th century. The pre-Celtic, Celtic, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, and Norse influences were blended in Britain under the Normans, Scandinavian Vikings who had lived in Northern France. Although Celtic languages persist in Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland, as well as Cornwall in south-west England, the predominant language is English, which is primarily a blend of Anglo-Saxon and Norman French.
*Population (2007 est.): 60.8 million.
*Annual population growth rate (2007 est.): 0.275%.
*Major ethnic groups: British 91%, Irish 2%, West Indian and African 3%, South Asian 3%, others 1%.
*Major religions: Church of England (Anglican), Roman Catholic, Church of Scotland (Presbyterian), Muslim.
*Major languages: English
*Education: Years compulsory--12. Attendance--nearly 100%. Literacy--99%.
*Health: Infant mortality rate (2007 est.)--5.01/1,000. Life expectancy (2007 est.)--males 76.23 yrs.; females 81.3 yrs.; total 78.7 years
*Work force (2007, 31.1 million): Services--80.4%; industry--18.2%; agriculture--1.4%.

===Ethnic tensions===

Britain is home to 2.4 million Muslims from numerous ethnicities. This population is growing 10 times faster than the national average. Regarded as one of the most tolerant countries in Europe, Britain struggles with questions of integration, particularly the social exclusion of its Muslims, as well as the psychological aftermath of the July 2005 suicide bombings on London’s public transport system carried out by young Britons of Pakistani descent, which left 52 people dead and over 700 injured.

===Religion===
[[File:Canterbury Cathedral.jpg|thumb|left|350px|Canterbury Cathedral (photographed during 1890-1900).]]
Religious faith, according to a 2011 survey, has declined sharply in Britain over the last two decades. Now only 42% of people describe themselves as Christian, as opposed to 66% in 1990. Most of the decline is due to a drift away from the Church of England, it is claimed, with only 20% claiming allegiance, down from 40%.

In 2003 the Office of National Statistics estimated 29% of the population identified with Anglicanism, 10% with the Catholic Church, and 14% with other Protestant churches. A 2007 survey reported that the number of Catholics (mostly Irish) attending Sunday services has overtaken the number of Anglicans doing so. A September 2006 English Church Census reported that Methodists were decreasing as a percentage of the population, while members of the Church of Jesus Christ Latter-day Saints (Mormons), Pentecostal churches, many churches from Africa, and the Eastern Orthodox Church, almost entirely immigrants, were increasing.<ref> According to [http://www.state.gov/g/drl/rls/irf/2008/108478.htm U.S. State Department Report, 2008]</ref>

Individuals with no religious belief comprised 21% of the population in 2009. Muslims comprise 3% of the population. The Muslim community is predominantly South Asian in origin, but other groups from the Arabian Peninsula, Africa, Southeast Asia, and the Levant are represented. In addition, there is a growing number of indigenous converts. Although estimates vary, the Government places the number of mosques in the whole country at one thousand. Groups comprising 1% or less of the population include Hindus, Sikhs, Jews, and Buddhists. Individuals from Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, and Sikh backgrounds are concentrated in London and other large urban areas, primarily in England.

Attendance at religious services was significantly different from the number of adherents. According to a report released on May 8, 2008, by Religious Trends, only 4 million Christians attend services on a regular basis (defined as at least once a month) in the country. These figures do not include Northern Ireland, where higher%ages reportedly attend both Catholic (more than 60%) and Protestant (more than 35%) services. The Religious Trends report stated that more than 50% of Muslims regularly worship at mosques. Figures for Jews and other religious groups were unavailable.

Religious affiliation was not evenly distributed among ethnicities. According to the 2001 census, approximately 70% of the white population described themselves as Christians. Nearly 75% of black Caribbean respondents stated that they were Christians, as did 70% of black Africans. Meanwhile, 45% of Indians were Hindus and 29% were Sikhs. Approximately 92% of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis were Muslims.

In Northern Ireland, where divisions between nationalists and unionists evolved largely along religious lines, the 2001 census showed that 53.1% were Protestants and 43.8% were Catholics. Many Catholics and Protestants continued to live in segregated communities in Northern Ireland, although many middle class neighborhoods were mixed communities. The policy of the Government remained one of promotion of religious tolerance.

There are two established (or state) churches--The [[Church of England]] (Anglican) and the [[Church of Scotland]] (Presbyterian). The Act of Settlement, enacted in 1688, states that no Catholic, or person married to a Catholic, may ascend the throne.
====Religion in schools====
The Government provides financial support—up to 90% of the total capital costs of the buildings and 100% of running costs, including teachers' salaries - to sectarian educational institutions that are commonly referred to as "faith schools".
[[File:Matthew Boulton College.jpg|thumb|Matthew Boulton College.]]
The Government also helps fund the repair and maintenance of all listed places of worship for religious groups nationwide and contributes to the budget of the Church Conservation Trust, which preserves "redundant" Church of England buildings of architectural or historic significance.

The Government has not classified the Church of Scientology as a religious institution and therefore has not granted the organization recognition for charitable status.

More than 30% of state schools had a religious character. Nearly all of the 6,949 "faith schools" are associated with Christian denominations, although there are 31 Jewish, 7 Islamic, and 2 Sikh schools. An additional two Jewish, three Islamic, and two Sikh schools have also been tentatively approved by the Government to open. In addition, several hundred independent schools of a religious nature receive no state support but must meet government quality standards. Controversy arose in 2006 over 100 Islamic schools when an Office of Standards in Education (Ofsted) evaluation of these schools showed many were "little more than places where the Koran was recited." The schools were given time to correct their deficiencies. A review is due in 2010. Some Christian faith schools also faced controversy. Some were accused of not following the national curriculum in science, teaching creationism instead. During the reporting period, a further controversy erupted when it was learned that some faith schools were not following an "open" admission policy as required by law, denying admission to both special needs children and those outside the faith of the school administrators. The Catholic Church and the Church of England have an agreement to voluntarily accept up to 25% of places for pupils from another religious group or no religious group.

Almost all schools in Northern Ireland receive state support. More than 90% of students attended schools that were either predominantly Catholic or Protestant. Integrated schools served approximately 5% of school-age children whose families voluntarily chose this option, often after overcoming significant obstacles to provide the resources to start a new school and demonstrate its sustainability for 3 years before government funding begins. Demand for places in integrated schools outweighed the limited number of places available. The May 8, 2007, devolution, or granting of power, authorized the Northern Ireland Assembly to decide on academic selection. Now there are more than 50 integrated schools, and the new Government permits existing schools to petition to change from sectarian to integrated. More petition for that status than are granted it. Some have accused the Government of a go-slow approach to avoid sectarian animus.

The law requires religious education for all children, ages 3 to 19, in publicly maintained schools. In England and Wales it forms part of the core curriculum in accordance with the Education Reform Act of 1988. In Scotland, religious education of some sort is mandated by the Education Act of 1980. However, the shape and content of religious instruction throughout the country is decided on a local basis. Locally agreed syllabi are required to reflect the predominant place of Christianity while taking into account the teachings and practices of other principal religions in the country. Syllabuses must be nondenominational and refrain from attempting to convert pupils. Schools with a religious designation follow a syllabus drawn up by the school governors according to the trust deed of the school. All parents have the legal right to request that their children not participate in religious education, but the school must approve this request.

Daily collective prayer or worship of "a wholly or mainly of a broadly Christian character" is practiced in schools in England and Wales, a requirement that may be waived for students who obtain permission of the school authorities. The Education and Inspections Act 2006 permits sixth form students (generally 16-19-year-olds) to withdraw themselves from worship without their parents' permission or action. This new law does not exempt sixth form students from religious education classes. Non-Christian worship is permitted with approval of the authorities. Teachers have the right not to participate in collective worship, without prejudice, unless they work for a faith school.

After several controversial court decisions prohibiting full-face veils in school (but not head scarves) and the wearing of a Christian chastity ring, the Department of Education provided guidance that advises schools to "… act reasonably in accommodating religious requirements," under human rights legislation. Some Muslim groups, including the Islamic Human Rights Commission, said it was inappropriate for the Government to provide guidance that regulated Muslim communities in matters concerning the expression of their religious beliefs. But it is also legally possible under the act, according to the guidance, to have a school uniform policy that "restricts the freedom of pupils to manifest their religion" on the grounds of health and safety and the "protection of the rights and freedoms of others." The Government's guidance is meant to remind "head teachers" to act with a degree of sensitivity when considering decisions that will impact the cultural complexion of their communities.

====Census====

According to the 2011 Census the religious make-up of the UK at that time was:

{| border="1" cellspacing=0 cellpadding=3
|+'''Religions in United Kingdom'''
!Belief
!Thousands
!Proportion
|-
|Christian ||29,000 ||51.6
|-
|No Religion ||9104 ||15.5
|-
|Muslim ||1591 ||2.7
|-
|Hindu ||559 ||1.0
|-
|Sikh ||336 ||0.6
|-
|Jewish ||267 ||0.5
|-
|Other ||179 ||0.3
|-
|Buddhist ||152 ||0.3
|-
|Pagan & Wicca ||40 ||0.1
|-
|Total religious ||45,163 ||76.8
|-
|No answer ||4289 ||7.3
|}
The answers were distorted by an internet campaign just prior to the census, encouraging people to actually question religion that claimed that if at least 50,000 people stated their religion as 'Jedi Knight' it would be officially classified as a religion. This was not true, though the Office of National Statistics does aggregate very small religions into the 'Other' category whereas a religion of 50,000 would be itemised separately. This separate listing does not constitute any form of official recognition.

It should be noted that non-practising Christians and the non-religious group are growing in the UK and Europe. At the same time, there is growth in the Islamic, Sikh and Hindu groups due to immigration.

Two of the four states of the United Kingdom, England and Scotland, have official state religions. The [[Church of England]] is the official religion of England and the (Presbyterian) Church of Scotland is the official religion of Scotland. The (Anglican) Church of Ireland was [[disestablished]] in 1871 and the (Anglican) Church of Wales was disestablished in 1920, whereupon it was renamed the [[Church in Wales]].

===Crown Dependencies===
A number of the smaller [[British Isles]], most importantly [[Jersey]], [[Guernsey]] and the [[Isle of Man]] are '[[Crown dependencies|British Crown Dependencies]]' and not members of the UK. Their governments are independent of that of the UK other than foreign and defence policy (the UK government retains the legal power to overrule the governments of the Dependencies, but this power has not been exercised since 1967), and they are not members of the [[European Union]].

==Sports and Pastimes==
[[File:Wembley Stadium.jpg|thumb|230px|Wembley Stadium.]]
Many of the most popular [[sport]]s in the world today were developed or codified in the UK. These include [[soccer|football]] (which is called ''soccer'' in North America), [[cricket]], [[Rugby (Sport)|rugby]], [[tennis]], [[hockey]], [[baseball]] and [[golf]]. The UK is represented in international competitions by the individual nations (such as in football, the one-day form of cricket and rugby) and by the whole of the UK in other sports (such as [[athletics]], golf and tennis). The Test cricket team is that of 'England & Wales' (colloquially, just 'England') but from time to time has had Scottish and Irish players.

The UK remains a major sporting force both in competition and the administration of sport. It is dominant in several Olympic sports, notably cycling, rowing and sailing and a leading force in cricket, rugby union, and golf.

Certain venues have their own distinct and historical recognition and host a number of international competitions. These include Wimbledon for tennis, Silverstone for motor racing, and St Andrews for golf. There are several major venues for football, rugby and cricket.

Domestic sport is dominated by football with one of the strongest and most popular leagues in the world - the Premier League. This league is sponsored by Barclays Bank, so has the official name "Barclays Premier League". Many of the Premier League's teams are well known outside the United Kingdom, especially the "big four" (Manchester United, Arsenal, Chelsea and Liverpool) and maintain followings around the world. Cricket and both codes of rugby also have strong and popular domestic leagues. Other popular sports include snooker, rowing, golf, tennis, athletics, cycling, darts, horse racing, and motor racing. These most popular sports are well covered by both the print press and television.

Some sports which are more popular in other countries such as volleyball, handball, American football and basketball have small but dedicated followings.

United Kingdom supporters, unlike those of the United States, will virtually never support any team that is an underdog (with the exceptions of West Ham United, Partick Thistle, Bromley, Manchester City, St Mirren, Norwich, Kilmarnock, Blackburn Rovers and the Scottish national team.<ref>http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_football.cfm?page=133</ref>) It is surmised that this is due to the high levels of atheism. <ref>See the evidence provided at [[Mystery:Why Do Atheists Dislike Underdogs?]]</ref>

The UK is also renowned for its music, and is the home of bands like [[The Beatles]] and [[Radiohead]], as well as festivals such as [[Creamfields]]

==Government==
''See also [[British politics]]''
[[File:Jewel House guard in the Tower of London.JPG|thumb|200px|Jewel House guard in the Tower of London.]]
Nationalist movements exist in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, seeking (in the case of Scottish and Welsh nationalists) to dissolve the United Kingdom and to win independence for their respective territories, and in the case of Northern Ireland nationalists and republicans to create a sovereign united Ireland. At the present time, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their own legislatures.

The United Kingdom does not have a written constitution. The equivalent body of law is based on statute, common law, and "traditional rights". Changes may come about formally through new acts of Parliament, informally through the acceptance of new practices and usage, or by judicial precedents. Although Parliament has the theoretical power to make or repeal any law, in actual practice the weight of 700 years of tradition restrains arbitrary actions.

Executive power rests nominally with the monarch but actually is exercised by a committee of ministers (cabinet) selected from among the members of the House of Commons and, less frequently, the House of Lords. The prime minister is normally the leader of the largest party in the House of Commons, and can remain in office for so long as he or she has the support of a majority in that body.

==Parliament==
[[File:Westminster palace Charles Barry.jpg|left|380px]]
Parliament was authorized in the [[Magna Carta]] (1215), and first summoned by King Edward I in 1296, the oldest governing body in the world. Parliament represents the entire country and can legislate for the whole or for any constituent part or combination of parts. Elections are called by the prime minister, but the maximum length of a parliament is usually 5 years (except in wartime). The focus of legislative power is the 646-member House of Commons, which has sole jurisdiction over finance. Normally the government--the prime minister and cabinet--have full control of the House. If they lose control and new general election is held. The House of Lords, although shorn of most of its powers, can still review, amend, or delay temporarily any bills except those relating to the budget. In 1999, the government removed the automatic right of hereditary peers to hold seats in the House of Lords. The current house consists of appointed life peers who hold their seats for life and 92 hereditary peers who will hold their seats only until final reforms have been agreed upon and implemented. The judiciary is independent of the legislative and executive branches but cannot review the constitutionality of legislation.

Members of the House of Commons are elected to represent specific geographic constituencies. Members are elected on a "First past the post" system and there is no proportional representation. The upshot is that a third party with under 25% of the vote typically obtains very few seats.

==Constituent countries==
[[File:Scottish Eilean Donan castle.jpg|thumb|300px|Scottish Eilean Donan castle.]]
The separate identities of each of the United Kingdom's constituent parts are also reflected in their respective governmental structures. Up until the recent devolution of power to Scotland and Wales, a cabinet minister (the Secretary of State for Wales) handled Welsh affairs at the national level with the advice of a broadly representative council for Wales. Scotland maintains, as it did before union with England, different systems of law (Roman-French), education, local government, judiciary, and national church (the Church of Scotland instead of the Church of England). In addition, separate departments grouped under a Secretary of State for Scotland, who also is a cabinet member, handled most domestic matters. In late 1997, however, following approval of referenda by Scottish and Welsh voters (though only narrowly in Wales), the British Government introduced legislation to establish a Scottish Parliament and a Welsh Assembly. The first elections for the two bodies were held May 6, 1999. The Welsh Assembly opened on May 26, and the Scottish Parliament opened on July 1, 1999. The devolved legislatures have largely taken over most of the functions previously performed by the Scottish and Welsh offices.

Northern Ireland had its own Parliament and prime minister from 1921 to 1973, when the British Government imposed direct rule in order to deal with the deteriorating political and security situation. From 1973, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, based in London, was responsible for the region, including efforts to resolve the issues that lay behind the "the troubles."

By the mid-1990s, gestures toward peace encouraged by successive British governments and by President Clinton began to open the door for restored local government in Northern Ireland. An Irish Republican Army (IRA) cease-fire and nearly 2 years of multiparty negotiations, led by former U.S. Senator George Mitchell, resulted in the Good Friday Agreement of 10 April 1998, which was subsequently approved by majorities in both Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Key elements of the agreement include devolved government, a commitment of the parties to work toward "total disarmament of all paramilitary organisations," police reform, and enhanced mechanisms to guarantee human rights and equal opportunity. The Good Friday Agreement also called for formal cooperation between the Northern Ireland institutions and the Government of the Republic of Ireland, and it established the British-Irish Council, which includes representatives of the British and Irish Governments as well as the devolved Governments of Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. Devolved government was reestablished in Northern Ireland in December 1999.

The Agreement (more commonly known as the "Good Friday Agreement", and more rarely as the Belfast Agreement<ref>http://www.nio.gov.uk/index/key-issues/the-agreement.htm</ref>) was reached on Friday, April 10 1998 in Belfast and provides for a 108-member elected Assembly, overseen by a 12-minister Executive Committee (cabinet) in which unionists and nationalists share leadership responsibility. Northern Ireland elects 18 representatives to the Westminster Parliament in London. However, the five Sinn Fein Members of Parliament (MPs), who won seats in the 2004 election, have refused to claim their seats.

===Principal Government Officials===
[[File:674uyyhju.jpg|thumb|David Cameron]]
*Head of State '''- Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Her other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith''' who, as Head of State for many other countries also holds other titles particular to her role and rule as Head of State for those countries. More commonly referred to as '''HM''' (Her Majesty) '''Queen Elizabeth II'''

The Cabinet
*Prime Minister, First Lord of the Treasury and Minister for the Civil Service '''- Rt Hon [[David Cameron]] MP'''
*Deputy Prime Minister and Lord President of the council '''- Rt Hon [[Nick Clegg]] MP'''<ref name="LibDem">Member of the [[Liberal Democrats]]</ref>
*First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs '''- Rt Hon [[William Hague]] MP'''
*Chancellor of the Exchequer '''- Rt Hon [[George Osborne]] MP'''
*Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor '''- Rt Hon Kenneth Clark QC MP'''
*Secretary of State for the Home Department and Minister for Women and Equalities '''- Rt Hon Theresa May MP'''
*Secretary of State for Defence '''- Rt Hon Dr Liam Fox MP'''
*Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and President of the Board of Trade '''- Rt Hon Dr Vince Cable MP'''<ref name = "LibDem" />
*Secretary of State for Work and Pensions '''- Rt Hon Iain Duncan Smith MP'''
*Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change '''- Rt Hon Chris Huhne MP'''<ref name = "LibDem" />
*Secretary of State for Health '''- Rt Hon Andrew Lansley CBE MP'''
*Secretary of State for Education'''- Rt Hon Michael Gove MP'''
*Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government '''- Rt Hon Eric Pickles MP'''
*Secretary of State for Transport '''- Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP'''
*Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs '''- Rt Hon Caroline Spelman MP'''
*Secretary of State for International Development '''- Rt Hon Andrew Mitchell MP'''
*Secretary of State for Northern Ireland '''- Rt Hon Owen Paterson MP'''
*Secretary of State for Scotland '''- Rt Hon Michael Moore MP'''<ref name = "LibDem" />
*Secretary of State for Wales '''- Rt Hon Cheryl Gillan MP'''
*Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport '''- Rt Hon Jeremy Hunt MP'''
*Chief Secretary to the Treasury '''- Rt Hon Danny Alexander MP'''<ref name = "LibDem" />
*Leader of the House of Lords and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster '''- Rt Hon The Lord Strathclyde PC'''
*Minister without Portfolio '''- Rt Hon The Baroness Warsi PC

Also attend Cabinet meetings:
*Minister for the Cabinet Office and Paymaster General'''- Rt Hon Francis Maude MP'''
*Minister of State in the Cabinet Office'''- Rt Hon Oliver Letwin MP'''
*Minister for Universities and Science '''- David Willetts MP'''
*Leader of the House of Commons, Lord Privy Seal '''- Rt Hon Sir George Young Bt MP'''
*Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury and Chief Whip '''- Rt Hon Patrick McLoughlin MP'''
*Attorney General '''- Rt Hon Dominic Grieve QC MP'''<ref>http://www.parliament.uk/directories/hciolists/hmg.cfm</ref>

===Political Conditions===
[[David Cameron]] became Prime Minister on May 11, 2010, after [[Gordon Brown]] resigned. Cameron leads a [[Conservative Party|Con]]-[[Liberal Democrats|Lib Dem]] coalition after failing to achieve a majority in the the 2010 general election

===Membership in the European Union===
The [[Conservative Party|Conservative]] government of [[Edward Heath|Sir Edward Heath]] took the UK into the [[European Union]] in 1973. The [[Labour Party]] under [[Harold Wilson]] won the 1974 general elections and due to splits within the party, called the only national [[referendum]] asking the people if they wanted to stay in the Union. The "yes" vote won by a margin of approximately two to one. The Labour and Conservative parties have since had deep divisions over Union membership. Labour's 1983 manifesto promised to leave the Union, and whilst the Conservative party have never pledged to leave the Union, a growing band of "Eurosceptics" threatened to tear the party apart in the 1990s. All three major parties wish to stay in the Union although disagree over the level of integration, but smaller parties such as the UK Independence Party and the Referendum Party campaigned on the single issue of sovereignty being lost to the Union.

==Defence and Foreign Relations==
[[File:11943452 115b299206.jpg|right|240px]]
The United Kingdom is a founding member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and is one of NATO's major European maritime, air, and land powers; it ranks third among NATO countries in total defence expenditure. The United Kingdom has been a member of the European Community (now European Union) since 1973. In the United Nations, the United Kingdom is a permanent member of the Security Council. The U.K. held the Presidency of the G-8 during 2005; it held the EU Presidency from July to December 2005.

The British Armed Forces are charged with protecting the United Kingdom and its overseas territories, promoting Britain's wider security interests, and supporting international peacekeeping efforts. The 37,000-member Royal Navy, which includes 6,000 Royal Marine commandos, is in charge of the United Kingdom's independent strategic nuclear arm, which consists of four Trident missile submarines. The British Army, consisting of approximately 99,200 personnel, the Royal Air Force, with 42,000 personnel, along with the Royal Navy and Royal Marines, are active and regular participants in NATO and other coalition operations. Approximately 9% of the British Armed Forces is female, and 4% of British forces represent ethnic minorities.
[[File:Royal Naval college UK.jpg|thumb|center|380px|Royal Naval College.]]
===Iraq===
The U.K. was the United States' main coalition partner under the designation Operation TELIC. Under UN Security Council Resolution 1483, the U.K. also shared with the United States responsibility for civil administration in Iraq and was an active participant in the Coalition Provisional Authority before the handover of Iraqi sovereignty on June 28, 2004. Britain's participation in the Iraq war and its aftermath remains a domestically controversial issue.

<blockquote>
Iraqi oil supply was considered to be 'vital' to British interests. The British Government saw Iraqi oil as "vital" to the UK's long-term energy security, and the effective privatisation of its oil industry was central to the post-invasion plan for the country, according to previously unseen Whitehall documents. [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/iraqi-oil-supply-was-considered-to-be-vital-to-british-interests-2270072.html] ''The Independent.''
</blockquote>

The Iraq Inquiry is conducted to identify lessons that can be learned from the Iraq conflict; the inquiry is concerned over Mr. Blair's evidence on the legal advice he received before agreeing to join the invasion, and the timing of the decision to go to war. [http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/chilcot-to-grill-blair-on-how-he-misled-iraq-war-inquiry-2185725.html] The Chair of the Inquiry, Sir John Chilcot (1939) was Staff Counsellor to the Security and Intelligence Agencies (1999-2004) and the National Criminal Intelligence Service (2002-06).

===Afghanistan===
Britain stood shoulder to shoulder with the United States following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the U.S., and its military forces are part of the coalition force in Afghanistan. The British force in [[Afghanistan War|Afghanistan]] is at 9,000 in late 2009 and will rise by an extra 500 troops in 2010. British forces are primarily based in the Helmand region, where they are on the front line in the war against continued Taliban operations. In addition, Britain has contributed more than £500 million to Afghan reconstruction--the second-largest donor after the U.S.
===Israel===
Britain has shown a greater willingness than the United States to criticize the Israelis over settlements and what some call the disproportionate responses to provocations from Gaza and southern Lebanon. (Jewish Labour MP Gerald Kaufman is among the most vocal.) Like his predecessors, both Labour and Conservative, former Foreign Secretary Milliband has been unequivocal: "Settlements are illegal under international law," he told Parliament in 2008; "They are a major blockage to peace in the Middle East on the basis of a two-state solution." His successor William Hague, on 20 March 2011, "expressed our serious concern over the recent announcement of 400 new housing units in the West Bank. Continued settlements run contrary to peace.” A BBC poll in March 2011 found that 14% of British subjects have a generally positive opinion of Israel while 66% have a generally negative opinion.

===Relations with the United States===
The United Kingdom is one of the United States' closest allies, and British foreign policy emphasises close coordination with the United States. Bilateral cooperation reflects the common language, ideals, and democratic practices of the two nations. Relations were strengthened by the countries' alliances during both World Wars, and its role as a founding member of NATO, in the Korean conflict, in the Persian Gulf War, and in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The United Kingdom and the United States continually consult on foreign policy issues and global problems and share major foreign and security policy objectives.

The United Kingdom is the fifth-largest market for U.S. goods exports after Canada, Mexico, Japan, and China, and the sixth-largest supplier of U.S. imports after Canada, China, Mexico, Japan, and Germany. U.S. exports of goods and services to the United Kingdom in 2006 totaled $92 billion, while U.S. imports from the U.K. totaled $93 billion. The United States has had a trade deficit with the United Kingdom since 1998. The United Kingdom is a large source of foreign tourists in the United States. In 2005, 3.4 million U.S. residents visited the United Kingdom, while 4.2 million U.K. residents visited the United States.

The United States and the United Kingdom share the world's largest foreign direct investment partnership. U.S. investment in the United Kingdom reached $324 billion in 2005, while U.K. direct investment in the U.S. totaled $282 billion. This investment sustains more than 1 million American jobs.

==Economy==
[[File:London.jpg|thumb|left|280px|London's financial center.]]
Britain has been hard hit by the [[Recession of 2008]], with its major banks taken over or subsidized by the government. Real gross domestic product declined by 4.6% in 2009, and is expected to rise by 0.6% before 2010 and probably will continue to increase by 1% in 2011.

Britain has the fifth-largest economy in the world, is the second-largest economy in the European Union, and is a major international trading power. A highly developed, diversified, market-based economy with extensive social welfare services provides most residents with a high standard of living. Unemployment and inflation levels are amongst the lowest within the European Union.

Since 1979, the British Government has privatised most state-owned companies, including British Steel, British Airways, British Telecom, British Coal, British Aerospace, and British Gas, although in some cases the government retains a "golden share" in these companies. The previous Labour government continued the privatisation policy of its Conservative predecessor, particularly by encouraging "public-private partnerships" (partial privatisation) in such areas as the London Underground. The economy of the United Kingdom is now primarily based on private enterprise, accounting for approximately four-fifths of employment and output.
[[File:Bluewater Shopping Centre, Kent, England Crop 2009.jpg|thumb|440px|Bluewater Shopping Centre, Kent, 2009.]]
London ranks alongside New York as a leading international financial centre. London's financial exports contribute greatly to the United Kingdom's balance of payments. Ratings agencies rank the United Kingdom's banking sector as one of the strongest in the world and its banks are amongst the most profitable in the G-8. It is a global leader in emissions trading and is home to the Alternative Investment Market (AIM). It is also a government priority to make London the leading center of Islamic finance.

Britain is the European Union's only significant energy exporter. It is also one of the world's largest energy consumers, and most analysts predict a shift in U.K. status from net exporter to net importer of energy by 2020, possibly sooner. Oil production in the U.K. is levelling off. While North Sea natural gas production continues to rise, gains may be offset by ever-increasing consumption. North Sea oil and gas exploration activities are shifting to smaller fields and to increments of larger, developed fields, presenting opportunities for smaller, independent energy operators to become active in North Sea production.
*GDP (at current market prices, 2007 est.): US$1.93 trillion.
*Annual growth rate (2009 est.): -4.6%
*Per capita GDP (2006 est.): US$31,800.
*Natural resources: Coal, oil, natural gas.
*Agriculture (1.1% of GDP): Products--cereals, oilseed, potatoes, vegetables, cattle, sheep, poultry, fish.
*Industry: Types--steel, heavy engineering and metal manufacturing, textiles, motor vehicles and aircraft, construction (5.2% of GDP), electronics, chemicals.
*Trade (2006 est.): Exports of goods and services--US$468.8 billion: manufactured goods, fuels, chemicals; food, beverages, tobacco. Major markets--U.S., European Union. Imports of goods and services--US$603 billion: manufactured goods, machinery, fuels, foodstuffs. Major suppliers--U.S., European Union, Japan.

===Currency===
The currency of the United Kingdom is the [[Pound|Pound Sterling]], commonly called Pound and written £ or GBP, divided into 100 New Pence (now commonly just called pence or 'p'). Traditionally the UK had a complicated triple currency structure of 20 [[shilling|shillings]] to the Pound and 12 "old pence" (represented by a "d" from the Roman ''denarius'') to the shilling, making a total of 240 pence to the Pound. This system was abandoned in 1971 due to difficulties with computerised accounting systems, in favour of the current [[decimal]] system.

The UK has never joined the [[Euro]] zone.

==History==
[[File:Stonehenge.jpg|thumb|left|Stonehenge.]]
The Roman invasion of Britain in 43AD and most of Britain's subsequent incorporation into the Roman Empire stimulated development and brought more active contacts with the rest of Europe. However, there was no permanent Roman imprint apart from roads and locations for cities. As Rome's strength declined, the country again was exposed to invasion--including the pivotal incursions of the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes in the fifth and sixth centuries AD--up to the Norman conquest in 1066. Norman rule effectively ensured Britain's safety from further intrusions; certain institutions, which remain characteristic of Britain, could develop. Among these are a political, administrative, cultural, and economic centre in London; a separate but established church and distinctive and distinguished university education.

====Union====

Both Wales and Scotland were independent kingdoms that resisted English rule. The English conquest of Wales succeeded in 1282 under Edward I, and the Statute of Rhuddlan established English rule 2 years later. To appease the Welsh, Edward's son (later Edward II), who had been born in Wales, was made Prince of Wales in 1301. The tradition of bestowing this title on the eldest son of the British Monarch continues today. An act of 1536 completed the political and administrative union of England and Wales.

While maintaining separate parliaments, England and Scotland were ruled by the same king beginning in 1603, when James VI of Scotland succeeded his cousin Elizabeth I as James I of England. In the ensuing 100 years, strong religious and political differences divided the kingdoms. Finally, in 1707, England and Scotland were unified as Great Britain, sharing a single Parliament at Westminster.

Ireland's invasion by the Anglo-Normans in 1170 led to centuries of strife. Successive English kings sought to conquer Ireland. In the early 17th century, large-scale settlement of the north from Scotland and England began. After its defeat, Ireland was subjected, with varying degrees of success, to control and regulation by Britain.

The legislative union of Great Britain and Ireland was completed on January 1, 1801, under the name of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland (normally shortened to "Great Britain" or "Britain"). However, armed struggle for independence continued sporadically into the 20th century. The Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921 established the Irish Free State, which subsequently left the Commonwealth and became a republic after World War II. Six northern, predominantly [[Protestant]], Irish counties have remained part of the United Kingdom.

====British Expansion and Empire====
[[Image:Sir Francis Grant's Portrait of Queen Victoria.jpg|right|200px|thumb|''Queen Victoria'', by [[Sir Francis Grant]].]]
The '''British Empire''' was the [[List of largest empires|largest empire]] in history and, for over a century, was the foremost [[Great power|global power]]. It was a product of the [[Age of Discovery]], which began with the maritime explorations of the 15th century, that sparked the era of the European [[Colonialism|colonial]] empires. By 1921, the British Empire held sway over a population of about 458 million people, approximately one-quarter of the world's population.<ref>Angus Maddison. ''The World Economy: A Millennial Perspective'' (p. 98, 242). [[Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development|OECD]], Paris, 2001.</ref> It covered about 36.7 million km² (14.2 million square miles),<ref>Bruce R. Gordon. [http://www.hostkingdom.net/earthrul.html ''To Rule the Earth...''] (See [http://www.hostkingdom.net/Bibliography.html Bibliography] for sources used.)</ref> about a quarter of Earth's total land area. As a result, its political, linguistic and cultural legacy is widespread. At the peak of its power, it was often said that "[[The empire on which the sun never sets|the sun never sets on the British Empire]]" because its span across the globe ensured that the sun was always shining on at least one of its numerous [[colonies]] or subject nations.<ref>This phrase had already been used a few centuries before by the king [[Charles I of Spain]], referring to the [[Spanish Empire]].</ref>

Begun initially to support William the Conqueror's (c. 1029-1087) holdings in France, Britain's policy of active involvement in continental European affairs endured for several hundred years. By the end of the 14th century, foreign trade, originally based on wool exports to Europe, had emerged as a cornerstone of national policy.

During the five decades following [[World War II]], most of the territories of the Empire became independent. Many went on to join the [[Commonwealth of Nations]], a free association of independent states. <ref>T. O. Lloyd, ''The British Empire, 1558-1995. 2nd ed. (1996). </ref> Some have retained the [[British monarch]] as their [[head of state]] to become independent [[Commonwealth realm]]s.

====Sea Power====
The foundations of sea power were gradually laid to protect English trade and open up new routes. Defeat of the Spanish Armada in 1588 firmly established England as a major sea power. Thereafter, its interests outside Europe grew steadily. Attracted by the spice trade, English mercantile interests spread first to the Far East. In search of an alternate route to the Spice Islands, John Cabot reached the North American continent in 1498. Sir Walter Raleigh organized the first, short-lived colony in Virginia in 1584, and permanent English settlement began in 1607 at Jamestown, Virginia. During the next two centuries, Britain extended its influence abroad and consolidated its political development at home, as the Royal Navy dominated the seas.
====Industrial Revolution====
[[File:Bradford Industrial Museum.jpg|thumb|left|Bradford Industrial Museum.]]
Britain's [[industrial revolution]] greatly strengthened its ability to oppose Napoleonic France. By the end of the Napoleonic Wars in 1815, Britain was the foremost European power, and its navy ruled the seas. Peace in Europe allowed the British to focus their interests on more remote parts of the world, and, during this period, the British Empire reached its zenith. British colonial expansion reached its height largely during the reign of Queen Victoria (1837-1901). Queen Victoria's reign witnessed the spread of British technology, commerce, language, and government throughout the British Empire, which, at its greatest extent, encompassed roughly one-fifth to one-quarter of the world's area and population. It is controversial whether British colonies accelerated or slowed Britain's economic growth, for its growth rate fell below nations without empires, especially the U.S. and germany. Democracy came in fits and starts in a series of reforms that finally, by the 1920s, allowed all adults to vote.

 

====End of Empire====
By the time of Queen Victoria's death in 1901, other nations, including the United States and Germany, had developed their own industries; Britain lost its comparative economic advantage, and the ambitions of its rivals had grown. The UK joined world war I because of the invasion of [[Belgium]], and subsequently began [[World War II]] after the invasion of [[Poland]]. The losses and destruction of [[World War I|The First World War]], the [[Great Depression]] of the 1930s, the independence of the Dominions, and decades of relatively slow growth eroded the Britain's preeminent international position of the previous century.

Nationalism became stronger in other parts of the empire, particularly in India and Egypt.

In 1926, Britain granted Australia, Canada, and New Zealand almost complete autonomy as "dominions"; beginning with the independence of India and Pakistan in 1947, the remainder of the British Empire was almost completely dismantled by the 1960s.

== United Kingdom and moral decline ==
[[Image:Hitchens,_Stanford.jpg‎ |right|thumb|200px|[[Christopher Hitchens]] is an outspoken [[atheism|atheist]] in Britain.]]
''See also:'' [[Britain and morality]] and [[Atheism and morality]]

In 2011 and in recent years, there have been number of reports on the decline of morality in [[Britain]].<ref>
*[http://creation.com/britain-needs-god ''Britain needs God'' by Creation Ministries International]
*[http://creation.com/lying-as-survival-strategy ''Why is England burning? by Creation Ministries International'']
*[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/8695318/UK-riots-David-Cameron-promises-to-restore-sense-of-morality-as-police-get-new-powers.html UK riots: David Cameron promises to restore 'sense of morality' as police get new powers]
*[http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/Article.aspx?id=171651 British morality, Jerusalem Post, By JERUSALEM POST, 03/24/2010]
*[http://www.socialaffairsunit.org.uk/blog/archives/000237.php The Strange Death of Moral Britain by Christie Davies]
*[http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/economy/economy-lab/carl-mortished/uk-welfare-plan-saves-money-but-morally-bankrupt/article1790653/ U.K. welfare plan: Saves money, but morally bankrupt, Globe and Mail,Nov. 09, 2010 by Carl Mortished]</ref> [[Peter Hitchens]] is the [[ex-atheists|ex-atheist]], now [[Church of England]] brother of atheist [[Christopher Hitchens]]. In an article entitled "Britain Needs God" [[Creation Ministries International]] declared:
{{cquote|Peter also wrote of what he saw as the growing public discourtesy and incivility in [[Britain]]. When he returned to London, after a five-year absence, he was shocked by the decline in people’s behaviour. He commented, “The rapid vanishing of [[Christianity]] from public consciousness and life, as the last fully [[Christian]] generation ages and disappears, seems to me to be a major part of it. I do not think I would have been half so shocked by the squalor and rudeness of 1990 [[Moscow]], if I had not come from a country where Christian forbearance was still well-established. If I had then been able to see the [[London]] of 2010, I would have been equally shocked.” In many respects, Peter’s book is a warning to people, as to the kind of society they can expect if they continue to reject Christian beliefs.<ref>[http://creation.com/britain-needs-god ''Britain needs God'']</ref>}}

In an article entitled "Why is England Burning", the Australian Bible study site Creation Ministries International ascribed the British riots of August 2012 to a "moral and social decline" that has been "the inevitable consequence of a nation rejecting God and His Word."<ref>[http://creation.com/lying-as-survival-strategy ''Why is England burning?'']</ref>

== See also ==
*[[English Painting]]
*[[British politics]]
*[[June 2007 UK terror attacks]]

== External links ==

*[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/nov/15/sir-john-chilcot-wrong-man Sir John Chilcot 'wrong man to head Iraq invasion inquiry'.]
*[http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/iraqi-oil-supply-was-considered-to-be-vital-to-british-interests-2270072.html Iraqi oil supply was considered to be 'vital' to British interests.]

== Notes ==

<references/>

{{European Union}}

[[Category:United Kingdom|United Kingdom]]
[[Category:European Countries]]
[[Category:NATO members]]
[[Category:Christian-Majority Countries]]
[[Category:British Empire]]

Talk:United Kingdom

2012-02-14T17:52:48Z

SusanP: /* Moral Decline? */

==Name==

The Article states that Great Britain is a short form of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Actually, Great Britain is the name of the largest Island in the United Kingdom, and should not be used to describe the whole country. --[[User:Eyupdutch|Eyupdutch]] 09:28, 22 June 2009 (EDT)
::the article is correct. Please look at a dictionary. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 21:33, 22 June 2009 (EDT)
== Title ==
'Great Britain' redirects automatically to 'United Kingdom.' This is incorrect as the two terms are not interchangeable. The former is strictly the name of the Island which comprises the Mainland of England, Scotland and Wales, whereas the United Kingdom, is the name of a country, who's territory extends over many islands, including Northern Ireland. There should be a seperate article for 'Great Britain.'

:It is true that this difference needs to be made clear in the entry -- but there seems little sense in having a separate entry for two such overlapping entities! [[User:Boethius|Boethius]] 11:04, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

That's a fair point I suppose!
Consider it done : )

:::I see that "Great Britain" still redirects here.--[[User:British_cons|British_cons]] [[User_talk:British_cons|(talk)]] 06:40, 23 March 2007 (EDT)

::::The [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland]] also redirects here, which is the entity before Ireland got its independence. I put the redirect there for now to simply allow articles like [[War of 1812]] to link to other articles, but someone who knows a lot on the history of those countries should fix it. [[User:GodlessLiberal|GodlessLiberal]] 23:03, 31 March 2007 (EDT)
::::: There are now separate articles for the [[Kingdom of Great Britain]] (the island is at [[Great Britain]]) and the [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland]]. If someone has time it might be useful to have articles for pre-Union [[Kingdom of England|England]], [[Kingdom of Scotland|Scotland]] and [[Kingdom of Ireland|Ireland]]. I think it would be useful for all of them to have a notice at the top pointing to this article as the present day successor state. [[User:Mrjimbob|Mrjimbob]] 19:34, 22 August 2007 (EDT)
:::::: There's already articles on [[England]] and [[Scotland]] and more than one on [[Ireland]]. Do these not suit the purpose? [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 05:44, 24 August 2007 (EDT)

==Currency==
Not changed the article text but I'm 99% sure that while English money is legal tender in Scotland, NI et al the reverse isn't true - can anyone confirm this & if so amend the article appropriately? [[User:Tracy C Copeland|Tracy C Copeland]] 13:24, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

:The paragraph, as it is, is ok and correct - you could expand it if you wanted to, but the situation's a little complex:
:*Bank of England coins are legal tender throughout the UK.
:*Bank of England notes are only legal tender in England and Wales (and possibly Channel Islands & Isle of Man).
:*Channel Islands & Isle of Man notes and coins are only legal tender those jurisdictions.
:*Scottish & NI notes aren't legal tender anywhere.
:*So no notes are legal tender in Scotland & NI at all.
:But "legal tender" doesn't really mean anything. All the forms of currency are perfectly acceptable anywhere in the UK - you'd have a hard time convincing a court that you had a right not to accept Scottish notes (for payment of debt) just because they aren't "legal tender". I got this information from [http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/banknotes/about/faqs.htm here], [http://www.siliconglen.com/Scotland/1_7.html here] and [http://www.royalmint.com/RoyalMint/web/site/Corporate/Home/Corp_faq.asp here] --[[User:JamesK|JamesK]] 20:10, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

::* The Bank of England doesn't produce coins, that's the Royal Mint.
::* Only in England and Wales does the concept of 'legal tender' exist. The Channel Islands and Isle of Man are not part of the UK.
::* Yes.
::* As above, Under Scots Law and Northern Irish law there is a broader concept of what is 'legal tender' as it doesn't technically exist under their law.
::* Scottish and Northern Irish notes are usually accepted thoughtout the United Kingdom, although sometimes an explanation is required.
:: [[User:Mrjimbob|Mrjimbob]] 13:14, 26 June 2007 (EDT)

==Anthem==
Wales is the only country of the UK to have an official national anthem. Scotland hasn't ("Flower of Scotland" is definitely not official), England hasn't, and "God Save the Queen" is not even the official anthem of the UK. [[User:Dorpfeld|Dorpfeld]] 15:30, 22 March 2007 (EDT)

== Article has a superfluous "The" in the title. ==

Have no problems with the article but why is the title "'''The''' United Kingdom" rather than "United Kingdom"? After all there are not articles for "'''The''' People's Republic of China" or "'''The''' United States of America".

Perhaps someone could move the page to "United Kingdom"...? It would then be more consistent with other names, easier to search for, and easier to link to. --[[User:Jeremiah4-22|Jeremiah4-22]] 19:21, 26 March 2007 (EDT)
:Since "United Kingdom" redirects to "The United Kingdom" searching and linking shouldn't be a problem but I agree it should probably be changed for consistency. --[[User:JamesK|JamesK]] 10:02, 27 March 2007 (EDT)

== Darts? ==
I live in the U.K. and last time i looked darts was not a popular sport.{{unsigned|Nick227}}
:Yes, it is. Most local pubs have a dart board with many having darts teams. A quick look at the top darts players shows the vasy majority are British. [[User:stevendavy|stevendavy]]
:I would agree with that. It's not as popular to watch as football or cricket or rugby, but I would guess that nearly as many people play darts in a week as play football. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 09:33, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

== Religion ==

Hey im British and im a little concerned on the whole religion thing. The table says that over 70% of people are christian which is probably true however the article doesn`t explain that most people do not go to church, no more than 2 million people in the uk still go to chuch. We also have very liberal social policies, we support science, we support gay rights (they can have civil ceromonies, join the army ,there are discrimination laws to protect them and most people now accept them), we are pro choice. The Uk is a very liberal country in comparison to the US but this table makes us sound more conservative than the US which it is not.

Politically all of the three mainstream parties are more liberal than the US democrats as the conservative party has moved to the centre left since the introduction of the human rights Act 1998. If I can source all this would it be a problem to include it? Yours --[[User:Realist2|Realist2]] 09:41, 19 December 2007 (EST)

:Source and include it, please and thank you! [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 10:38, 19 December 2007 (EST)

== Government Section ==

The section on government now carries a lengthy discussion on recent developments in the politics of Northern Ireland - would this be better having its own section or moved to its own article? [[User:Ferret|-- Ferret]] [[User talk:Ferret|Nice old chat]] 16:54, 21 December 2007 (EST)
: It probably should be moved to its own article. [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 23:55, 21 December 2007 (EST)

:I just did this. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 09:31, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

==England v United Kingdom==
A lot of the history in this article is really the history of England. That's a problem as we need to separate the UK from England in people's mind. We either need to write about the history of all four constituent countries (not really practical at this stage) or restrict ourselves to history of the UK after union. I suggest the latter. [[User:Daphnea|Daphnea]] 09:35, 24 June 2008 (EDT)

== Principal government officials ==

I edited this sub-section to add the Lord Chancellor and the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who are unquestionably principal government officials. Another editor deleted the names of these people but kept the names of two diplomats (ambassadors to the US and UN), who are comparatively minor officials.

That's a bit peculiar. Any comments before I revert that editor's edits? From a UK perspective, a list of principal government officials would include the PM, Lord Chancellor, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Foreign Secretary and probably Home Secretary. The Mayor of London and the First Minister of Scotland have a much higher public profile than any ambassador. [[User:WaZi|WaZi]] 20:00, 28 September 2008 (EDT)

== A name change with no change? ==

The article now includes the following:
{{QuoteBox|The official name of the country (since 1922) is ''The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland''. ... From 1801 to 1922 the official name was ''The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland''.}}
I assume that one of these versions is in correct.

[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 00:48, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

:Neither is correct. Although the [[Irish Free State]] seceded in 1922, the name was not changed by Act of Parliament for another five or so years - I think 1927, but will check. Up to that point the name was the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 04:16, 29 September 2008 (EDT)
:In fact is says this in the opening paragraph. [[User:Bugler|Bugler]] 04:18, 29 September 2008 (EDT)

== Jedi Knights? not ==

The "Jedi Knight" response to the religion question was an organized hoax. Amusing indeed, but not an indicator of religious affiliation. see [http://www.snopes.com/religion/jedi.asp details] [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 19:50, 30 September 2008 (EDT)

== Politics ==

Someone really needs to update the section that talks about the MPs, especially since so many of them are walking now.

Also (although completely unrelated), the descriptors of "United Kingdom" and "Great Britain" need to be changed to show that there actually is a difference between them and that the terms are not interchangeable. I would suggest adding in a descriptor of "British Isles" as well, since that has a third meaning. [[User:Ululator|Ululator]] 19:56, 13 June 2009 (EDT)

== Moral Decline? ==

Can we remove this pointless section from an otherwise good article? Being British, it's quite insulting that such a baseless claim is added, with no real evidence. I actually live in Britain, and I see no evidence in moral decline. --[[User:RedGoliath|RedGoliath]] 16:30, 6 February 2012 (GMT)
:I tend to agree. If people want to know what the cork hat wearers at CMI think of the UK, they can go on the CMI website. We have no need to parrot them.--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 12:43, 6 February 2012 (EST)
::Me too. I've visited a couple of times and while I wasn't impressed at all the drunkenness I saw, the UK seems to be doing pretty much fine. It certainly has a lot less crime than the USA, which is a big indicator of immorality. --[[User:GeorgeLi|GeorgeLi]] 12:47, 6 February 2012 (EST)
:::Who do I contact to remove the section? I don't want to do it myself, because someone with blocking rights might mistake me for a vandal. --[[User:RedGoliath|RedGoliath]] 19:25, 6 February 2012 (GMT)
::::I believe all the Moral Decline section has been written by [[User:Conservative]]. There's also some really nice useless section about [[Sweden]] and probably other countries... That's a shame.--[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 15:38, 6 February 2012 (EST)
:::::Well, I have condensed the second quote, which was really two long, to give just the facts of the matter, encyclopedia style. (It still remains on the dedicated [[Britain and morality]] page.)--[[User:CPalmer|CPalmer]] 11:18, 7 February 2012 (EST)
:well conservative remains one of the biggest tin hat users here. I'll remove those comments.[[User:SusanP|SusanP]]

Hawaii

2012-02-14T17:50:13Z

SusanP: /* Politics */

[[Image:NOAA_Hawaii_7.gif‎ |right|thumb|350px|Hawaiian Island Chain - from Southeast to Northwest.‎]]
'''Hawaii''' (Hawaiian: Hawai'i) was an independent country that joined the [[United States of America]] voluntarily in 1898 and became a state on August 21st, 1959--it was the fiftieth (and last) state to enter into the union. In 2005 it had a population of 1,275,194 on 6,423 square miles of land. <ref>http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108204.html</ref> It is located in the Pacific Ocean west and south of the mainland of the United States. It is the only American state to have 2 official languages. The main Hawaiian islands are (east to west) Hawai'i (or 'the Big Island'), [[Maui]], Kaho'olawe, [[Molokai|Moloka'i]], [[Lanai|Lana'i]], [[Oahu|O'ahu]], [[Kauai|Kaua'i]] and Ni'ihau. The state capital, [[Honolulu]], and [[Pearl Harbor]] are both on the island of Oahu. The origin of the name ''Hawai'i'' is obscure. It could be derived from the Polynesian ''Owhyii'', 'Place of the Gods', or from ''Hawaiki'' (the former name of Raiatea in the [[Society Islands]]), or may have the meaning 'Homeland'.<ref>Concise Dictionary of World Place-Names (Oxford 2005) p210</ref>

{{clear}}
{{USState
|name=Hawaii
|flag=Hawaii_State_Flag.gif
|motto="Ua mau ke ea o ka aina I ka pono" (The life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness)
|nick=The Aloha State
|capital=Honolulu
|language=English, Hawaiian <ref>http://hawaii.gov/lrb/con/conart15.html</ref>
|governor=Neil Abercrombie
|gparty=Democrat
|senator2=Daniel Akaka
|s2party=Democrat
|s2phone=(202) 224-6361
|s2email=http://akaka.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home Contact
|senator1=Daniel Inouye
|s1party=Democrat
|s1phone=(202) 224-3934
|s1email=http://inouye.senate.gov/abtform.html Contact
|population=1,211,537
|date=August 21, 1959 (50th)
}}
==Ancient History==
The original settlers of the Hawaiian island chain were Polynesian explorers who voyaged in ocean-worthy canoes from the southern Pacific (primarily the Marquesas), arriving in the islands circa 300-600 AD. In addition to their Polynesian culture and traditions, these earliest settlers brought with them an array of plants and animals. A second wave of migrations between the Hawaiian and Society Islands took place circa 1000-1300 AD, and this wave brought an infusion of Tahitian religious forms and social structure to the inhabitants of Hawaii. This period ended around 1300 AD, after which the culture of the Hawaiians developed a distinct identity.<ref>http://www.hawaiihistory.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ig.page&CategoryID=311</ref>

The population of ancient Hawaii grew sharply between 900 and 1300 AD, then stabilized at a lower rate as the inhabitants lived in balance with the resources of the islands. At the time James Cook arrived in 1778, the population of the islands was estimated to be around 300,000. <ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

==The 18th Century==

===Unification under a Single King===
In the middle of the 18th century, the Hawaiian islands were governed as a collection of separate kingdoms. As the century came to a close, a dynamic figure named [[Kamehameha]] began a campaign to unify all of the islands under his rule as sole monarch. This was primarily accomplished though brutal conquest, although some of his opponents capitulated peacefully as his army's reputation grew. Kamehameha's conquest of the islands was complete by 1795, and the westerners who arrived from that time and afterward dealt with a single authority for the entire chain. <ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

===Discovery by the West===
European discovery of the Hawaiian Islands was by Captain [[James Cook]] in 1778. As the location of the islands appeared on navigation charts they were visited by ships of various nations, including the British, Americans, French and Russians, since the location was ideal for providing safe anchorage and the replenishment of provisions in the mid-Pacific. The islands were also strategically located in the migration path of humpback whales, which were among the most sought-after by a thriving whaling industry in the early 1800's. Unfortunately, contact with westerners brought with it western diseases that decimated the indigenous population, which plummeted from approximately 300,000 in 1778 to 56,900 in 1872.<ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

==The 19th Century==

===The End of ''Kapu''===
With the death of Kamehameha and ascension of his son Liholiho to the throne, significant changes began to take place. The most profound was the decision by Liholiho to disregard the sanctity of the ''kapu'' system of rules and customs that had been the backbone of Hawaiian society. In gradual steps, he allowed changes to customs like allowing men and women to eat together at feasts for the first time, and as objections to these changes were dropped or put down they continued until temples to the ancient gods were dismantled and idols burned. The abandonment of ''kapu'' left a void in the social structure of Hawaii just as the first Christian missionaries began to arrive. <ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

===The Missionary Influence===
Early visitors from Europe introduced Christianity to the native Hawaiians, but these were not part of any organized missionary campaign. A Hawaiian from Kona, Henry Opukaha'ia, is acknowleged to be the first native Christian convert, and in 1808 he traveled to New England. He spent the next 10 years in Connecticut seeking to inspire and organize missionaries to accompany him back to the islands, but he died in New England in 1818. His work inspired others, though, and in 1819 the first missionaries (Presbyterians, Congregationalists and Dutch Reformists) were sent by American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions to the islands. "You are to aim at nothing short of covering those islands with fruitful fields and pleasant dwellings, and schools and churches; of raising up the people to an elevated state of Christian civilization" was the parting instruction from Dr. Samuel Worchester, secretary of the commissioners.<ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

The missionaries were not initially trusted by Liholiho, who instead placed them under probation. A missionary headquarters was established in Honolulu, and one of the first priorities was to develop a consistent written form for the Hawaiian language, which was only spoken up to that time. They also set up the first island printing press, and as other companies of missionaries arrived, they influenced changes in Hawaiian society as well as developments in education, organization of government and entrepreneurism. 0<ref>http://www.hawaiihistory.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ig.page&PageID=277&returntoname=Short%20Stories&returntopageid=460</ref>

Unfortunately, not all of these changes were for the long-term benefit of the native Hawaiian culture. One particular example was the disapproval and suppression of the ''hula'' by the missionaries. The ''hula'' is a deep and complex form of recording legends, history and insights about man and nature into patterns of movements that to the uneducated look like elaborate dances. The Hawaiians had no written version of their language prior to the arrival of the missionaries, and the rich collection of hulas passed from generation to generation was their primary form of recorded culture. The Protestant missionaries arriving in 1820 believed that the ''hula'' dangerously promoted old heathen beliefs and celebrated physical enjoyment. With this misunderstanding, they strongly pressured the Hawaiians who had converted to Christianity, including members of the monarchy, to eradicate ''hula''. Their efforts drove the practice underground, and while much of Hawaii's ancient history and heritage was lost as a result, public appreciation and study of the true ''hula'' (as opposed to dances for tourists) was reawakened in the 1970's, studied, and documented for posterity.<ref>http://www.hawaiihistory.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ig.page&CategoryID=253</ref>

===Westernization===

The Hawaiian Kingdom flourished throughout the 19th century with several monarchs. It became increasingly westernized. The United States became the major trading partner and protected the Kingdom of Hawaii from takeover by Japan. The vast sugar plantations attracted workers from across the world, especially from Japan, as the native Hawaiians refused to work for pay.

===Revolution of 1893===

The modernization of Hawaiian society was incompatible with absolutre monarchy. The Hawaiian Revolution of 1893 when Hawaiian citizens (many of western descent) overthrew Queen Liliuokalani in response to her attempt to unilaterally impose a new constitution and seize power as an absolute ruler. The revolution was successful with the loss of no life. No Hawaiians tried to fight for their queen. The new Hawaiian government was set up as the Republic of Hawaii and it was recognized by every nation which had recognized the Hawaiian Kingdom.

During the Hawaiian Revolution, a few American troops landed to protect American life and property. They did not engage in fighting and did not occupy any government buildings. However, this action has lead many historical revisionists to falsely claim that the United States invaded Hawaii and deposed the Queen. American President [[Grover Cleveland]] was opposed to the Hawaiian Revolution and he sent [[James Henderson Blount]] to Hawaii to discredit it. Blount was a racist southerner who did not want any more colored people and he wrote a report that reflected his bigotry. He failed to swear in witnesses, refused to speak to many involved in the revolution, and then issued a report blaming the whole matter on an elaborate American plot to invade Hawaii. His Blount Report is cited as evidence of an illegal takeover of Hawaii by Hawaiian separatists to this day.

An investigation of the Hawaiian Revolution was conducted by [[Congress]] in 1894. It was bipartisan, swore in witnesses, and interviewed many that James Blount refused to talk with. Congress issued the Morgan Report which refuted the Blount Report and cleared the United States of any wrong doing during the Hawaiian Revolution.

The Hawaiian Republic agreed to join the United States as a territory in 1898. Congress annexed Hawaii via a Joint Resolution of Congress.

==The 20th Century==
Hawaii was attacked by Japan on December 7, 1941 at [[Pearl Harbor]]. This resulted in the death of over 2000 defenders and brought the United States into [[World War Two]].

The islands became a huge naval base and the staging point for the Pacific War. The islands were under martial law during the ar and controlled by the military.

Hawaiian citizens voted overwhelmingly (93%) for statehood. It was accordingly added as the 50th American state in 1959.

==Politics==
Since statehood, Hawaii has been dominated by the [[Democratic Party]]. [[John Kerry]] carried the state electoral vote in 2004 and the entire Congressional delegation is made up of Democrats. The [[Republican Party]] has made some recent progress with the current governor being a Republican. Despite that, Hawaii remains one of the most liberal states in the US. 67% of residents believe in social liberal policies.

There is a tiny separatist movement on the islands which wishes to have Hawaii secede from the USA and form an independent Hawaiian nation. Proponents of this course argue that Hawaii was illegally annexed and should be "restored" to nationhood. The overwhelmingly majority of Hawaiians do not support this view and the separatists remain a small and powerless protest group. None of their leaders is of pure Hawaiian ancestry.

Hawaii offers a significant number of benefits to same sex couples, but has stopped short of offering [[Same Sex Marriage]].

===Elected officials===
====Federal====
*Sen. [[Daniel Akaka]] [D]
*Sen. [[Daniel Inouye]] [D]
*Rep. [[Colleen Hanabusa]] [D, HI-1]
*Rep. [[Mazie Hirono]] [D, HI-2]

===Statewide===
*Governor [[Neil Abercrombie]] (D)
*Lt. Governor [[Brian Schatz]] (D)

==Religion==
Church Membership (as of 2010)<ref>http://www.stats.gc.ca/foriegn/usa?state#=49</ref>

*[[Roman Catholic]]: 9.2
*[[Buddhist]]: 12.3%
*[[Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]] (Mormon): 0.6%
*[[United Church of Christ]]: 1.6%
*[[Southern Baptist]]: 1.4%
*[[Judaism]]: 0.3%
*[[Episcopal]]: 0.8%
*[[United Methodist]]: 0.6%
*[[Lutheran]]: 0.2%
*[[Atheist]] 28.3%

==Tourism==
Hawaii is the United States' only state in the tropics (i.e., south of the [[Tropic of Cancer]]) and a popular tourist attraction known for its beaches, surf, volcanoes, and [[Polynesia]]n history.

==Trivia==

* Hawaii is the only U.S. state that grows [[coffee]] and [[pineapple]]s.

* Measured from the base to its peak, Hawaii's Mauna Kea is the tallest mountain in the world at 33,474 feet, (compared to [[Mount Everest]] which is 29,028 feet above sea level)<ref>[http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/BeataUnke.shtml]</ref>.

*President [[Barack Obama]] was born in Hawaii.

==See also==
* [[Aloha]]
* [[Kauai]]
* [[Lanai]]
* [[Maui]]
* [[Molokai]]
* [[Oahu]]
* [[Kona Hawaii Temple]]
* [[Laie Hawaii Temple]]
* "[[The Hawaiians]]" - historical drama ([[James Michener]])

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Sources==
*[http://www.mythichawaii.com An excellent look at how the tiki gods worshiping Hawaiians behaved before conversion to Christianity. Including their savage warriors weapons ''Mythic Hawaii'']
*[http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/15000.html Hawaii Quick Facts from the US Census Bureau]
*[http://www.historyofnations.net/oceania/hawaii.html History of Hawaii]
*[http://www.hawaiihistory.org/ Hawaiihistory.org - Contains an excellent history of Hawaii in timeline format]
*[http://morganreport.org/ Morgan Report]
*[http://www.deephawaii.com/hawaiianhistory.htm Hawaiian history] - history of Hawaii from 300AD to 1900AD
{{USstates}}
[[Category:States of the United States]]
[[Category:Islands]]
[[Category:Hawaii]]
[[Category:Progressive Era]]

Hawaii

2012-02-14T17:48:35Z

SusanP: /* Religion */ update stats

[[Image:NOAA_Hawaii_7.gif‎ |right|thumb|350px|Hawaiian Island Chain - from Southeast to Northwest.‎]]
'''Hawaii''' (Hawaiian: Hawai'i) was an independent country that joined the [[United States of America]] voluntarily in 1898 and became a state on August 21st, 1959--it was the fiftieth (and last) state to enter into the union. In 2005 it had a population of 1,275,194 on 6,423 square miles of land. <ref>http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108204.html</ref> It is located in the Pacific Ocean west and south of the mainland of the United States. It is the only American state to have 2 official languages. The main Hawaiian islands are (east to west) Hawai'i (or 'the Big Island'), [[Maui]], Kaho'olawe, [[Molokai|Moloka'i]], [[Lanai|Lana'i]], [[Oahu|O'ahu]], [[Kauai|Kaua'i]] and Ni'ihau. The state capital, [[Honolulu]], and [[Pearl Harbor]] are both on the island of Oahu. The origin of the name ''Hawai'i'' is obscure. It could be derived from the Polynesian ''Owhyii'', 'Place of the Gods', or from ''Hawaiki'' (the former name of Raiatea in the [[Society Islands]]), or may have the meaning 'Homeland'.<ref>Concise Dictionary of World Place-Names (Oxford 2005) p210</ref>

{{clear}}
{{USState
|name=Hawaii
|flag=Hawaii_State_Flag.gif
|motto="Ua mau ke ea o ka aina I ka pono" (The life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness)
|nick=The Aloha State
|capital=Honolulu
|language=English, Hawaiian <ref>http://hawaii.gov/lrb/con/conart15.html</ref>
|governor=Neil Abercrombie
|gparty=Democrat
|senator2=Daniel Akaka
|s2party=Democrat
|s2phone=(202) 224-6361
|s2email=http://akaka.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home Contact
|senator1=Daniel Inouye
|s1party=Democrat
|s1phone=(202) 224-3934
|s1email=http://inouye.senate.gov/abtform.html Contact
|population=1,211,537
|date=August 21, 1959 (50th)
}}
==Ancient History==
The original settlers of the Hawaiian island chain were Polynesian explorers who voyaged in ocean-worthy canoes from the southern Pacific (primarily the Marquesas), arriving in the islands circa 300-600 AD. In addition to their Polynesian culture and traditions, these earliest settlers brought with them an array of plants and animals. A second wave of migrations between the Hawaiian and Society Islands took place circa 1000-1300 AD, and this wave brought an infusion of Tahitian religious forms and social structure to the inhabitants of Hawaii. This period ended around 1300 AD, after which the culture of the Hawaiians developed a distinct identity.<ref>http://www.hawaiihistory.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ig.page&CategoryID=311</ref>

The population of ancient Hawaii grew sharply between 900 and 1300 AD, then stabilized at a lower rate as the inhabitants lived in balance with the resources of the islands. At the time James Cook arrived in 1778, the population of the islands was estimated to be around 300,000. <ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

==The 18th Century==

===Unification under a Single King===
In the middle of the 18th century, the Hawaiian islands were governed as a collection of separate kingdoms. As the century came to a close, a dynamic figure named [[Kamehameha]] began a campaign to unify all of the islands under his rule as sole monarch. This was primarily accomplished though brutal conquest, although some of his opponents capitulated peacefully as his army's reputation grew. Kamehameha's conquest of the islands was complete by 1795, and the westerners who arrived from that time and afterward dealt with a single authority for the entire chain. <ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

===Discovery by the West===
European discovery of the Hawaiian Islands was by Captain [[James Cook]] in 1778. As the location of the islands appeared on navigation charts they were visited by ships of various nations, including the British, Americans, French and Russians, since the location was ideal for providing safe anchorage and the replenishment of provisions in the mid-Pacific. The islands were also strategically located in the migration path of humpback whales, which were among the most sought-after by a thriving whaling industry in the early 1800's. Unfortunately, contact with westerners brought with it western diseases that decimated the indigenous population, which plummeted from approximately 300,000 in 1778 to 56,900 in 1872.<ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

==The 19th Century==

===The End of ''Kapu''===
With the death of Kamehameha and ascension of his son Liholiho to the throne, significant changes began to take place. The most profound was the decision by Liholiho to disregard the sanctity of the ''kapu'' system of rules and customs that had been the backbone of Hawaiian society. In gradual steps, he allowed changes to customs like allowing men and women to eat together at feasts for the first time, and as objections to these changes were dropped or put down they continued until temples to the ancient gods were dismantled and idols burned. The abandonment of ''kapu'' left a void in the social structure of Hawaii just as the first Christian missionaries began to arrive. <ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

===The Missionary Influence===
Early visitors from Europe introduced Christianity to the native Hawaiians, but these were not part of any organized missionary campaign. A Hawaiian from Kona, Henry Opukaha'ia, is acknowleged to be the first native Christian convert, and in 1808 he traveled to New England. He spent the next 10 years in Connecticut seeking to inspire and organize missionaries to accompany him back to the islands, but he died in New England in 1818. His work inspired others, though, and in 1819 the first missionaries (Presbyterians, Congregationalists and Dutch Reformists) were sent by American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions to the islands. "You are to aim at nothing short of covering those islands with fruitful fields and pleasant dwellings, and schools and churches; of raising up the people to an elevated state of Christian civilization" was the parting instruction from Dr. Samuel Worchester, secretary of the commissioners.<ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

The missionaries were not initially trusted by Liholiho, who instead placed them under probation. A missionary headquarters was established in Honolulu, and one of the first priorities was to develop a consistent written form for the Hawaiian language, which was only spoken up to that time. They also set up the first island printing press, and as other companies of missionaries arrived, they influenced changes in Hawaiian society as well as developments in education, organization of government and entrepreneurism. 0<ref>http://www.hawaiihistory.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ig.page&PageID=277&returntoname=Short%20Stories&returntopageid=460</ref>

Unfortunately, not all of these changes were for the long-term benefit of the native Hawaiian culture. One particular example was the disapproval and suppression of the ''hula'' by the missionaries. The ''hula'' is a deep and complex form of recording legends, history and insights about man and nature into patterns of movements that to the uneducated look like elaborate dances. The Hawaiians had no written version of their language prior to the arrival of the missionaries, and the rich collection of hulas passed from generation to generation was their primary form of recorded culture. The Protestant missionaries arriving in 1820 believed that the ''hula'' dangerously promoted old heathen beliefs and celebrated physical enjoyment. With this misunderstanding, they strongly pressured the Hawaiians who had converted to Christianity, including members of the monarchy, to eradicate ''hula''. Their efforts drove the practice underground, and while much of Hawaii's ancient history and heritage was lost as a result, public appreciation and study of the true ''hula'' (as opposed to dances for tourists) was reawakened in the 1970's, studied, and documented for posterity.<ref>http://www.hawaiihistory.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ig.page&CategoryID=253</ref>

===Westernization===

The Hawaiian Kingdom flourished throughout the 19th century with several monarchs. It became increasingly westernized. The United States became the major trading partner and protected the Kingdom of Hawaii from takeover by Japan. The vast sugar plantations attracted workers from across the world, especially from Japan, as the native Hawaiians refused to work for pay.

===Revolution of 1893===

The modernization of Hawaiian society was incompatible with absolutre monarchy. The Hawaiian Revolution of 1893 when Hawaiian citizens (many of western descent) overthrew Queen Liliuokalani in response to her attempt to unilaterally impose a new constitution and seize power as an absolute ruler. The revolution was successful with the loss of no life. No Hawaiians tried to fight for their queen. The new Hawaiian government was set up as the Republic of Hawaii and it was recognized by every nation which had recognized the Hawaiian Kingdom.

During the Hawaiian Revolution, a few American troops landed to protect American life and property. They did not engage in fighting and did not occupy any government buildings. However, this action has lead many historical revisionists to falsely claim that the United States invaded Hawaii and deposed the Queen. American President [[Grover Cleveland]] was opposed to the Hawaiian Revolution and he sent [[James Henderson Blount]] to Hawaii to discredit it. Blount was a racist southerner who did not want any more colored people and he wrote a report that reflected his bigotry. He failed to swear in witnesses, refused to speak to many involved in the revolution, and then issued a report blaming the whole matter on an elaborate American plot to invade Hawaii. His Blount Report is cited as evidence of an illegal takeover of Hawaii by Hawaiian separatists to this day.

An investigation of the Hawaiian Revolution was conducted by [[Congress]] in 1894. It was bipartisan, swore in witnesses, and interviewed many that James Blount refused to talk with. Congress issued the Morgan Report which refuted the Blount Report and cleared the United States of any wrong doing during the Hawaiian Revolution.

The Hawaiian Republic agreed to join the United States as a territory in 1898. Congress annexed Hawaii via a Joint Resolution of Congress.

==The 20th Century==
Hawaii was attacked by Japan on December 7, 1941 at [[Pearl Harbor]]. This resulted in the death of over 2000 defenders and brought the United States into [[World War Two]].

The islands became a huge naval base and the staging point for the Pacific War. The islands were under martial law during the ar and controlled by the military.

Hawaiian citizens voted overwhelmingly (93%) for statehood. It was accordingly added as the 50th American state in 1959.

==Politics==
Since statehood, Hawaii has been dominated by the [[Democratic Party]]. [[John Kerry]] carried the state electoral vote in 2004 and the entire Congressional delegation is made up of Democrats. The [[Republican Party]] has made some recent progress with the current governor being a Republican.

There is a tiny separatist movement on the islands which wishes to have Hawaii secede from the USA and form an independent Hawaiian nation. Proponents of this course argue that Hawaii was illegally annexed and should be "restored" to nationhood. The overwhelmingly majority of Hawaiians do not support this view and the separatists remain a small and powerless protest group. None of their leaders is of pure Hawaiian ancestry.

Hawaii offers a limited number of benefits to same sex couples, but has stopped short of offering [[domestic partnerships]].

===Elected officials===
====Federal====
*Sen. [[Daniel Akaka]] [D]
*Sen. [[Daniel Inouye]] [D]
*Rep. [[Colleen Hanabusa]] [D, HI-1]
*Rep. [[Mazie Hirono]] [D, HI-2]

===Statewide===
*Governor [[Neil Abercrombie]] (D)
*Lt. Governor [[Brian Schatz]] (D)

==Religion==
Church Membership (as of 2010)<ref>http://www.stats.gc.ca/foriegn/usa?state#=49</ref>

*[[Roman Catholic]]: 9.2
*[[Buddhist]]: 12.3%
*[[Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]] (Mormon): 0.6%
*[[United Church of Christ]]: 1.6%
*[[Southern Baptist]]: 1.4%
*[[Judaism]]: 0.3%
*[[Episcopal]]: 0.8%
*[[United Methodist]]: 0.6%
*[[Lutheran]]: 0.2%
*[[Atheist]] 28.3%

==Tourism==
Hawaii is the United States' only state in the tropics (i.e., south of the [[Tropic of Cancer]]) and a popular tourist attraction known for its beaches, surf, volcanoes, and [[Polynesia]]n history.

==Trivia==

* Hawaii is the only U.S. state that grows [[coffee]] and [[pineapple]]s.

* Measured from the base to its peak, Hawaii's Mauna Kea is the tallest mountain in the world at 33,474 feet, (compared to [[Mount Everest]] which is 29,028 feet above sea level)<ref>[http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/BeataUnke.shtml]</ref>.

*President [[Barack Obama]] was born in Hawaii.

==See also==
* [[Aloha]]
* [[Kauai]]
* [[Lanai]]
* [[Maui]]
* [[Molokai]]
* [[Oahu]]
* [[Kona Hawaii Temple]]
* [[Laie Hawaii Temple]]
* "[[The Hawaiians]]" - historical drama ([[James Michener]])

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Sources==
*[http://www.mythichawaii.com An excellent look at how the tiki gods worshiping Hawaiians behaved before conversion to Christianity. Including their savage warriors weapons ''Mythic Hawaii'']
*[http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/15000.html Hawaii Quick Facts from the US Census Bureau]
*[http://www.historyofnations.net/oceania/hawaii.html History of Hawaii]
*[http://www.hawaiihistory.org/ Hawaiihistory.org - Contains an excellent history of Hawaii in timeline format]
*[http://morganreport.org/ Morgan Report]
*[http://www.deephawaii.com/hawaiianhistory.htm Hawaiian history] - history of Hawaii from 300AD to 1900AD
{{USstates}}
[[Category:States of the United States]]
[[Category:Islands]]
[[Category:Hawaii]]
[[Category:Progressive Era]]

Hawaii

2012-02-14T17:46:20Z

SusanP: /* Trivia */

[[Image:NOAA_Hawaii_7.gif‎ |right|thumb|350px|Hawaiian Island Chain - from Southeast to Northwest.‎]]
'''Hawaii''' (Hawaiian: Hawai'i) was an independent country that joined the [[United States of America]] voluntarily in 1898 and became a state on August 21st, 1959--it was the fiftieth (and last) state to enter into the union. In 2005 it had a population of 1,275,194 on 6,423 square miles of land. <ref>http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0108204.html</ref> It is located in the Pacific Ocean west and south of the mainland of the United States. It is the only American state to have 2 official languages. The main Hawaiian islands are (east to west) Hawai'i (or 'the Big Island'), [[Maui]], Kaho'olawe, [[Molokai|Moloka'i]], [[Lanai|Lana'i]], [[Oahu|O'ahu]], [[Kauai|Kaua'i]] and Ni'ihau. The state capital, [[Honolulu]], and [[Pearl Harbor]] are both on the island of Oahu. The origin of the name ''Hawai'i'' is obscure. It could be derived from the Polynesian ''Owhyii'', 'Place of the Gods', or from ''Hawaiki'' (the former name of Raiatea in the [[Society Islands]]), or may have the meaning 'Homeland'.<ref>Concise Dictionary of World Place-Names (Oxford 2005) p210</ref>

{{clear}}
{{USState
|name=Hawaii
|flag=Hawaii_State_Flag.gif
|motto="Ua mau ke ea o ka aina I ka pono" (The life of the land is perpetuated in righteousness)
|nick=The Aloha State
|capital=Honolulu
|language=English, Hawaiian <ref>http://hawaii.gov/lrb/con/conart15.html</ref>
|governor=Neil Abercrombie
|gparty=Democrat
|senator2=Daniel Akaka
|s2party=Democrat
|s2phone=(202) 224-6361
|s2email=http://akaka.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.Home Contact
|senator1=Daniel Inouye
|s1party=Democrat
|s1phone=(202) 224-3934
|s1email=http://inouye.senate.gov/abtform.html Contact
|population=1,211,537
|date=August 21, 1959 (50th)
}}
==Ancient History==
The original settlers of the Hawaiian island chain were Polynesian explorers who voyaged in ocean-worthy canoes from the southern Pacific (primarily the Marquesas), arriving in the islands circa 300-600 AD. In addition to their Polynesian culture and traditions, these earliest settlers brought with them an array of plants and animals. A second wave of migrations between the Hawaiian and Society Islands took place circa 1000-1300 AD, and this wave brought an infusion of Tahitian religious forms and social structure to the inhabitants of Hawaii. This period ended around 1300 AD, after which the culture of the Hawaiians developed a distinct identity.<ref>http://www.hawaiihistory.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ig.page&CategoryID=311</ref>

The population of ancient Hawaii grew sharply between 900 and 1300 AD, then stabilized at a lower rate as the inhabitants lived in balance with the resources of the islands. At the time James Cook arrived in 1778, the population of the islands was estimated to be around 300,000. <ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

==The 18th Century==

===Unification under a Single King===
In the middle of the 18th century, the Hawaiian islands were governed as a collection of separate kingdoms. As the century came to a close, a dynamic figure named [[Kamehameha]] began a campaign to unify all of the islands under his rule as sole monarch. This was primarily accomplished though brutal conquest, although some of his opponents capitulated peacefully as his army's reputation grew. Kamehameha's conquest of the islands was complete by 1795, and the westerners who arrived from that time and afterward dealt with a single authority for the entire chain. <ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

===Discovery by the West===
European discovery of the Hawaiian Islands was by Captain [[James Cook]] in 1778. As the location of the islands appeared on navigation charts they were visited by ships of various nations, including the British, Americans, French and Russians, since the location was ideal for providing safe anchorage and the replenishment of provisions in the mid-Pacific. The islands were also strategically located in the migration path of humpback whales, which were among the most sought-after by a thriving whaling industry in the early 1800's. Unfortunately, contact with westerners brought with it western diseases that decimated the indigenous population, which plummeted from approximately 300,000 in 1778 to 56,900 in 1872.<ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

==The 19th Century==

===The End of ''Kapu''===
With the death of Kamehameha and ascension of his son Liholiho to the throne, significant changes began to take place. The most profound was the decision by Liholiho to disregard the sanctity of the ''kapu'' system of rules and customs that had been the backbone of Hawaiian society. In gradual steps, he allowed changes to customs like allowing men and women to eat together at feasts for the first time, and as objections to these changes were dropped or put down they continued until temples to the ancient gods were dismantled and idols burned. The abandonment of ''kapu'' left a void in the social structure of Hawaii just as the first Christian missionaries began to arrive. <ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

===The Missionary Influence===
Early visitors from Europe introduced Christianity to the native Hawaiians, but these were not part of any organized missionary campaign. A Hawaiian from Kona, Henry Opukaha'ia, is acknowleged to be the first native Christian convert, and in 1808 he traveled to New England. He spent the next 10 years in Connecticut seeking to inspire and organize missionaries to accompany him back to the islands, but he died in New England in 1818. His work inspired others, though, and in 1819 the first missionaries (Presbyterians, Congregationalists and Dutch Reformists) were sent by American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions to the islands. "You are to aim at nothing short of covering those islands with fruitful fields and pleasant dwellings, and schools and churches; of raising up the people to an elevated state of Christian civilization" was the parting instruction from Dr. Samuel Worchester, secretary of the commissioners.<ref>http://archives.starbulletin.com/1999/06/16/millennium/index.html</ref>

The missionaries were not initially trusted by Liholiho, who instead placed them under probation. A missionary headquarters was established in Honolulu, and one of the first priorities was to develop a consistent written form for the Hawaiian language, which was only spoken up to that time. They also set up the first island printing press, and as other companies of missionaries arrived, they influenced changes in Hawaiian society as well as developments in education, organization of government and entrepreneurism. 0<ref>http://www.hawaiihistory.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ig.page&PageID=277&returntoname=Short%20Stories&returntopageid=460</ref>

Unfortunately, not all of these changes were for the long-term benefit of the native Hawaiian culture. One particular example was the disapproval and suppression of the ''hula'' by the missionaries. The ''hula'' is a deep and complex form of recording legends, history and insights about man and nature into patterns of movements that to the uneducated look like elaborate dances. The Hawaiians had no written version of their language prior to the arrival of the missionaries, and the rich collection of hulas passed from generation to generation was their primary form of recorded culture. The Protestant missionaries arriving in 1820 believed that the ''hula'' dangerously promoted old heathen beliefs and celebrated physical enjoyment. With this misunderstanding, they strongly pressured the Hawaiians who had converted to Christianity, including members of the monarchy, to eradicate ''hula''. Their efforts drove the practice underground, and while much of Hawaii's ancient history and heritage was lost as a result, public appreciation and study of the true ''hula'' (as opposed to dances for tourists) was reawakened in the 1970's, studied, and documented for posterity.<ref>http://www.hawaiihistory.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=ig.page&CategoryID=253</ref>

===Westernization===

The Hawaiian Kingdom flourished throughout the 19th century with several monarchs. It became increasingly westernized. The United States became the major trading partner and protected the Kingdom of Hawaii from takeover by Japan. The vast sugar plantations attracted workers from across the world, especially from Japan, as the native Hawaiians refused to work for pay.

===Revolution of 1893===

The modernization of Hawaiian society was incompatible with absolutre monarchy. The Hawaiian Revolution of 1893 when Hawaiian citizens (many of western descent) overthrew Queen Liliuokalani in response to her attempt to unilaterally impose a new constitution and seize power as an absolute ruler. The revolution was successful with the loss of no life. No Hawaiians tried to fight for their queen. The new Hawaiian government was set up as the Republic of Hawaii and it was recognized by every nation which had recognized the Hawaiian Kingdom.

During the Hawaiian Revolution, a few American troops landed to protect American life and property. They did not engage in fighting and did not occupy any government buildings. However, this action has lead many historical revisionists to falsely claim that the United States invaded Hawaii and deposed the Queen. American President [[Grover Cleveland]] was opposed to the Hawaiian Revolution and he sent [[James Henderson Blount]] to Hawaii to discredit it. Blount was a racist southerner who did not want any more colored people and he wrote a report that reflected his bigotry. He failed to swear in witnesses, refused to speak to many involved in the revolution, and then issued a report blaming the whole matter on an elaborate American plot to invade Hawaii. His Blount Report is cited as evidence of an illegal takeover of Hawaii by Hawaiian separatists to this day.

An investigation of the Hawaiian Revolution was conducted by [[Congress]] in 1894. It was bipartisan, swore in witnesses, and interviewed many that James Blount refused to talk with. Congress issued the Morgan Report which refuted the Blount Report and cleared the United States of any wrong doing during the Hawaiian Revolution.

The Hawaiian Republic agreed to join the United States as a territory in 1898. Congress annexed Hawaii via a Joint Resolution of Congress.

==The 20th Century==
Hawaii was attacked by Japan on December 7, 1941 at [[Pearl Harbor]]. This resulted in the death of over 2000 defenders and brought the United States into [[World War Two]].

The islands became a huge naval base and the staging point for the Pacific War. The islands were under martial law during the ar and controlled by the military.

Hawaiian citizens voted overwhelmingly (93%) for statehood. It was accordingly added as the 50th American state in 1959.

==Politics==
Since statehood, Hawaii has been dominated by the [[Democratic Party]]. [[John Kerry]] carried the state electoral vote in 2004 and the entire Congressional delegation is made up of Democrats. The [[Republican Party]] has made some recent progress with the current governor being a Republican.

There is a tiny separatist movement on the islands which wishes to have Hawaii secede from the USA and form an independent Hawaiian nation. Proponents of this course argue that Hawaii was illegally annexed and should be "restored" to nationhood. The overwhelmingly majority of Hawaiians do not support this view and the separatists remain a small and powerless protest group. None of their leaders is of pure Hawaiian ancestry.

Hawaii offers a limited number of benefits to same sex couples, but has stopped short of offering [[domestic partnerships]].

===Elected officials===
====Federal====
*Sen. [[Daniel Akaka]] [D]
*Sen. [[Daniel Inouye]] [D]
*Rep. [[Colleen Hanabusa]] [D, HI-1]
*Rep. [[Mazie Hirono]] [D, HI-2]

===Statewide===
*Governor [[Neil Abercrombie]] (D)
*Lt. Governor [[Brian Schatz]] (D)

==Religion==
Church Membership (as of 1999)<ref>http://www.hawaii.gov/dbedt/info/economic/databook/db2000/ The State of Hawaii Data Book 2000</ref>

*[[Roman Catholic]]: 17.7%
*[[Buddhist]]: 8.3%
*[[Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints]] (Mormon): 4.6%
*[[United Church of Christ]]: 1.6%
*[[Southern Baptist]]: 1.4%
*[[Assemblies of God]]: 0.9%
*[[Judaism]]: 0.8%
*[[Episcopal]]: 0.8%
*[[United Methodist]]: 0.6%
*[[Lutheran]]: 0.5%

==Tourism==
Hawaii is the United States' only state in the tropics (i.e., south of the [[Tropic of Cancer]]) and a popular tourist attraction known for its beaches, surf, volcanoes, and [[Polynesia]]n history.

==Trivia==

* Hawaii is the only U.S. state that grows [[coffee]] and [[pineapple]]s.

* Measured from the base to its peak, Hawaii's Mauna Kea is the tallest mountain in the world at 33,474 feet, (compared to [[Mount Everest]] which is 29,028 feet above sea level)<ref>[http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2001/BeataUnke.shtml]</ref>.

*President [[Barack Obama]] was born in Hawaii.

==See also==
* [[Aloha]]
* [[Kauai]]
* [[Lanai]]
* [[Maui]]
* [[Molokai]]
* [[Oahu]]
* [[Kona Hawaii Temple]]
* [[Laie Hawaii Temple]]
* "[[The Hawaiians]]" - historical drama ([[James Michener]])

==References==
{{reflist}}

==Sources==
*[http://www.mythichawaii.com An excellent look at how the tiki gods worshiping Hawaiians behaved before conversion to Christianity. Including their savage warriors weapons ''Mythic Hawaii'']
*[http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/15000.html Hawaii Quick Facts from the US Census Bureau]
*[http://www.historyofnations.net/oceania/hawaii.html History of Hawaii]
*[http://www.hawaiihistory.org/ Hawaiihistory.org - Contains an excellent history of Hawaii in timeline format]
*[http://morganreport.org/ Morgan Report]
*[http://www.deephawaii.com/hawaiianhistory.htm Hawaiian history] - history of Hawaii from 300AD to 1900AD
{{USstates}}
[[Category:States of the United States]]
[[Category:Islands]]
[[Category:Hawaii]]
[[Category:Progressive Era]]

United States of America

2012-02-14T17:44:46Z

SusanP: /* Economy */ China owns 30 trillion$ of american debt

{{Country
|name =''United States of America''
|map =US map.PNG
|map2 =Loc of United States.png
|established=1776
|flag =50 star flag.png
|arms =United States arms.png
|capital =Washington, D.C.
|government =Constitutional Republic
|language =English
|official =n
|president =Barack Hussein Obama
|area =3,718,695 sq mi
|pop =313,232,000 (2011)
|gdp-year = $15 trillion (2011)
|gdp-pc =$48,029 (2011)
|currency =United States Dollar (USD)
}}
The '''United States of America''' (''conventional short form'': '''United States'''; ''abbreviation'': '''US''' or '''USA'''; sometimes also referred to as '''the States''' or simply as '''America''') is a [[North America|North American]] nation that consists of a federal union of fifty individual states, along with territories and a capital district. Founded originally as 13 colonies in the [[British Empire]], Britain's American colonies broke with the mother country on July 4, 1776 with the [[Declaration of Independence]].<ref>IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776. [http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/index.htm The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America], ushistory.org, (Accessed August 2010).</ref> The new nation became recognized as the United States of America following the [[American Revolutionary War|War of Independence]] in 1783. Shortly thereafter, in 1787, the [[United States Constitution]] was written; grounded on [[Republican form of government|republican]] political principles and [[Judeo-Christian]] values, the constitution remains in effect today. The Americans created political parties and, since abolishing [[slavery]] in a bloody [[American Civil War|civil war]] (1861-65), instituted a form of government guided by the rule of law rather than the desires of a majority of voters. According to the U.S. Constitution written by America's [[Founding Fathers]], the United States is a [[Constitutional Republic]]. It is not a [[Democracy|democracy]].

America's capitalist economy grew rapidly, becoming the largest in the world by the 1870s. During the 19th and 20th centuries, 37 new states were added to the original 13 as the nation expanded across the North American continent and acquired a number of overseas possessions. After defeating Communism in the [[Cold War]], the U.S. emerged as the world's only [[superpower]], boasting the largest economy and most powerful military. It exerts enormous cultural and intellectual influence worldwide, and in return is the target of the enemies of democracy and [[capitalism]].

The capital of the United States of America is [[Washington, DC]].

== People ==
[[File:Php3sfokfPM.jpg|220px|left|At Washington, DC.]]
Population: 310,232,863 (July 2010 est.) Population growth rate: 0.97% (2010 est.) Labor force: 153.9 million (2010 est.).

Ethnic groups: white 79.96%, black 12.85%, Asian 4.43%, Amerindian and Alaska native 0.97%, native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 0.18%, two or more races 1.61% (July 2007 estimate) note: a separate listing for Hispanic is not included because the US Census Bureau considers Hispanic to mean persons of Spanish/Hispanic/Latino origin including those of Mexican, Cuban, Puerto Rican, Dominican Republic, Spanish, and Central or South American origin living in the US who may be of any race or ethnic group (white, black, Asian, etc.); about 15.1% of the total US population is Hispanic <ref> [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html CIA - The World Factbook.] </ref>

In 2010, around 400,000 [[illegal immigrants]] were deported. The Pew Hispanic Center, a nonpartisan research organization in Washington, estimates 11.5 million to 12 million "unauthorized migrants" live in the US today. <ref> [http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0516/p01s02-ussc.html Illegal immigrants in the US: How many are there?] </ref>

==Geography==

[[File:Colorado.jpg|thumb|[[Colorado]].]]
North America, bordering both the North [[Atlantic Ocean]] and the North [[Pacific Ocean]], is between [[Canada]] and [[Mexico]]. In addition to the boundaries of the Pacific Ocean and the Atlantic Ocean, the United States is otherwise bounded by the [[Bering Sea]], the Arctic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico and the Caribbean Sea. Two of the fifty states, Alaska and Hawaii (an archipelago), are not contiguous with any of the other states. Puerto Rico, which is largely self governing, is part of the U.S., as are several smaller territories in the Pacific Ocean, such as Guam. Each of the 50 states has a large degree of sovereignty, but the boundaries are debated and shift slightly every year.

At over 3.7 million square miles (over 9.6 million km²), the U.S. (including its non-contiguous and overseas states and territories) is the third largest country by total area (after Russia and Canada). It is the world's third most populous nation, with over 350 million people (after China and India).

Mt. McKinley is highest point in North America and Death Valley the lowest point on the continent. <ref>[https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html CIA World Factbook], ''North America :: United States'', Updated on February 23, 2011, (Accessed on February 23, 2011).</ref>

==History==

===American Revolution===
{{main|American Revolution}}
[[File:Washington-deleware.jpg|thumb|left|Washington, Chief of the Continental Army, is shown crossing the Delaware River.]]
The American Revolution exploded from fears the British Empire was trying to restrict the historic rights and liberties of Americans. The British victory in the French and Indian War ended the threat that foreign powers might attack the colonies; Britain's protection was no longer needed. At the same time Britain decided to assert its powers by imposing [[taxes]]. The taxes (as on stamps, sugar, and tea) were not large but the principle was simple: Americans insisted their own [[Legislature|legislatures]] could impose taxes but not [[Parliament]], because Americans were not represented there. "No taxation without representation!" and "[[Don't tread on me]]" became common phrases in America by the American people, but the British refused over and over again to accept it. London sent in troops when Boston protested vehemently, and Americans organized shadow governments in every colony.

The Americans were adopting a new political philosophy, called [[republicanism]], which stressed civic virtue, fear of corruption, and disdain for [[aristocracy]] (there were no aristocrats in America apart from occasional British visitors). Republicanism alerted Americans to their constitutional rights as Englishmen – one right was that the people, through their elected officials, set the taxes and upheld law. Constitutionally, to Americans their "elected officials" were not represented in the British Parliament, it meant having their own colonial legislatures. The British replied haughtily toward this desire from the Americans, going so far as to suggest America was "virtually represented" by the British Parliament in some way or form.

====Boston Tea Party====
{{main|Boston Tea Party}}

The British Parliaments idea of representation in America fueled their desire to increase taxes on the Americans. The tax on stamps in 1765 incited near rebellion, as the 13 separate colonies began meeting together and sharing their grievances. The stamp tax was repealed but others followed, especially the tax on tea. In response, Americans boycotted tea and merchants refused to order it, except in Boston. There, a well-organized group of patriots dumped the tea in the harbor, historically known as the [[Boston Tea Party]]. These events infuriated London, so they sent troops to North America and stripped [[Massachusetts]] of its self government and suspended the historic rights the colonists were so proud of.

====Thirteen Colonies====
{{main|Thirteen Colonies}} [[Image:Pop1750.jpg|right|thumb|400px]]

The thirteen original colonies began organizing shadow governments, called "Committees of Correspondence," which prepared the Americans for the day "patriots" (or "Whigs," as they called themselves) could assume all functions of local government. That day came when the British sent troops from Boston to seize gunpowder in attempt to dismantle a potential revolt, and the American patriots gathered there to defend their liberty. These patriots were known as the American "Minute men," a well trained militia, and had planned for this day at Lexington and Concord. When the militia clashed with the elite British troops they soundly defeated them, prompting an historic backlash from Britain. The American Revolution had begun.

The thirteen colonies, organized as the "[[First Continental Congress]]," became a national government as the shadow governments in each colony took control and ousted all royal officials. Congress set up a [[Continental Army]] and gave command to an American hero and Virginia's leader, [[George Washington]]. George Washington took charge in Boston, and he forced the British to leave in the spring of 1776. All 13 colonies were at this point in control of the American Patriots, and they listened as [[Tom Paine]] explained ''Common Sense'' principles, proudly boasting of America's strength and its power as a new nation. America, in its own right as an individual nation no longer needed nor wanted a foreign [[King]]. Congress called on the colonies to become States and to write new State constitutions. On July 4, 1776, Congress unanimously declared the independence of a new nation, the United States of America.

====France in the American Revolutionary War====
[[File:Marquis de Lafayette.jpg|thumb|[[Marquis de Lafayette]].]]
King [[George III]] could not abide the insolent Americans and he sent his small army and large navy to America in attempt to reconquer his lost colonies. They were able to recapture [[New York City]], but the King's failure to spread elsewhere greatly outweighed this small victory. The powerful Royal navy gave the British command of the seas and the ability to land troops anywhere and capture any specific place, but the shortage of British soldiers, and the very long 3000 mile supply line, meant that the British could only hold a few points at any one time. Hiring German soldiers (Hessians) was necessary, but they were not enough, for the Patriots always had more available soldiers. The British expectations that Loyalist would rise up and overthrow the Patriots was a [[chimera]]; the Loyalists did provide some help to British invasion forces, but were never strong enough to operate on their own or control any territory.

[[France]], humiliated by Britain in the 1760s, was stronger in the late 1770's than it was a decade earlier and wanted revenge against the British for their past woes. Thus, the French secretly armed and financed the Americans. Lafayette, a French general in the American Revolutionary War, served in the Continental Army under George Washington. He convinced France to send their first naval and land forces to the Americas and participated in defending Richmond, Virginia from Benedict Arnold and in the battle of Yorktown, Virginia; Lafayette contributed in no slight degree toward the grand result.

In 1777, the British sent a large army to invade [[New York]] and cut off the revolutionary states of [[New England]]. The plan was a disaster as the American militia captured the entire British invasion force at Saratoga. Encouraged by diplomat [[Benjamin Franklin]], the French recognized the United States as an independent nation, signed a treaty of alliance, and entered the war against Britain. Later, the treaty extended to [[Spain]] and the [[Netherlands]] as allies to America; Britain's diplomacy was disjointed that it had no allies at all, and was militarily matched or surpassed by America and its new allies. The British invasion of the South in 1780-81 was designed to bring out Loyalist support, but it failed and the second major British army was captured at the [[Battle of Yorktown]]. The British Parliament revolted at their reckless king and his incompetent government and sued for peace, which was achieved on terms favorable to the U.S. in 1783. About 20% of the Loyalists moved to [[Canada]], but many stayed in America, and the new peaceful nation resumed its rapid growth.

===New Nation===
[[File:Bierstadt Looking Down Yosemite-Valley 1865.jpg|thumb|[[Albert Bierstadt]], ''Looking Down Yosemite-Valley'', 1865.]]
In 1783, when the Treaty of Paris concluded the war of independence, the American population totalled some three million citizens and slaves living on about one million square miles of land. Tens of thousands of [[Native Americans]] also lived in the [[Northwest Territory]] and the Southwest.

The Thirteen original states are [[Connecticut]], [[Delaware]], [[Georgia]], [[Maryland]], [[Massachusetts]] (including [[maine]]), [[New Hampshire]], [[New Jersey]], [[New York]], [[North Carolina]], [[Pennsylvania]], [[Rhode Island]], [[South Carolina]] and [[Virginia]]. In 1790, an agreement between supporters of Jefferson and those of [[Alexander Hamilton]] resulted in the creation of the [[District of Columbia]] from part of [[Maryland]]; it has served as the national capital since 1800. The remainder of the 1783 territory was eventually organized as the states of [[Ohio]], [[Indiana]], [[Michigan]], [[Illinois]], [[Wisconsin]], [[Kentucky]], [[Tennessee]], [[Mississippi]] and [[Alabama]].

===Expansion===
[[File:U.S. Territorial Acquisitions PD WC.jpg|thumb|left|Territorial acquisitions such as the Thirteen Colonies, the Louisiana Purchase, and British and Spanish Cession.]]
In 1803, [[French]] emperor [[Napoleon Bonaparte]] took advantage of a lull in his war with Great Britain to sell the [[Louisiana Territory]] to the United States, more than doubling the nation's land area. This territory would later be organized as the states of [[Minnesota]], [[North Dakota]], [[South Dakota]], [[Montana]], [[Wyoming]], [[Nebraska]], [[Iowa]], [[Missouri]], [[Arkansas]], [[Kansas]], [[Oklahoma]], and [[Louisiana]] proper. President Jefferson commissioned [[Lewis and Clark]] to explore the new territory from 1802 to 1804.

The U.S. seized, then purchased [[Florida]] from Spain in 1819. [[Texas]] joined the United States in 1845 after winning its revolution against Mexico.
[[File:Map Leading Group by County US.jpg|thumb|Map Leading Group by County, 2000.]]
After victory the [[Mexican American War]] of 1846-48, the U.S. purchased via the [[Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo]] territory that became the states of [[California]], [[Nevada]], [[Utah]], [[Colorado]], [[New Mexico]] and [[Arizona]]. In 1846 the U.S. and Britain agreed that the 49th Parallel (degree of latitude) would serve as the boundary between the U. S. and [[British Columbia]] (now part of Canada). The American portion became the states of [[Washington]], [[Oregon]] and [[Idaho]].

In 1867, the U.S. purchased [[Alaska]] from [[Russia]]. It became a state in 1959.

Hawaii became an independent republic in 1894 and voluntarily joined the U.S. in 1898, becoming a state in 1960.

As a result of the [[Spanish-American War]], the United States took control of the [[Philippines]] and annexed [[Puerto Rico]] and [[Guam]]. The Philippines became independent in 1946, after the U.S. reconquered the islands from Japan in World War II. [[Puerto Rico]] has occasionally held referendum that ratified its continuing unique "Commonwealth" status as part of the United States. The residents of Puerto Rico are U.S. citizens. Guam continues as a U.S. owned territory with full citizenship for its inhabitants. The people of Puerto Rico and Guam have a vote in presidential primaries and a voice, but not a vote, in Congress.

==The Constitution and Politics in the United States==

[[Image:76485685i79.jpg|right|thumb|300px|The drafting committee presenting the [[Declaration of Independence]] to the [[Continental Congress]], painted by John Trumbull 1817–1819.]]

Between 1776 and 1788, the United States was governed according to the [[Articles of Confederation]]. The Founding Fathers formally established the current structure of the United States by ratification of the [[U.S. Constitution]] in 1788. Since 1789, that constitution has been the basic governing document. America's Founding Fathers understood that a democracy is always in flux and given to “mob rule,”<ref>[[Michelle Malkin]]. [http://michellemalkin.com/2009/03/27/the-coming-g20-riots-the-spread-of-mob-rule/comment-page-1/ The coming G20 riots & the spread of mob rule], ''Michelle Malkin'', March 27, 2009.</ref> while a republic is fixed and stable, resting on “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” Because of the uncertainty of democracy, [[Benjamin Rush]] — a signer of the Declaration of Independence — wrote: “A simple democracy is one of the greatest of evils.”<ref>AWR Hawkins. [http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/america-a-republic-not-a-democracy/ America: A Republic, Not a Democracy], ''Pajamas Media'', September 03, 2009.</ref>

Sovereignty in America comes from the citizenry, and the basic political values are called "[[republicanism]]," (not to be confused with the [[Republican Party]],) especially the commitment to civic virtue and civic duty, and opposition to corruption and aristocracy. Popular political parties emerged in the United States in the 1790s; currently the two major political parties are the [[Democratic Party]], and the [[Republican Party]]. Minor parties are of little importance overall but can be useful in pushing certain topics to the public eye.

=== The Role of Religion in Government ===
{{main|Religion and U.S. Government}}

==Government==
{{main|United States Federal Government}}

[[Image:56eugyjnm.jpg|right|thumb|300px|The [[White House]], the official home and workplace of the [[President of the United States]] of America.]]

===Executive Branch===

*Chief of state: The [[President of the United States]] is both the chief of state and head of government
*Head of government: President of the United States; [[Vice President of the United States]]
*Cabinet: Cabinet appointed by the president with Senate approval
*Elections: The president and vice president serve four-year terms (eligible for a second term)

===Legislative Branch===

The United States legislative branch of government is a [[bicameral]] Congress, which consists of the [[United States Senate|Senate]] (100 seats, 2 members are elected from each state by popular vote to serve six-year terms; one-third are elected every two years) and the [[House of Representatives]] (435 seats; members are directly elected by popular vote to serve two-year terms).

===Judicial Branch===
{{main|Supreme Court of the United States}}

The United States [[Supreme Court]] consists of nine justices, nominated by the president and confirmed with the advice and consent of the Senate. Members of the Supreme Court are appointed to serve for life; the judicial branch extends to the United States Courts of Appeal, the United States District Courts, and State and County Courts. The primary role of the nine justices of the Supreme Court is to assure the United States government does not attempt to surrender, sell or transfer the people's unalienable rights given by [[God]]. The Supreme Court has the power to consider the constitutionality of laws passed by Congress.

== Economy ==

The US has the largest and most technologically powerful economy in the world, with a per capita GDP of $47,400. In this market-oriented economy, private individuals and business firms make most of the decisions, and the federal and state governments buy needed goods and services predominantly in the private marketplace. US business firms enjoy greater flexibility than their counterparts in Western Europe and Japan in decisions to expand capital plant, to lay off surplus workers, and to develop new products. At the same time, they face higher barriers to enter their rivals' home markets than foreign firms face entering US markets. US firms are at or near the forefront in technological advances, especially in computers and in medical, aerospace, and military equipment; their advantage has narrowed since the end of World War II. The onrush of technology largely explains the gradual development of a "two-tier labor market" in which those at the bottom lack the education and the professional/technical skills of those at the top and, more and more, fail to get comparable pay raises, health insurance coverage, and other benefits. Unfortunately, china remains both the banker and salesman to the united state's role as buyer, and debtor. This will not end well for the United States, republican president or not. Since 1975, practically all the gains in household income have gone to the top 20% of households. The war in March-April 2003 between a US-led coalition and Iraq, and the subsequent occupation of Iraq, required major shifts in national resources to the military. Soaring oil prices between 2005 and the first half of 2008 threatened inflation and unemployment, as higher gasoline prices ate into consumers' budgets. Imported oil accounts for about 60% of US consumption. Long-term problems include inadequate investment in economic infrastructure, rapidly rising medical and pension costs of an aging population, sizable trade and budget deficits, and stagnation of family income in the lower economic groups. The merchandise trade deficit reached a record $840 billion in 2008 before shrinking to $506 billion in 2009, and ramping back up to $630 billion in 2010. The global economic downturn, the sub-prime mortgage crisis, investment bank failures, falling home prices, and tight credit pushed the United States into a recession by mid-2008. GDP contracted until the third quarter of 2009, making this the deepest and longest downturn since the Great Depression. To help stabilize financial markets, the US Congress established a $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) in October 2008. The government used some of these funds to purchase equity in US banks and other industrial corporations, much of which had been returned to the government by early 2011. In January 2009 the US Congress passed and President Barack Obama signed a bill providing an additional $787 billion fiscal stimulus to be used over 10 years - two-thirds on additional spending and one-third on tax cuts - to create jobs and to help the economy recover. Approximately two-thirds of these funds were injected into the economy by the end of 2010. In March 2010, President Obama signed a health insurance reform bill into law that will extend coverage to an additional 32 million American citizens by 2016, through private health insurance for the general population and Medicaid for the impoverished. In July 2010, the president signed the DODD-FRANK Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, a bill designed to promote financial stability by protecting consumers from financial abuses, ending taxpayer bailouts of financial firms, dealing with troubled banks that are "too big to fail," and improving accountability and transparency in the financial system - in particular, by requiring certain financial derivatives to be traded in markets that are subject to government regulation and oversight. In November 2010, in an attempt to keep interest rates from rising and snuffing out the nascent recovery, the US Federal Reserve Bank (The Fed) announced that it would purchase $600 billion worth of US Government bonds by June 2011.

Leading industrial power in the world, highly diversified and technologically advanced; [[petroleum]], [[steel]], motor vehicles, aerospace, telecommunications, chemicals, [[electronics]], food processing, consumer goods, lumber, mining.
<ref>[https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html CIA - The world Factbook]</ref>

==Flag Description==
[[Image:50 star flag.png|left|thumb|150px|The [[Flag of the United States of America]]]]
{{main|Flag of the United States of America}}

Thirteen equal horizontal stripes of red (top and bottom) alternating with white; there is a blue rectangle in the upper hoist-side corner bearing 50 small, white, five-pointed stars arranged in nine offset horizontal rows of six stars (top and bottom) alternating with rows of five stars; the 50 stars represent the 50 states, the 13 stripes represent the 13 original colonies; known as Old Glory; the design and colors have been the basis for a number of other flags, including [[Chile]], [[Liberia]], [[Malaysia]], and [[Puerto Rico]].

{{Clear}}

==References==
{{reflist}}

== See also==
[[File:Lawrence The Migration of the Negro.jpg|thumb|The Migration of the Negro by [[Jacob Lawrence]], 1940-1941.]]
*[[Pledge of Allegiance]]
*[[Famous American artists]]
*[[List of 50 states]]
*[[Americas]]
*[[America (continent)]]
*[[Columbia]]
*[[Gallery of American Masterpieces]]

==External links==
*[[CIA]] - [https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/us.html The World FactBook]
*[http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/616563/United-States United States.]
*[http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/america.htm America]
*[http://www.nationsonline.org/oneworld/flags_of_us_states.htm Flags of the U.S. States]
*[http://www.pibmug.com/files/map_test.swf Interactive map test of the 50 U.S. states]
*[http://www.u-s-history.com/pages/h445.html U.S. History]
*[http://www.theroot.com/buzz/who-owns-united-states Who Owns the United States?]
*[http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html Wealth, Income, and Power.] by G. William Domhoff, University of California Santa Cruz.

{{USstates}}

[[Category:North American Countries]]
[[Category:United States of America]]
[[Category:NATO members]]
[[Category:United States History]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]

Debate: 15 questions for evolutionists

2012-02-14T17:38:49Z

SusanP: Undo revision 960195 by KenDollBoyToy (talk)

In May 2011 [[Creation Ministries International]] launched the [[Question evolution! campaign]]. Core to this campaign are '''15 Questions for Evolutionists'''. In this debate, I want to collect answers to these questions - and replies to these answers by creationist. I'll try something new: this debate will be somewhat moderated - as I want to get concise arguments, I'll take out all personal attacks on the debate page.

The 15 Questions for evolutionists can be found [http://creation.com/15-questions HERE] and there are 15 links on that page for those interested in further study. In addition, Creation Ministries International has issued three response web pages to evolutionists concerning their replies to the 15 questions which can be found at these web locations: [http://creation.com/15-questions-responses-1 Responses to our 15 Questions: part 1 - Questions 1–3] and [http://creation.com/15-questions-responses-2 Responses to our 15 Questions: part 2 - Questions 4–8] and [http://creation.com/15-questions-responses-3 Responses to our 15 Questions: part 3 - Questions 9–15].

In addition, Creation Ministries International is in the midst of releasing a series of educational videos designed to rebut evolutionist responses to the 15 questions for evolutionists:

*[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9oJFXSyGpM Question Evolution! campaign - Introduction]

*[http://creation.com/genesis-unleashed?fileID=f4hTmRKz8rc 15 Questions for Evolutionists -- General objections]

*[http://creation.com/genesis-unleashed?fileID=IizKNWUrMwU 15 Questions for Evolutionists -- Question 1]

*[http://creation.com/genesis-unleashed?fileID=e7CXwh46dX0 15 Questions for Evolutionists -- Question 2]

==How did life originate?==
''Evolutionist Professor Paul Davies admitted, “Nobody knows how a mixture of lifeless chemicals spontaneously organized themselves into the first living cell.” Andrew Knoll, professor of biology, Harvard, said, “we don’t really know how life originated on this planet”. A minimal cell needs several hundred proteins. Even if every atom in the universe were an experiment with all the correct amino acids present for every possible molecular vibration in the supposed evolutionary age of the universe, not even one average-sized functional protein would form. So how did life with hundreds of proteins originate just by chemistry without intelligent design?''

===What an evolutionist would say===
Darwin's 1859 book was called [[On the Origin of Species]], not '''On the Origin of Life''', his theory didn't cover the very beginnings of life, but what happened when speciation started.

Similarly, we have helpful physical theories about the behavior of objects in the universe, though we there is debate about the creation of the universe...

There are well-understood processes by which the chemicals present in the environment of the ancient earth could have combined into peptides, and eventually into self-catalyzing proteins that gave rise to DNA and unicellular organisms. This is the theory of abiogenesis, a relatively new branch of science distinct from evolutionary biology. As stated above, the theory of evolution does not say anything about how the first lifeforms formed, only how they developed afterwards.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 15:55, 12 January 2012 (EST)

::Agreed, the origin of life is a biochemical question--not really an evolutionary biology one. --[[User:JHunter|JHunter]] 12:36, 21 January 2012 (EST)

::::That said, most of modern biology consists of biochemical questions, including the major mechanisms underlying evolution, so the question on the origin of life is not an inappropriate one here. To answer it, I must first address an idea that I've heard quoted by creationists addressing this question in the links provided by User:Conservative. That is the common misconception that the current scientific consensus suggests that life started as self-replicating polypeptides. In light of evidence uncovered in the past couple decades, this hypothesis is now considered highly unlikely; the process that would become "life" was likely already started before the "primordial amino acid soup" came into play. Self-replicating polydeoxyribonucleotides (DNA strands), are also considered an unlikely because of the chemical characteristics of DNA. Self-replicating strands of RNA, on the other hand, can be randomly generated in a laboratory using common, non-biological, reagents. This is a far-cry from the long-discredited Miller-Urey experiment (their experimental conditions turned out to be a wildly incorrect reproduction of the early Earth), that found organic molecules in a solution zapped with electricity. Besides, complex organic molecules seem to form spontaneously (albeit in trace amounts) wherever the right elemental ingredients are present; that's the age-old rule of organic chemistry, if a side reaction '''can''' happen, it '''will''' happen to some degree.

::::Life is chemistry, very complex chemistry, but it is still chemistry. The components of a cell consist of biomolecules behaving in a chemical way (drugs are designed to take advantage of this fact). Barring any philosophical discussion on the meaning of life (for the last time, '''the answer to life, the universe, and everything is 42'''), the purpose of a cell (or a complex organism consisting of a vast network of cells) is to reproduce. Self-reproduction is one of the defining traits of life. Ribonucleotides (present in trace amounts wherever the ingredients are found) will spontaneously form 5' to 3' polymers in a warm, reducing, aqueous environment; such as that found around the edges of a hot-spring (assuming a low oxygen atmosphere, which is unanimously suggested for the early Earth by geological data), or even an oceanic thermal vent. That one or more of these oligomers would have the enzymatic capacity to self-replicate is extremely plausible. When considering the scale (an entire planet), it becomes probable.

::::How these self-reproducing RNA strands started conspiring with amino acids, became compartmentalized in phospholipids, and then started using a DNA template, is still largely unknown. It is thought that these changes occurred in the order I just mentioned because that is the most chemically plausible order of events; although a plausible scenario is still very far from an established theory. As more evidence becomes available, as more experiments are done, and as geology reveals more information about the chemistry of the early Earth, it is likely that the scientific community will arrive at more of a consensus regarding the origin of life. Obviously, nobody was there to witness the origin of life and, unless the NSF allocates grant money towards a 1981 DeLorean, a conjectural consensus (that is well-supported by all the evidence) will be the closest that science can come to providing an answer to this question. This does not mean that scientists "don't know"; in the absence of first-hand observation,an inference from evidence is the closest that the scientific process can come to explaining anything.

::::There is evidence that much of the Old Testament (after Genesis) is a historically accurate, if poetically embellished (as all histories were at the time), account of bronze-age Jewish history. Archaeological evidence supports this and so science supports this. However, it is a non sequitur to conclude that because ''some'' Old Testament stories are grounded in historical fact that ''all'' Old Testament stories are literally true--even St. Paul admits that this is a matter of faith (and open to interpretation), not evidence. To draw an analogy, Livy, a Roman historian, wrote a lengthy account of the history of the Roman people. Much of this account is very historically accurate and is supported as such by archaeological evidence. However, it is very clearly illogical to conclude that because Livy's historical narrative is largely true, his references to the Roman gods playing a hand in these events must be true as well. Similarly science, which by definition can ''only'' rely on empirical evidence, must search outside of scripture for evidence regarding the origin of life and draw conclusions based on evidence alone. --[[User:JHunter|JHunter]] 03:24, 25 January 2012 (EST)

===What a creationist would reply===

==How did the DNA code originate?==
''The code is a sophisticated language system with letters and words where the meaning of the words is unrelated to the chemical properties of the letters—just as the information on this page is not a product of the chemical properties of the ink (or pixels on a screen). What other coding system has existed without intelligent design? How did the DNA coding system arise without it being created?''

===What an evolutionist would say===
DNA is not a code, which is encoded information intentionally transmitted by an intelligent agent. The "information" present in DNA is the result of natural selection, which screens out DNA sequences unsuited to reproduction and increases the frequency of those which are useful. The result is a highly complex molecule capable of a large variety of functions, but it is still a chemical, obeying the laws of physics and chemistry in a highly predictable way.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 15:55, 12 January 2012 (EST)

::TonyPark is right again! There is no such thing as the "DNA code" (at least Dan Brown hasn't published it yet). A cell is a biochemical system, similar to how a car is a mechanical system. Actually, if examined closely, most biochemical systems are remarkably mechanical in function. The set of biomolecular actions in any cell, while they may seem quite complex, are actually quite predictable once they are well understood. This is one of the driving principles in modern cell biology, molecular biology, developmental biology, pharmacology, medicine (notably oncology), bioinformatics, and every other field (there are hundreds) that deals with functional genomics, proteomics, or metabolism.

::Genes are referred to as "information", even studied as information (bioinformatics), because that is a convenient way to model and discuss a very complex system. The article on [[genes]] here at Conservapedia is actually pretty well written (when I have time, I do want to tweak a couple minor points in that article, but that is something I will discuss on that article's talk page), I would encourage anybody reading this argument to read that article first if they are unfamiliar with the terms I am going to use.

::In the context of this question (and the "answers" posted by CMI), "DNA code" is a very arbitrarily defined term. The trouble is that the interactions between DNA and the biomolecular mediators of cellular homeostasis (the processes that maintain the tightly controlled cellular microenvironment) are quite complex. It is a gross oversimplification (in fact, it is incorrect) to say that DNA ''only'' functions as a "template" to be transcribed into mRNA and then translated into protein. It is true that a similar-sounding term, "genetic code", refers to triplets of bases (codons) encoding for particular amino acids in a protein product. However, there is a lot more that goes into regulating cell processes than blind protein production. Gene expression is a very tightly regulated process ensuring that only the right cells express the right genes at the right time (for a good example of when this goes wrong, see [[cancer]]). This regulation is highly mechanical. To avoid launching into a lengthy discussion of gene regulatory mechanisms, I will leave the point at that.

::Accordingly, I will give the authors of this question the benefit of the doubt and interpret "DNA code" to mean the sum of homeostatic regulation via direct and indirect biomolecular interactions with DNA. On the whole, this question is so broad in scope that it ''is'' impossible to properly answer without several thousand pages of text. To illustrate this point, I have a five volume reference book on my bookshelf that summarizes most of the human biomolecular signalling pathways that were known when it was published (2006); in total, the book is 5300 pages long. Given the pace with which biomedical scientists are unraveling the human interactome, a 2011 edition would need to be '''at least''' twice as long (and require a giant team of very masochistic editors). The simple fact here is that '''every''' chemical process within the cell can (and does) elicit some downstream effect on gene regulation. Therefore, one cannot even ''functionally'' explain the "DNA code" without also explaining every last scrap of chemistry that goes on in a cell. Similarly, thoroughly explaining its origin would require tracing the phylogeny of several hundred thousand individual processes.

::While creationists may rejoice at the "impossibility" of this question, science is not at all clueless about the evolutionary origin of many of the more central parts in this system. Quite the contrary actually. For instance, the evolutionary origin of introns in eukaryotic genes from ancient self-splicing bacterial transposable elements (which seem to have been retroviral in origin) is practically an air-tight case. The highly conserved sequence homology among members of the most common families of transcription factors (proteins that directly interact with DNA to regulate genes) also strongly hints at the existence of a common root at the base of each family "tree". An even better example is the remarkably high level of homology between the transcriptional machinery in all extant lineages of life. Similarly, there is the striking homology in translational machinery. In fact, sequencing of ribosomal RNAs (which are under quite a bit of selective pressure to stay '''very''' static) is a very accurate way to estimate ancestral relationships--oh, and for most clades examined, the "newfangled" rRNA data suggests ancestral relationships that are very similar to (and in plants and animals, often identical to) those suggested by older techniques based on phenotype. All the examples that I just gave are evidence of the common descent of the gene regulatory / expression machinery. Clearly, without going back to the origin of life itself (which is an impossibility), explaining the evolutionary origin of the obscure <s>creationist invention</s> concept that is the "DNA code" is fundamentally impossible. However, just because scientists can not precisely trace every last bit of cellular machinery all the way back to the origin of life (which is the rather disingenuous implication of this question), does not mean that that the scientific community is at a loss for evidence from which to make logical inferences about its approximate naturalistic origin.

::Like question number 1, question 2 ignores the fundamental principles of the scientific process; conclusions and hypotheses regarding an un-observable process must strictly rely on logical consideration of the available evidence. The sound practice of science (which, I might add, is meticulously ingrained in any scientist-in-training and '''very''' strictly enforced by peer review) requires that evidence is objectively interpreted as only speaking for itself, independent of presupposition or ideological dogma. Science is not about searching for evidence in support of a particular hypothesis; in fact, it is about seeking evidence which contradicts the working hypothesis, so that the working hypothesis may be further refined. It is for this simple reason that "creation science", by relying on the '''presupposition''' of divine creation, is not science. A scientific theory, such as evolution or relativity is not a presupposition (as will be claimed in a couple later questions), rather it is a logical paradigm that is compatible with the hypotheses suggested by the available evidence. Scientific theories are, by definition, fluid logical paradigms; when the evidence suggests a paradoxical conclusion, the theory (not the conclusion) is adjusted to accommodate the new finding. --[[User:JHunter|JHunter]] 13:41, 25 January 2012 (EST)

===What a creationist would reply===

==How could mutations—accidental copying mistakes (DNA ‘letters’ exchanged, deleted or added, genes duplicated, chromosome inversions, etc.)—create the huge volumes of information in the DNA of living things?==
''How could such errors create 3 billion letters of DNA information to change a microbe into a microbiologist? There is information for how to make proteins but also for controlling their use—much like a cookbook contains the ingredients as well as the instructions for how and when to use them. One without the other is useless. Mutations are known for their destructive effects, including over 1,000 human diseases such as hemophilia. Rarely are they even helpful. But how can scrambling existing DNA information create a new biochemical pathway or nano-machines with many components, to make ‘goo-to-you’ evolution possible? E.g., How did a 32-component rotary motor like ATP synthase (which produces the energy currency, ATP, for all life), or robots like kinesin (a ‘postman’ delivering parcels inside cells) originate?''

===What an evolutionist would say===
DNA mutations alone cannot drive evolution. This is why "living fossils" do not evolve; they are in an environment with little to no selection pressure on them because they are so well adapted. As a result, the animals change very little over time, aside from a small amount of random genetic drift.

When natural selection is added to the equation, there is a mechanism by which good mutations can be screened from bad ones, and a mechanism for gene frequencies to change in a way that allows a species to slowly adapt to their environment. Not all mutations are beneficial, obviously, but the environment punishes bad DNA very quickly, and after billions of years life has become very sophisticated, even on the smallest scales.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 12:18, 13 January 2012 (EST)

::Yet another very well-worded answer. Mr. Park, you are a tough act to follow!

::Seriously, what is the deal with the creationist obsession with mutating genes? Seriously, the idea that changing the genes is a major driving force of evolution pre-dates the understanding of how genes work. There are plenty of other ('''much''' more common and interesting) ways to generate phenotypic variation within a population. In the past three decades, advances in population genetics, combined with a veritable revolution in the fields of molecular biology and developmental biology, have demonstrated that. In other words, referencing the breakthroughs that have resulted from the new-found understanding of the molecular mechanisms of evolution, '''"This ain't your daddy's Darwin!"'''

::But first, because the question insists, I will address the boring stuff.

::Genes duplicate, entire sections of chromosomes, and sometimes even whole chromosomes, or sets of chromosomes, can be duplicated or even fused. Sometimes, just a portion of a gene is duplicated, or maybe even swapped with a part from a different gene. On a smaller scale, errors in DNA replication, among other factors, can cause single base pairs in DNA to be changed (this is called a "single nucleotide polymorphism" or a SNP--pronounced "Snip"), deleted, or inserted. Sometimes, it's a transposable element (chunks of DNA that like to move around in the genome--a lot) that inserts in the middle of an exon. Or maybe even an endogenous retrovirus that's still intact enough to move around finding itself in between two enhancer elements for an essential gene. Chromosomes are not static structures either. High school biology was only partially right when they taught you that recombination occurs between homologous chromosomes during meiosis; as it turns out, non-homologous chromosomes trade parts too sometimes (quite often, actually, on an evolutionary time scale). In short, on the scale of hundreds of millions of years, the genome has more in common with Mardis Gras in New Orleans than it does with a leather-bound book.

::On the genomic level, when and where mutations occur is largely random. The vast majority of mutations have no effect whatsoever on phenotype. However, when a mutation does affect phenotype, whether or not it survives to be present in future populations is not random. Any genomic change that increases an organism's ability to reproduce efficiently, will gradually become increasingly prevalent in subsequent generations because the more-efficiently reproducing individuals generate more offspring. Alternatively, if a variation impairs the ability of an individual to reproduce efficiently, then that variation will become less prevalent in subsequent generations because the individuals carrying it will produce proportionately fewer offspring. This seemingly obvious observation '''is''' natural selection. To say that a trait is "selected against" simply means that it has a deleterious effect on the relative reproductive potential of the individuals carrying it.

::Random mutations generate novel allelic variations within a population, and the sieve of reproduction keeps the randomly-occurring harmful variations from being present in future populations while at the same time amplifying the number of individuals carrying favorable variations. The net result of this process is anything but random.

::That said, ecosystems change, natural disasters happen, geological events happen, new organisms colonize an ecosystem and disrupt the food chain. An allele that was beneficial in one generation, may be quite deleterious four generations later. But, when that happens, selective pressure shifts and individuals carrying the now-harmful allele are out-reproduced by individuals who are better adapted to the new conditions--thus the allelic composition of the population shifts again. Repeating a similar cycle over hundreds of generations will result in a population that is, by and large, phenotypically different (sometimes quite dramatically) from the original population. Repeat the cycle over tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or millions, of generations, and add in a whole host of other possible random events that favor or cause a redistribution of allele frequencies over the generations, and the end population will have changed drastically from the original population.

::Now for the fun stuff. The regions of important genes that encode for important proteins are under quite a bit of selective pressure to change as little as possible over the generations; a random mutation in one those regions would be so harmful to the reproductive ability of the individuals carrying it that it is not likely to persist in a population for more than a few generations (assuming it's not lethal to the original carrier, in which case it would not even be present in one). As such, mutations in functional protein coding genes are not a major driving force of phenotypic change across generations. This is why the fruit fly makes a good model for human genetics--the superfluous regions of the genes (that, say, encode for parts of proteins where the amino acid sequence is largely inconsequential) have diverged quite a bit, but the important parts have stayed the same over the hundreds of millions of years since the last common ancestor between the fruit fly and the human. They have retained this "homology" because any changes in those regions was very strongly selected against.

::So what is the major cause of morphological change? Among closely related species (and, yes, for the purpose of this explanation humans are '''very''' closely related to mice), the major genetic differences underlying morphological variation are not in the protein-coding regions of the genes themselves, but in the promoter (regulatory) regions of these genes. Mutating an essential component gene that is essential to normal embryonic development is going to result in a dead embryo--not a reproductively viable organism. However, subtly adjusting the "on/off" switch of such a gene, and tweaking its expression pattern (which cells express a given gene), will both allow the organism to grow to reproductive viability, and produce a morphological change. If individuals with this new morphological change are able reproduce more efficiently than individuals without it, it will become increasingly prevalent in future generations.

::As for how new genetic information is added (by which, I assume, you mean the emergence of new protein-coding genes), we return to the hustle and bustle of the chromosomes. Gene duplication events are very common. When an organism only has one or two (depending on the nature of the gene and the mutation) copies of an important gene to play with, significant changes will be very strongly selected against. When a gene is randomly duplicated, the organism now has a spare copy--and may accrue mutations in one of the copies of that gene without seriously impacting its reproductive potential. As mutations accumulate in the copy of the gene that is now freed from negative selective pressure, it will most likely just wind up as a useless (junk) sequence in the genomic junkyard (there are thousands of such non-functional duplicate-gene remnants in the human genome). If, however, as its sequence diverges from that of its "functional" copy, its mechanical function (or expression pattern, or both) changes in such a way that it provides a survival benefit to the organism carrying it, individuals carrying the divergent copy (now a new gene in its own right) will be selected for in subsequent generations and progressively more beneficial allelic variations of the new gene will be selected for.

::Similarly, when a large segment of a chromosome is duplicated, every new duplicate gene contained in that segment is entered into the "new gene lottery", for a chance to become new (repurposed) genetic information. This too is a fairly common occurrence, especially when there is a lot of selective pressure for novel adaptation.

::Evolution has been a '''long''' road. It's taken 4 billion years for gene duplication, sequence divergence, random catastrophes, population events, and the cut-throat race for reproductive viability to lead to life as we know it today.

::::[[Hardy Weinberg equilibrium]] is a model for what the genes of a living thing would be if they did not evolve. In this model, forces that change genetic frequency, such as mutations, genetic recombination, and so on, would have no effect. This concretely means that if a population has Hardy Weinberg equilibrium, and if, say, fifty percent of the individuals having one allele (alleles are versions of a gene) and fifty percent has another, then over, say, a thousand generations, fifty percent would still have one allele and fifty percent the other.

::::Experiments testing whether this equilibrium exists have been conducted for decades, and the result is that the frequency of alleles in a population change from generation to generation, and they change tremendously over large spans of time because mutations, genetic recombination, genetic drift, and other factors all make tiny changes in genes in individuals.

::::That withstanding, when individuals in a species pass their genes from generation to generation, it's easily to fathom that tiny observeable changes in alleles mean observeable changes in species over massive spans of time. [[User:PabloAbra|PabloAbra]] 18:15, 9 February 2012 (EST)

===What a creationist would reply===

==Why is natural selection, a principle recognized by creationists, taught as ‘evolution’, as if it explains the origin of the diversity of life?==
''By definition it is a selective process (selecting from already existing information), so is not a creative process. It might explain the survival of the fittest (why certain genes benefit creatures more in certain environments), but not the arrival of the fittest (where the genes and creatures came from in the first place). The death of individuals not adapted to an environment and the survival of those that are suited does not explain the origin of the traits that make an organism adapted to an environment. E.g., how do minor back-and-forth variations in finch beaks explain the origin of beaks or finches? How does natural selection explain goo-to-you evolution? ''

===What an evolutionist would say===
''By definition it is a selective process (selecting from already existing information), so is not a creative process.'' What definition is that? Of course, selecting can be a creative process! A sculptor selects the pieces of marble which have to be chipped of...

Most evolutionists - I think - would subscribe to the sentence: ''It might explain why certain genes benefit creatures more in certain environments, but not where the genes and creatures came from in the first place!''

In addition, in no science classroom is natural selection taught as the entirety of evolution. This is a misconception resulting from the phrase "Survival of the fittest" being used to describe evolution. The other half of the equation is genetic mutation, which provides new material, so to speak, to be vetted by the natural selection process.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 16:04, 12 January 2012 (EST)

::Natural selection is not synonymous with evolution. Nobody who properly understands how evolution works would teach it as such; there would be no purpose in doing so other than to deliberately prevent the students from understanding the intricacies of the evolutionary process. Natural selection '''is''' the major driving force of evolution, but it not the same thing as evolution. No competent teacher would present them as the same thing. --[[User:JHunter|JHunter]] 23:03, 26 January 2012 (EST)

===What a creationist would reply===

==How did new biochemical pathways, which involve multiple enzymes working together in sequence, originate?==
'' Every pathway and nano-machine requires multiple protein/enzyme components to work. How did lucky accidents create even one of the components, let alone 10 or 20 or 30 at the same time, often in a necessary programmed sequence. Evolutionary biochemist Franklin Harold wrote, “we must concede that there are presently no detailed Darwinian accounts of the evolution of any biochemical or cellular system, only a variety of wishful speculations.”''

===What an evolutionist would say===

Biochemical pathways do not arise out of nothing; they are built over millions of years, piece by piece, adding new functions as they become useful and dropping functions as they become superfluous. These pathways are, like all of DNA, merely chemical reactions, obeying well understood laws, and provide some function to an organism at every level of complexity. Natural selection allowed new variations on old pathways to be tried, and if they succeeded, propagated.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 16:09, 12 January 2012 (EST)

::If you piece apart the chemical pathways, it is a given that losing a small part of that pathway will render it useless. However, incomplete parts of that pathway can serve different purposes inside the body, meaning that they still have a reason to be selected for.

::This argument is not unlike the flagellum argument, with the mousetrap analogy; a mousetrip will not work if it's missing a part. However, you can use the pieces of a mousetrap for other purposes than catching mice. Furthermore, a few of flagellum's parts serve other purposes in the body.

::The argument that a chemical pathway's complexity makes it impossible to produce by evolution relies on the assumption that every part of a chemical pathway is entirely useless unless every part is present. However, the body does not exist in a vacuum and countless import chemicals in the body serve multiple purposes. [[User:PabloAbra|PabloAbra]] 18:26, 9 February 2012

===What a creationist would reply===

==Living things look like they were designed, so how do evolutionists know that they were not designed?==
''Richard Dawkins wrote, “biology is the study of complicated things that have the appearance of having been designed with a purpose.” Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of the double helix structure of DNA, wrote, “Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.” The problem for evolutionists is that living things show too much design. Who objects when an archaeologist says that pottery points to human design? Yet if someone attributes the design in living things to a designer, that is not acceptable. Why should science be restricted to naturalistic causes rather than logical causes?''

===What an evolutionist would say===
The appearance of design in natural phenomena is not proof of design, just as seeing a face in a cloud or a piece of rock does not indicate that it is designed. The only "designer" necessary to explain the diversity of life on Earth is the combination of DNA mutation, to create new genetic material, and natural selection, to screen out harmful mutations from the new material.

What we see as "designed" structures and organs are in fact the result of an evolutionary process, without any kind of plan or input besides the environment killing off any variants that don't confer enough of a reproductive advantage.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 16:17, 12 January 2012 (EST)

::Who cares? The potential existence of a designer doesn't have anything to do with the potential existence of evolution. The evolutionary mechanisms in question tend to rely on numbers, on the probability that a mutation will happen here, that random mating will pair this chromosome with that, that genetic drift will change one allele percentage to another. If these numbers are driven by an almighty force, it doesn't change the mechanisms themselves. As far as I'm concerned, this question is thus irrelevant to the debate. [[User:PabloAbra|PabloAbra]] 18:38, 9 February 2012

===What a creationist would reply===

==How did multi-cellular life originate?==
''How did cells adapted to individual survival ‘learn’ to cooperate and specialize (including undergoing programmed cell death) to create complex plants and animals?''

===What an evolutionist would say===

Like our cells, bacteria use chemical signals to communicate with each other, and in large numbers are capable of cooperation in creating structures and solving problems of resource gathering. The ability to cooperate, and eventually form multi-cell colonies and then multicellular organisms, would have conferred a massive survival advantage to the first bacteria who developed the trait. [[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 16:24, 12 January 2012 (EST)

===What a creationist would reply===

==How did sex originate?==
''Asexual reproduction gives up to twice as much reproductive success (‘fitness’) for the same resources as sexual reproduction, so how could the latter ever gain enough advantage to be selected? And how could mere physics and chemistry invent the complementary apparatuses needed at the same time (non-intelligent processes cannot plan for future coordination of male and female organs).''

===What an evolutionist would say===

Sexual reproduction provides a huge evolutionary advantage by increasing the genetic diversity of offspring, and therefore increasing the rate of evolution. This is why almost all of the complex organisms on Earth reproduce sexually. Even some bacteria have been shown to have "sex", in the sense of exchanging DNA information in order to produce offspring with a combination of both organisms' genes.

The complex sexual specialization we see today in animals did not arise randomly; it is not as though male and female versions of animals evolved separately, by sheer luck. They have existed together since almost the very beginning of life. [[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 16:36, 12 January 2012 (EST)

===What a creationist would reply===
If sexual reproduction is such a huge evolutionary advantage, how is it that there still exist so many species which reproduce asexually ? If it is a huge advantage, we would expect to see every organisms evolve in this direction, wouldn't we ? [[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]]

No, we most certainly would not. Just because a trait is advantageous does not mean every organism will independently develop it. Your argument could be applied to the traits of flight, intelligence, or any other advantageous trait to equally absurd results. [[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 17:36, 12 January 2012 (EST)

:I don't follow your reasoning.
:*You say that sexual reproduction is a huge advantage
:*You say that Evolution is based upon natural selection
:*Therefore, Evolution should favor species with sexual reproduction and natural selection should wipe out those who do not reproduce sexually.
:I did not mean that every organisms should have independently develop it but that the organisms which do not reproduce sexually should have been replaced by others who have this huge advantage. I appreciate that you talk about ''absurd results'', I agree with you on that point.--[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 17:58, 12 January 2012 (EST)

:I think what User:TonyPark is trying to get at is that sexual reproduction is advantageous to MOST organisms. Some species may get along quite well with asexual reproduction, and hence have no reason to change. --[[User:RedGoliath?|RedGoliath]] 23:07, 12 January 2012 (GMT)
::I can understand how flying or intelligence might be an advantage to some species and not others but how is it possible that genetic diversity (as you presented the advantage) can ''not'' be advantageous to some species ?--[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 18:24, 12 January 2012 (EST)
:::As the question implied: sexual reproduction comes at a price! For complicated beings is seems to be worth the costs, for very simple not. [[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 18:31, 12 January 2012 (EST)

:::It's an interesting subject, though often coming up with reasonable hypotheses can be difficult. The Komodo Dragon comes to mind, however, as a species that breeds both sexually and asexually, depending on its conditions. This is seen in a number of other species, including some bacteria. Obviously, this has it's advantages: If a females cannot find a mate, she can asexually reproduce.
As for species that only reproduce asexually, there may be no selection pressure that requires more diverse offspring. An advantage of asexual reproduction is that it occurs much quicker than sexual reproduction for obvious reasons. There are likely other advantages to asexual rep., but nothing that I can think of at this moment in time --[[User:RedGoliath|RedGoliath]] 23:42, January 2012 (GMT)

It is advantageous to every species, but that doesn't mean that every asexual species is going to die out, only that they won't probably do as well as sexual species do over a period of time. This holds to be true in most environments, where almost all complex forms of life are sexual, and the asexual species are comparatively simpler in structure. Don't forget that asexual creatures do evolve and adapt, just slower.

Side question: Don't you think a scientist somewhere might have already thought of that question and answered it? I ask myself that about most of these 15 questions.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 18:56, 12 January 2012 (EST)

::::Alright, the 3 of you made a good case here. Now, please explain me how it began? Was it only 1 individual mutation? If so who did it reproduce with ?--[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 20:50, 12 January 2012 (EST)

:::::Bacteria commonly share information from one to the other using plasmids. This is seen in how some bacteria can become resistant to antibiotics. Though I have no actual evidence to support it(I didn't google) it seems logical to me that this was the beginning of sexual reproduction. I'm not terribly knowledgeable about evolutionary biology but this seems to be the earliest form of pseudo-sexual reproduction and it obviously came about due to a need for genetic variation in the species since, as is known, asexual reproduction does not provide variation. That is the extent of my knowledge of that so if anyone else knows more about plasmids and how they developed it would be wonderful. [[User:Ayzmo|Ayzmo :)]] 21:17, 12 January 2012 (EST)

::::::We should also remember that one of the biggest sources of gene exchange among bacteria, besides plasmids, is in fact bacteriophage viruses. They can infect one bacteria and ferry genetic material from it to another bacteria, and something like 70% of ocean-dwelling bacteria on earth today are in fact infected with a bacteriophage of some kind. So, to answer your question, PhilipN, it is possible for only one bacteria to have developed the trait, but if that bacteria was infected with a virus, as most are, those genes would have been spread to other bacteria in the vicinity, giving them the ability to reproduce sexually as well.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 12:17, 13 January 2012 (EST)

:::::"Who did it produce with?" - Your question presupposes that there had to be two distinct sexes. My following point will be an educated guess. It may not be right, but it's just an example of how the different sexes could have occured.
:::::If you take a look at flowers, you'll find that each flower has both male and female reproductive organs. This is pretty much universal over all plant species. Animals on the other hand, tend to have distinct males and females (at least, most vertebrates). This would imply that the separate reproductive organs were present before plants and animals diverged from a common ancestor. The common ancestor would likely have both pairs of organs, as plants do today. Plants, perhaps, never lost this trait. However, at some point after the divergance, animals became distinctly male and female (again, at least in vertebrates).
:::::As you know, organisms need energy, and the more body parts and organs you have, the more energy you require. Could it be that in animals, organisms in a species started to become specialised for which organs they used? In half of a population, the female rep. organs were slightly reduced, and vice versa. This would mean that the organisms required less energy. They would all still have both pairs of organs, but one would be reduced. Soon, two sexes would form, as one type of sexual organ would have been reduced/lost in each group.
:::::Again, this is not fact, merely my suggestion. Add to it if you wish, or point out how this would be wrong/unlikely. Hope this helps.
:::::--[[User:RedGoliath|RedGoliath]] 17:26, 13 January 2012 (GMT)

==Why are the (expected) countless millions of transitional fossils missing?==
''Darwin noted the problem and it still remains. The evolutionary family trees in textbooks are based on imagination, not fossil evidence. Famous Harvard paleontologist (and evolutionist), Stephen Jay Gould, wrote, “The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology”. Other evolutionist fossil experts also acknowledge the problem.''
===What an evolutionist would say===

The term "transitional fossil" is not used outside of creationist discussion. Every fossil is a transitional fossil, just as every animal is a transitional form, from what they were in the past to what they will be in the future. The term is usually used to describe fossils with traits from two different taxons, such as Archaeopteryx or Tiktaalik, but it is important to remember that taxonomic categories are human inventions, and there is nothing essentially different about one of these "intermediate" forms and other fossils in other stages of evolution.

In addition, the theory of evolution was formulated by studying animal anatomy, without the benefit of fossil evidence. Though fossil evidence has bolstered and improved the theory, it is not the only, or even the primary, source of evolutionary data. That distinction falls on DNA sequencing, which has provided huge amounts of data to scientists with a level of precision that Darwin could not have dreamed of.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 16:48, 12 January 2012 (EST)

===What a creationist would reply===

==How do ‘living fossils’ remain unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years, if evolution has changed worms into humans in the same time frame?==
''Professor Gould wrote, “the maintenance of stability within species must be considered as a major evolutionary problem.”''

===What an evolutionist would say===

DNA mutations alone cannot drive evolution. It is necessary that the environment exert some kind of natural selection pressure on the organism for evolution to occur. This is why "living fossils" do not evolve; they are in an environment with little to no selection pressure on them because they are so well adapted. As a result, the animals change very little over time, aside from a small amount of random genetic drift.

In addition, the statement that evolution has turned "worms into humans" is inaccurate. It would be more accurate to say that evolution has turned a small colony of bacteria in a pool of ooze into the entire majestic diversity of life on Earth. This is more impressive, as well.

===What a creationist would reply===

==How did blind chemistry create mind/ intelligence, meaning, altruism and morality?==
''If everything evolved, and we invented God, as per evolutionary teaching, what purpose or meaning is there to human life? Should students be learning nihilism (life is meaningless) in science classes?''
===What an evolutionist would say===
Evolutionary says nothing about the existence of god, nor does it advocate nihilism or any other philosophical stance. The potential philosophical implications of the theory of evolution can be an interesting topic, but is not relevant to a scientific debate.

It should be noted that there are plenty of Christians who believe in evolution and have no such crisis of faith.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 20:45, 12 January 2012 (EST)

===What a creationist would reply===

==Why is evolutionary ‘just-so’ story-telling tolerated?==
''Evolutionists often use flexible story-telling to ‘explain’ observations contrary to evolutionary theory. NAS(USA) member Dr Philip Skell wrote, “Darwinian explanations for such things are often too supple: Natural selection makes humans self-centered and aggressive—except when it makes them altruistic and peaceable. Or natural selection produces virile men who eagerly spread their seed—except when it prefers men who are faithful protectors and providers. When an explanation is so supple that it can explain any behavior, it is difficult to test it experimentally, much less use it as a catalyst for scientific discovery.”''
===What an evolutionist would say===

"Just so storytelling" is not a defined term, and is most likely a completely subjective snarl word used to denigrate any scientific theory the asker doesn't agree with. The question is vague in wording, disingenuous in its intent and pointoess to answer, because the asker has already decided that evolution is a fairy tale sight unseen.

===What a creationist would reply===

==Where are the scientific breakthroughs due to evolution?==
''Dr Marc Kirschner, chair of the Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, stated: “In fact, over the last 100 years, almost all of biology has proceeded independent of evolution, except evolutionary biology itself. Molecular biology, biochemistry, physiology, have not taken evolution into account at all.”9 Dr Skell wrote, “It is our knowledge of how these organisms actually operate, not speculations about how they may have arisen millions of years ago, that is essential to doctors, veterinarians, farmers … .”10 Evolution actually hinders medical discovery.11 Then why do schools and universities teach evolution so dogmatically, stealing time from experimental biology that so benefits humankind?''
===What an evolutionist would say===
This is an appeal to authority. The truth of evolution is in whether or not it explains the diversity of life, not whether a Harvard professor approves of it. This question uses quote mining to misrepresent the attitudes of scientists, but it is not relevant to a debate of whether or not evolution is true.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 17:00, 12 January 2012 (EST)

On a more important point: the breakthrough of evolution is the theory itself, and all of the knowledge about the natural world that we gain from it. That knowledge is used to help deal with drug-resistant bacteria, breed new types of plants and find human analogues for biomedical research, to name only a few applications. However, even if there were no "breakthroughs" from evolutionary theory, it would still be one of humanity's greatest triumphs, because it explains how life as we know it came into being, and that knowledge enriches us in ways that cannot be adequately measured.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 11:50, 13 January 2012 (EST)

===What a creationist would reply===

==Science involves experimenting to figure out how things work; how they operate. Why is evolution, a theory about history, taught as if it is the same as this operational science?==
''You cannot do experiments, or even observe what happened, in the past. Asked if evolution has been observed, Richard Dawkins said, “Evolution has been observed. It’s just that it hasn’t been observed while it’s happening.”''

===What an evolutionist would say===
*There are experiments: e.g., [[Richard Lenski]]'s experiments on the [[e-coli]] [[bacterium]], which got some attention in 2008.
*[[Astronomy]] is equally a science about history, the history of stars. We can't plan experiments on a galactic scale, but we can observe the experiments of nature.

Obviously, it is impoosible to observe events that occurred before the dawn of history, or indded at any point in the past. It is by studying the evidence left behind that we can draw conclusions as to what has occurred. This is the same epistemological basis behind history, archaeology and even crime scene investigation. It is disingenuous to assert that nothing can be learned about the past unless a direct eyewitness account survives.[[User:TonyPark|TonyPark]] 17:24, 12 January 2012 (EST)

===What a creationist would reply===

==Why is a fundamentally religious idea, a dogmatic belief system that fails to explain the evidence, taught in science classes?==
''Karl Popper, famous philosopher of science, said “Darwinism is not a testable scientific theory, but a metaphysical [religious] research programme ….”Michael Ruse, evolutionist science philosopher admitted, “Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.” If “you can’t teach religion in science classes”, why is evolution taught?''
===What an evolutionist would say===
Evolution is not a religion, and to call it one is ridiculous. It has no prayers, no churches, and no dogma. Proponents of evolution come from every faith background. The asker of this question is misleading the audience by forcing the assumption that evolution is a dogmatic belief system and not what it properly is, a highly respected scientific theory that explains and unifies a huge amount of evidence collected over many years by thousands of scientists working in a startlingly wide array of fields. The question also implies that dogmatic ideas that don't explain the evidence have no place in science classrooms, a sentiment I agree with. By those criteria, intelligent design should be discarded post-haste.

===What a creationist would reply===
[[Category:Debate]]
[[Category:Evolution]]

It Gets Better

2012-02-14T17:37:20Z

SusanP: Undo revision 961141 by KendollBoyToy (talk)

'''"It Gets Better "''' is the slogan of a project that tells gay teens to hold on to their homosexuality, promising them that adult homosexual life will provide them "levels of happiness, potential, and positivity". Its main argument is that the only problem the gay community faces is lack of acceptance and toleration from "straight" people. If they can "just get through their teen years", they'll be able to enjoy the protection of adult power and camaraderie which will overcome the "daily tormenting and bullying" they face now.

The project is the creation of [[Dan Savage]] and attempts to tackle the high levels of teen suicide, especially among [[homosexual]] teens. What Dan has done is to get national recognition, a campaign message of false hope that reached to the [[White House]], ''It Gets Better''.

It is noble to help troubled young people but it's wrong to deceive them. Dan Savage's video message is wrong. These teens need help, they need more, they need the truth. Mentally and physically, it gets better by leaving homosexuality. At the least, [[abstinence]] will prolong your life, not shorten it, unlike what Savage and the gay agenda advocates.

In January of 2012, [[Vox Day]] reported that two homosexual males who promoted the It Gets Better Project committed suicide. (see also: [[Mental Health and Homosexuality]]).<ref>http://voxday.blogspot.com/2012/01/it-really-doesnt-get-better.html</ref>

== Christian faith vs. defeatism and acceptance of sexual sin ==

''See also:'' [[Ex-homosexuals]] and [[Overcoming homosexuality]]

A person doesn't move forward in their life by accepting and embracing their [[sin]], they move forward by repenting of it and establishing a relationship with [[God]] through [[Jesus Christ]]. The sin of homosexuality is no different than other besetting sins in terms of it [[Overcoming homosexuality|being able to be conquered through the assistance of Christ]] and the existence of Christian [[ex-homosexuals]] is testimony to this fact. Christian [[faith]] has been conquering the sin of homosexuality for over 2,000 years.

The [[Apostle Paul]] wrote:
{{cquote|Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor [a]effeminate, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God. - I Corinthians 6:9-11 (NASB)}}

[[Peter LaBarbera]] is the President of [[Americans for Truth]] which is a organization which counters the [[homosexual agenda]]. LaBarbera stated the following regarding Christian ex-homosexuals who reported being transformed by the power of God:
{{cquote|Another factor from my experience as a close observer of the “ex-gay” phenomenon is that many former homosexuals do not linger in “[[reparative therapy]]” programs, or participate in them at all. They attribute their dramatic and (relatively) rapid transformation to the power of God, and likely would not show up in a study of this kind. In fact, these “unstudied” overcomers would appear to be the most successful ex-homosexuals because they’ve moved on with their lives — as “reborn” Christians move on after overcoming any besetting sin.<ref>http://www.americansfortruth.com/news/landmark-study-change-for-homosexuals-is-possible.html</ref>}}

Peter LaBarbera's statement above concerning [[Overcoming Homosexuality|overcoming homosexuality]] certainly has some evidence supporting it. For example, in 1980 a study was published in the ''American Journal of Psychiatry'' and eleven men participated in this study. The study reported that eleven homosexual men became heterosexuals "without explicit treatment and/or long-term psychotherapy" through their participation in a [[Pentecostalism|Pentecostal]] church.<ref>E.M. Pattison and M.L. Pattison, "'Ex-Gays': Religiously Mediated Change in Homosexuals," American Journal of Psychiatry, Vol. 137, pp. 1553-1562, 1980</ref>

==Partners==
Various benefactors are lined up including: [[GLSEN]], [[George Soros]], [[ACLU]], and [[The Trevor Project]]. [[Barack Obama]] became involved and like Savage, recorded a video in support of It Gets Better. To Obama, its a civil rights issue. Inspired by Obama, the White House Staff created a video in support of ''It Gets Better'' project. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iL2Ed_iKiG4 White House Staff, YouTube]

==External Links==
*[http://www.itgetsbetter.org/pages/about-it-gets-better-project/ official website:about it gets better project]
*[http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/civil-rights/it-gets-better White House website, Obama "It Gets Better"]

{{homosexualityb}}
[[Category:Activists]]
[[Category:Homosexuality]]
[[Category:Obama Presidency]]
[[Category:Barack Hussein Obama]]
[[Category:Charity]]
==References==
{{reflist|2}}

Causes of the Great Flood

2012-02-13T19:42:15Z

SusanP: /* Comet theory */

[[Image:Michelangeloflood.jpg|thumb|right|250px|Michelangelo's depiction of the Great Flood]]

One of the largest challenges for [[Young Earth Creationists]] is providing a valid scientific explanation for the '''causes of the Great Flood'''. This flood was the means of God's judgment on mankind because of the evil in their hearts and actions. Though there is some [[Flood geology|geological evidence]] for a massive worldwide flood, one question remains: where did all that water come from?

==Comet theory==
One theory, proposed by Bruce Masse, posits that a massive comet splashed down in the [[Indian Ocean]] thousands of years ago, causing a worldwide flood that nearly wiped out all life on earth. Masse's claim relies heavily on not only the flood myths of different cultures, but also on the fact that 70% of the earth is covered by water, making observation of a crater at the bottom of the Indian Ocean very difficult.

However, along with Ted Bryant of the University of Wollongong, Masse began looking for geological signs of a "megatsunami". Scanning through satellite images of the earth, Masse and his team discovered massive chevrons — wedge-shaped sandy structures that are sometimes packed with deep-oceanic microfossils dredged up by the tsunami — 4 miles into the coast of [[Madagascar]]. Masse and his team contend that this evidence is proof of both the comet impact and the global flood.<ref>[http://discovermagazine.com/2007/nov/did-a-comet-cause-the-great-flood/article_view?b_start:int=1&-C= "Did a Comet Cause the Great Floor?", ''Discover Magazine'']</ref>
Unfortunately, such a impact event, would have sent thousands of cubic meters of dust into the air, rendering photosynthesis impossible. This also makes the flood redundant.

==Vapor Canopy theory==
The vapor canopy theory was originally posited by Isaac Vail in 1874.<ref>[http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/canopy.html#top Evidence for God]</ref> It is one of the most common amongst young earth creationists. The theory states that the earth originally had a canopy of water vapor<ref>Though some creationists claim it was a layer of ice</ref> above the troposphere. The canopy could account for the unusually long lifespans depicted in the [[Bible]]. Though the canopy is not directly mentioned in the Bible, the idea is said to arise from Genesis 1:6-8<ref>''Then God said, “Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.” 7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so. 8 And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.'' -- New King James Version</ref>

The vapor canopy theory has been largely abandoned by many creationists, as it is very difficult to fathom scientifically.<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/e-mail/archive/AnswersWeekly/2009/0926.html AnswersinGenesis.org]</ref>

==Fountains of the Great Deep==
The fountains of the great deep are referenced in Genesis 7:11<ref>''In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.''</ref> These are believed to be massive subterranean deposits of water, which some suggest were trapped underneath the land after God made the dry land appear from under the waters.<ref>“Deep waters,” ''New Scientist'', 1997, 155(2097):22-26</ref>

The "breaking up" of the waters could refer to volcanic activity, as water vapor is the most abundant dissolved gas in magma.<ref>[http://www.cerritos.edu/esci/tutor/On-Line_lecture_notes/Volcanoes/Unit_11_Lecture_Magma.htm Magma Chemistry and Physical Properties]</ref> One such proponent of this theory is John Baumgardner, a geophysicists who studied at [[UCLA]]. He created a computer program known as ''Terra''. In his program, the magma churns and boils like water in a pot. As the cooler heavier material sinks, the hotter, lighter material rises.<ref name="flood">[http://library.thinkquest.org/29178/noahand.htm "Noah and the Flood", ''Creation vs. Evolution II'']</ref>Baumgardner believes that God stretched out the tectonic plates, causing the magma to rise into the ocean. The water displaced by this volcanic event could have sent massive tidal waves around the world, causing most or all of the land to be covered by water. After the event, the runoff of water would have been traveling at nearly 100 miles per hour, which Baumgardner states could have formed the Grand Canyon in about a week.<ref name="flood"></ref>

==References==
{{reflist}}

[[Category:Creationism]]
[[Category:Christianity]]

Great Flood

2012-02-13T19:40:57Z

SusanP: /* Black Sea theory */

{{cquote|'''Genesis 6:13''' ...The end of all flesh has come before Me; for the earth is filled with violence because of them; and behold, I am about to destroy them with the earth.}}
[[Image:Schönfeld The Flood.jpg|thumb|320px|The Flood by Johann Heinrich Schönfeld.]]
The '''Great Flood''' refers to the most catastrophic [[flood]] and the most catastrophic geological event that has ever taken place in human history.

Virtually nothing historical, from writings to civilization to long-living organisms like trees, has survived from before about 3000 or 3300 B.C., approximates date given to the Great Flood.<ref>''See, e.g.'', http://www.ohtm.org/strut99.pdf</ref> Today 60% of Americans accept as truth the Biblical account of the Great Flood,<ref>http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040216-113955-2061r.htm</ref> and most cultures record a world-destroying flood in their oral or written histories.

The ''Iceman'', an experienced hiker, was frozen by a surprise, massive ice storm in the Italian Alps 5,300 years ago -- when the Great Flood likely occurred.<ref>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/ancient/iceman-last-meal.html</ref>

== Summary ==

This flood was the means of [[God]]'s judgment on mankind because of the evil in their heart and actions. God warned [[Noah]] that He was going to destroy the world with a flood, because of the wickedness of mankind. Noah was to build an [[Noah's Ark|ark]] and take his family and pairs of each [[baraminology|kind]] of air-breathing animal in it in order to be saved from the flood.

After Noah and his family and all the creatures were on board, God shut the door of the ark. The flood was brought on by the bursting open of the ''fountains of the great deep'' and the opening of ''the floodgates of the sky''. The rain lasted nearly six weeks (40 days and nights). The flood waters apparently continued to rise for 150 days, but it was just over a year before the waters had receded enough for the occupants of the ark to leave.

The ark came to rest on one of the mountains of [[Ararat]]. God used a [[rainbow]] in the clouds as a sign that he would never again destroy the world in a flood.<ref>Genesis does not say that this was the first ever rainbow.</ref>

== Flood accounts ==
[[Image:The Great Deluge - Gustave Dore.jpg|thumb|330px|''The Great Deluge'', by Gustave Doré.]]
One of the strong pieces of evidence in support of a worldwide flood are the many stories that exist amongst people groups all over the world. These stories describe a world-destroying flood, and it is highly improbable to have this type of similarity between them. Dr. [[John Morris]] wrote regarding the historicity of the biblical flood:
{{cquote|One of the strongest evidences for the global flood which annihilated all people on [[Earth]] except for [[Noah]] and his family, has been the ubiquitous presence of flood legends in the folklore of people groups from around the world. And the stories are all so similar.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/570/</ref>}}

=== Gilgamesh Epic ===
The best known of the flood accounts is, firstly, the biblical account in [[Genesis]], and secondly, the one found in the [[Gilgamesh Epic]]. Here is a summary of the Gilgamesh Epic:
:''The council of the gods decided to destroy mankind with a flood, but Utnapishtim was warned by the god who had made man, Ea, to build a boat to take all living beings. The length, width, and height were each 120 cubits (about 180 feet). It had seven stories.
:''The gods got frightened by the flood and retreated to heaven where they cowered and wept.
:''The flood lasted six days and seven nights, and was accompanied by wind and storm.
:''Utnapishtim send out a dove followed by a swallow, but both returned, unable to find land. He then sent a raven, which didn't return.

Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] comments on the Gilgamesh Epic:
{{cquote|It is common to make legends out of historical events, but not history from legends. ... For instance, in Genesis, God’s judgment is just, he is patient with mankind for 120 years (Genesis 6:3), shows mercy to Noah, and is sovereign. Conversely, the gods in the Gilgamesh Epic are capricious and squabbling, cower at the Flood and are famished without humans to feed them sacrifices. That is, the human writers of the Gilgamesh Epic rewrote the true account, and made their gods in their own image.<ref Name="JS_GE" />}}

=== Common Themes in Flood Accounts ===
There are parallel themes going through most of the accounts of the [[Great Flood (cultural traditions)|Great Flood]]. Here are some of them.

==== Cause ====
Many of the accounts say that the flood was caused by God or some equivalent being.
In Genesis, it was Yahweh<ref>Genesis 6:3</ref>.
In the Gilgamesh Epic, it was the council of the gods<ref Name="JS_GE">[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3107 Noah’s Flood and the Gilgamesh Epic] by Jonathan Sarfati, ''Creation'', vol. 28 No. 4 pp.12-17</ref>.
In the Bundaba (Australian aboriginal) flood story, it was Ngowungu, the Great Father.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1468 Australian Aboriginal Flood Stories], ''Creation'' Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 6-9.</ref>
The Greeks recorded it as being [[Zeus]].<ref name="Greek">[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Greek Greek], in ''Flood Stories from Around the World'' by Mark Isaak.</ref>

==== Purpose ====
When the cause of the flood is attributed to a god, the reason is frequently said to be for [[mankind]]'s wickedness.
Genesis adds that "every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all the time".<ref>Genesis 6:5 (NIV)</ref>
The Miao account from China says, in verse, "These did not God's will nor returned His affection. / But fought with each other defying the Godhead. / Their leaders shook fists in the face of the Mighty."<ref>[http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=341 Genesis According to the Miao People], by Edgar A. Truax, ''Impact'', April 1991</ref>
A Navajo account says that it was because of "their sins of adultery and constant quarreling".<ref>[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Navajo Navajo (Four Corners area)], in ''Flood Stories from Around the World'' by Mark Isaak</ref>

==== What saved the people ====

People were generally saved either by floating out the flood, or fleeing to the top of a mountain. In the former case, the vessel took a variety of forms.
A Hopi Indian story has them surviving in the hollow stems of giant reeds<ref name="Hopi">[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Hopi Hopi], in ''Flood Stories from Around the World'' by Mark Isaak.</ref>
The Greek story has them surviving in a chest.<Ref name="Greek" />
In Genesis, [[Noah]] was instructed by God to build an ark to dimensions and other specifications included in the account.

==== Who was saved? ====
The survivors were often a single family.
An Australian aboriginal account has Ngadgja, the Supreme One, telling Gajara to take his wife, his sons, and his sons' wives.<ref name="Wunambal">[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1467 Aboriginal Flood Legend], by Howard Coates, ''Creation'' Vol. 4 No.3, pp.9-12</ref>
The Masai account from East Africa has Tumbainot taking his two wives, his six sons, and their wives.<ref name="Masai">[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Masai Masai (East Africa)], in ''Flood Stories from Around the World'' by Mark Isaak.</ref>
A Hawaiian story has Nuu taking his wife and three sons.<ref name="Hawaii">[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/flood-myths.html#Hawaii Hawaii], in ''Flood Stories from Around the World'' by Mark Isaak.</ref>
Noah took his wife, his three sons, and their wives.<ref>Genesis 7:13</ref>

==== Birds sent out ====
[[Image:Michelangeloflood.jpg|thumb|300px|right|''The Flood'', by Michaelangelo, detail from the Sistine Chapel, 1509.]]
Genesis describes Noah sending out birds to see if there was yet dry land.<ref>Genesis 8:6-12</ref>
Initially this was unsuccessful, but a subsequent attempt was successful when a dove didn't return. In the Hopi account also, they unsuccessfully sent out birds to find land.<ref name="Hopi" />
An Australian aboriginal account has a cuckoo not returning because it found land.<ref name="Wunambal" />
The Masai account has Tumbainot sending out a dove, which returned because it had no place to rest.<ref name="Masai" />

==== A rainbow ====
The Masai account has four rainbows signifying that God's [[wrath]] was over.<ref name="Masai" />
A Hawaiian account has the god Kane leaving a rainbow as a perpetual sign of his forgiveness.<ref name="Hawaii" />
From an Australian aboriginal story comes this account:
:Ngadja, the Supreme Being, put the rainbow in the sky to keep the rain-clouds back. The rainbow lies bent across the sky; he ties up the clouds behind it and the rain does not come. The rainbow keeps the clouds back and protects us so that the rainfall does not rise too high. Our people understand the significance of it. When we see the rainbow we say, ‘There will not be any abnormally heavy rain.’<ref name="Wunambal" />

Genesis says that the rainbow would be a reminder that God would never again destroy the world with a flood.<ref>Genesis 9:12-17</ref>

==== Criticisms ====

:''See more criticisms in the article on [[Noah's Ark#Criticisms|Noah's Ark]] and [[Flood Geology#Controversy|Flood Geology]].''
Critics of the global flood suggest that the flood accounts are unrelated accounts of local floods, or stories influenced by the arrival of missionaries.

However, Nozomi Osanai responds that "''...the detailed nature of the widely spread statements has common elements to the Bible. In fact, even people who live far from the sea or in mountainous areas have flood traditions which are similar to the Genesis account.''"<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/4089/ A comparative study of the flood accounts in the Gilgamesh Epic and Genesis, chapter 7], by Nozomi Osanai.</ref>

And Murray Adamthwaite responds regarding the missionary influence, "''...that explanation fails since in many cases secular anthropologists gathered the stories before missionaries reached these tribes with the Gospel. In other cases missionaries have related how they indeed told the story of Noah, only to find that the tribal folk already had a similar tale in their own legends.''"<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/2538 Animals, a Deluge and Noah’s Ark]</ref>
{{Clear}}

== Other ancient references ==
The Great Flood has left a variety of traditions in many cultures world-wide. In most of them, the stories involve a few survivors and a number of animals in a boat or on a raft; the search for dry land involving a bird; a landing on a mountain, and a sacrifice to the gods after the flood was over.

{| border="1" align="center" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="900" style="margin-left:5px"
|align="center" colspan="6"|
|-
!colspan="6" align="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: tan no-repeat scroll top left;"|European traditions
|-
! width="100" | Culture or people
! width="500" | Details
! width="150" | Name of Noah
! width="150" | Name of mountain
! width="80" | Number of survivors
! width="80" | Animals involved
|-
| Greece
| Deucalion and Pyrrha were warned by Prometheus about the flood and told to build a chest; they survived when the chest landed on a high mountain.<ref>[http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0022%3Atext%3DLibrary%3Abook%3D1%3Achapter%3D7%3Asection%3D2 Apollodorus, ''The Library'', book 1]</ref>
| Deucalion
| Mt. Parnassus
| -
| Yes
|-
!colspan="6" align="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: tan no-repeat scroll top left;"|Asian traditions
|-
! width="100" | Culture or people
! width="500" | Details
! width="150" | Name of Noah
! width="150" | Name of mountain
! width="80" | Number of survivors
! width="80" | Animals involved
|-
| Babylonia
| [[Epic of Gilgamesh]]; The god Ea warned Utnapishtim of the imminent destruction of the earth; the ark built was cube-shaped, and held his family, friends, and all animals
| Utnapishtim
| Mt. Nisir
| 8
| Yes; a raven and dove were used to search for dry land as well
|-
| Assyria
| King [[Ashurbanipal]], who lived in the seventh century B.C., recorded, "I have read intricate tablets inscribed with obscure [[Sumerian]] or [[Akkadian]]...inscriptions on stone from before the Flood."
| Utnapishtim; possibly used the same Gilgamesh tales of Babylonia
| Mt. Nisir
| 8
| Yes
|-
| Chaldean
| Xisuthrus was warned of a coming flood by the god Chronos, who ordered him to build a boat in which to carry family, friends, and two of every kind of animal.<ref>[http://rbedrosian.com/euseb2.htm Eusebius, ''Chronicle'', book 1]</ref>
| Xisuthrus
| -
| 8
| Yes; birds were used to find land.
|-
| China
| [[Hihking]]; The Chinese classic record details one family survived a great flood by gathering their sons and sons' wives together in a large boat, whereupon they repopulated the earth afterwards.
| Fuhi
| -
| 8
| Yes
|-
| Sumeria
| [[Eridu Genesis]]: the god [[Enki]] warns Ziudsura to build a large boat due to the coming destruction of the earth. After a flood lasting seven days, Ziudsura sacrifices to the gods.
| Ziudsura
| translation lost
| -
| translation lost
|-
| -
| -
| -
| -
| -
| -
|-
!colspan="6" align="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: tan no-repeat scroll top left;"|Australian traditions
|-
! width="100" | Culture or people
! width="500" | Details
! width="150" | Name of Noah
! width="150" | Name of mountain
! width="80" | Number of survivors
! width="80" | Animals involved
|-
| -
| -
| -
| -
| -
| -
|-
!colspan="6" align="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: tan no-repeat scroll top left;"|Oceanic Islanders traditions
|-
! width="100" | Culture or people
! width="500" | Details
! width="150" | Name of Noah
! width="150" | Name of mountain
! width="80" | Number of survivors
! width="80" | Animals involved
|-
| Hawaiian
| A man built a boat to escape a great flood. He landed his vessel on top of Mauna Kea on the Big Island. The man accidently attributed the cause of his safety to the moon god, and made sacrifices to the wrong god. Kane, the actual creator god descended to the man from a rainbow telling him of his error. <ref>http://www.enotes.com/wm-encyclopedia/nuu</ref><ref>"Nu'u" A Dictionary of World Mythology. Arthur Cotterell. Oxford University Press, 1997. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. 30 September 2010 http://www.oxfordreference.com/views/ENTRY.html?subview=Main&entry=t73.e525</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n2/flood-legends</ref><ref>http://www.answers.com/topic/nu-u</ref><ref>http://books.google.com/books?id=FyIEpx1aLXEC&pg=PA290&lpg=PA290&dq=nu'u+flood&source=bl&ots=BDjZOWOLI2&sig=y1I_kYruIhHJ6_UgsqiE5N1oTh8&hl=en&ei=zM0oTpbiC8L50gH6wdCACw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CGEQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=nu'u%20flood&f=false</ref>
| Nu'u
| Mauna Kea
| Unknown
| Unknown
|-
!colspan="6" align="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: tan no-repeat scroll top left;"|African traditions
|-
! width="100" | Culture or people
! width="500" | Details
! width="150" | Name of Noah
! width="150" | Name of mountain
! width="80" | Number of survivors
! width="80" | Animals involved
|-
| -
| -
| -
| -
| -
| -
|-
!colspan="6" align="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: tan no-repeat scroll top left;"|North American traditions
|-
! width="100" | Culture or people
! width="500" | Details
! width="150" | Name of Noah
! width="150" | Name of mountain
! width="80" | Number of survivors
! width="80" | Animals involved
|-
| Chippewa
| A war between Nanabozho and the Great Serpent who lived at the bottom of Lake Superior; the serpent, being wounded in the fight, vowed to destroy the tribe by a flood. The tribe quickly built rafts, gathered their animals, and escaped to the highest mountains, which were quickly covered over except the one on which stood Nanabozho<ref>[http://www.indians.org/welker/greatflo.htm].</ref>
| Nanabozho
| unknown
| unknown
| Yes
|-
| Choctaw
| The Great Spirit destroyed a corrupt and wicked human race and all life on earth, except a prophet who went in vain to warn the people to repent or die. The prophet survived by building a raft of sassafras logs.<ref>[http://www.tc.umn.edu/~mboucher/mikebouchweb/choctaw/flood1.htm].</ref>
| known only as the prophet.
| unknown
| unknown
| Yes; the bird which led him to land he named "Puchi Yushuba" (lost pigeon)
|-
!colspan="6" align="center" style="color: black; height: 30px; background: tan no-repeat scroll top left;"|South American traditions
|-
! width="100" | Culture or people
! width="500" | Details
! width="150" | Name of Noah
! width="150" | Name of mountain
! width="80" | Number of survivors
! width="80" | Animals involved
|-
| Tamanakis (Carib tribe, Orinoco River basin)
| A man and woman escaped to the highest peak after being warned of a flood. Afterward, the tossed coconuts behind them, which became the next race of man.
| -
| Mt Tapanacu
| -
| -
|-
|}

== Effects of ''the Flood'' ==
=== Natural Effects ===
==== Flood Geology ====
:''Main article: [[Flood Geology]]''
Flood geology is the study of the Earth's geology in the search of evidence for the Flood in the [[geology]] of the Earth.

=== Separation of Continents===
Some [[Young Earth Creationists]] point to the flood as the reason for the separation of [[Pangea]], rather than the secular view that the separation was caused by [[plate tectonics]] over millions or even billions of years.

=== Ice Age ===

Some scientists think that the Great Flood caused the Ice Age. Meteorologist Michael J. Oard
states in ''Frozen in Time'' that:

<blockquote>
''The Flood and its aftershocks provide the volcanic dust and gases that bring the summer cooling indispensable for the Ice Age. Water from the “fountains of the great deep” and mixing during the Flood provides a warm ocean. In the mid and high latitudes the warm ocean would cause copious evaporation and produce massive amounts of snow. The two ingredients required for an Ice Age, cool temperatures and tons of snow, were dramatically fulfilled immediately after the Genesis flood. This unique climate would persist for hundreds of years after the Flood as the intensity of the two mechanisms slowly decreased.'' <ref> [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/fit/chapter7.asp The Genesis flood caused the Ice Age] </ref> <ref> Oard, M.J., 1990. An ice age caused by the Genesis Flood, Institute for Creation Research, El Cajón, California. </ref>
</blockquote>

=== Spiritual Effects ===

Interpreting the way Noah obeyed God (Genesis 6:22):

<blockquote>
Noah was faithful for 120 long hard disappointing years. You can be sure, however, he was a happy man the day the rains came and he was safe and dry inside the ark that was the product of his faith and obedience to God...

Noah submitted himself and worshiped God... His strength to live for God was that he chose to walk daily with the Lord. The same power is available to us to believe in God and let God direct our lives.
<ref> [http://www.bible-truth.org/GEN6.HTM THE GREAT WORLD WIDE FLOOD] </ref>
</blockquote>

Consequently at present we should ask ourselves: What kind of faith do we have?, Does my faith guide me always in my daily decision? ([[Ibidem]])

== Modern explanations ==

[[Image:The building of the ark.jpg|thumb|left|The building of the ark by Bertram of Minden.]]
=== Black Sea theory ===
In 2000, explorers discovered evidence that humans lived where the [[Black Sea]] now is and speculated the sea was created during a great flood<ref>http://archives.cnn.com/2000/NATURE/09/13/great.flood.finds.ap/</ref>. Dr. Robert Ballard expanded on this theory, postulating that the Black Sea was much lower during the [[Ice Age]] (including the finding of a beach thousands of feet underwater), and when the walls holding back the [[Mediterranean Sea]] at the Bosporus broke, the sea rushed in and drowned the inhabitants; those who survived told the tale orally, and according to Ballard this became the basis for the flood accounts of Genesis and Gilgamesh<ref>http://www.nationalgeographic.com/blacksea/ax/frame.html</ref>. This theory is for a local flood, and not the world-wide flood as recorded in Genesis and many other cultural traditions. It also doesn't fit with many other details of the Genesis account.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3392 Proof of Noah's Flood at the Black Sea?] by Creation Ministries International.</ref> It is this theory that is believed to explain the various flood myths.

=== Crustal Displacement Theory ===
In ''When the sky fell: In search of Atlantis'' (1996), Rand Flem Ath<ref>http://www.flem-ath.com</ref> expanded on Professor [[Charles Hapgood]]'s theory of crustal displacement whereby the entire earth's crust moved with respect to the core. The suggested date for this was about 10,000 years BC. If a displacement had occurred then it would have caused enormous disruption to the the earth's oceans with massive tsunamis and heavy rain. Although the book was nominally about the disappearance of [[Atlantis]], the theory of crustal displacement not only explains the discrepancies in ice thickness in [[Greenland]] and [[Antarctica]] but also the sudden demise of the [[mammoth]]s. This theory could also potentially explain the widespread existence of flood accounts throughout different cultures.

==See Also==
*[[Causes of the Great Flood]]
*[[Flood geology]]

==External links==

*[http://creation.com/noahs-flood-questions-and-answers Noah's flood - Questions and answers] by [[Creation Ministries International]]
*[http://www.maicar.com/GML/Flood.html Greek Myths: Deucalion and the Flood]
*[http://www.ancienttexts.org/library/mesopotamian/gilgamesh/tab11.htm Epic of Gilgamesh, Tablet 11 (Flood Story)]
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologycolumn.html Geological evidence from Northwest Creation]
*[http://www.genesisfiles.com/Library.htm#B Genesis Files website]
*[http://www.searchgodsword.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?number=T2631 DELUGE OF NOAH]
*[http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/global10.asp Was the Flood Global? Answers in Genesis article]
*[http://www.nationalgeographic.com/blacksea/ax/frame.html Black Sea theory, from Dr. Robert Ballard and National Geographic]
*[http://www.ilhawaii.net/~stony/lore64.html Native American flood story]
*[http://wovoca.com/myths-flood-1.htm Collection of Flood myths]
*[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3107 A table comparing specific details in a number of different flood accounts]
*[http://www.swartzentrover.com/cotor/Bible/Bible/OT/Law/Genesis/timeline_of_the_flood.htm Timeline of the flood]
*[http://www.swartzentrover.com/cotor/Bible/Bible/OT/Law/Genesis/NoahsArk/Quotes%20of%20Seeing%20Noah%27s%20Ark.htm Quotes of Seeing Noah's Ark on Mt. Ararat]

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Geology]]
[[Category:Natural Disasters]]
[[Category:History]]
[[Category:Ancient History]]
[[Category:Book of Genesis]]
[[Category:Featured articles]]

Flood Geology

2012-02-13T19:38:02Z

SusanP: /* Genesis Flood account */

'''Flood geology''' is the study of the Earth's geology from the point of view that the Earth's geology was radically redefined by a [[Great Flood|global flood]] in the relatively recent past, as recorded in [[Genesis]], as well as the scores of flood stories in other cultures throughout the world.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/570/</ref>

== Genesis Flood account ==
Genesis provides the most detailed account of the global deluge, including specific dates, measurements, and even some key geological events during the flood. Consequently, flood geologists use it as a starting point for understanding the events of the deluge. Based on the Genesis account, flood geologists argue that the flood resulted from subterranean water erupting to the surface ("the springs of the great deep burst forth" <ref>Genesis 7:11, NIV</ref>), combined with 40 days and nights of rain. That is impossible, as the only way water can escape from the deep earth, is as steam, which would proceed to sterilize the entire planet. Furthermore, the atmosphere can only hold up to 160,000 liters of water per day, far lower than required to "cover the highest mountains". Although the rain stopped after 40 days, the flood waters continued to rise for 150 days, and lasted just over a year before Noah and the others on the boat were able to leave. During the flood, there was massive tectonic activity, including some land rising up and other land dropping, such that the waters ended up in newly-deepened oceans. All the animals and birds (except those on the ark), and large numbers of sea creatures perished, and many of them were buried so quickly that they became fossils, accounting for the vast majority of fossils existing today.

== Evidence ==
Flood geologists base their belief in a relatively recent global deluge on several strands of evidence. While none of these strands alone is sufficient to ''prove'' that a global flood occurred, flood geologists argue that a global deluge is the most reasonable and [[parsimonious]] explanation for the evidence.

=== Sedimentary rock ===
Some sedimentary rocks are formed by sand and other sediments which precipitate from solution, and undergo [[lithification]]. Although only about 5% of the earth's rocks are sedimentary, 75%-80% of the Earth's land area is covered in sedimentary rock.[http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/distance/gg101/Programs/program21%20SedimentaryRocks/program21.html] Therefore, flood geologists point out, there is irrefutable evidence that at least 75% of the Earth's land was once covered in water.

Cross-bedded dune sandstone was formed only on dry land, and only occurs in 7 distinct strata, separated by water-deposited layers.

=== Sufficient water ===
There is enough water on Earth today to cover the entire surface to a depth of 2.7 kilometres (1.7 miles), if the surface was levelled out.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter12.pdf Noah’s Flood—what about all that water?], Chapter 4 of the ''Creation Answers Book'', Dr. Don Batten (Ed.)</ref> Continents emerge because the average ocean depth is 3.7 km.<ref>http://www.mos.org/oceans/planet/features.html</ref>. Flood geologists argue that geological activity during and after the flood lowered the ocean basins, causing water to flow from the continents into the basins, and leaving dry land.<ref>{{Bible ref|Psalms|104|6-9|version=NASB}} "You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. '''The mountains rose; the valleys sank down''' To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth."</ref>However, such an event would have generated earthquakes of unimaginable magnitudes, causing further salination of what remains of the land.<ref>http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/natural-disasters/tsunami-profile/</ref>

=== Fossils ===
Fossilization requires rapid burial in a sedimentary solution, and subsequent rapid lithification of the solution. Slow burial does not result in fossilization, because the remains decay prior to being fossilized. Therefore, every fossil was buried in rapidly deposited sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone.

=== Fossil fuels ===
Fossil fuel formation requires the burial of enormous amounts of organic matter under a sedimentary solution, and the application of heat and pressure. Slow burial processes do not produce fossil fuels, because the organic matter decays prior to conversion into a fossil fuel. Therefore, all fossil fuels on earth were quickly buried under sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone;

Similar processes have been observed in [[Spirit Lake]] following the eruption of [[Mount St. Helens]] in 1980.

=== Rock strata ===
Most sedimentary rocks are layered, forming sharply defined lines at varying depths. Were these formed over long periods, erosion would have softened these lines. The sharpness of the lines implies rapid deposition and lithification.

=== Pure sedimentary layers ===
If sedimentary layers were laid down over millenia, they would have experienced mixing. However, many rock strata are pure -- for example, the [[St. Peter Sandstone]], covering 500,000 sq miles of the United States, is 99.94% pure silica. While uniformitarian scientists state that it was deposited by the shore of a sea, they cannot explain how it remained so pure if it was laid out over a long period of time. However, the sorting processes of [[liquefaction]], consistent with a global flood, can make such an explanation. Despite that, it ignores the fact that each layer has the time to be compressed by the sediment into stone, and thus not mix. In the event of a catastrophic global flood, the sediment would have mixed, because there was no time to turn to stone.

=== Submarine canyons ===
Canyons can be found under the sea at the end of many major world rivers, including the Congo, Amazon, Ganges, and Hudson. They extend for thousands of miles underwater, thousands of feet under the sea; they are as deep as the Grand Canyon in places, and although not well understood by the mainstream scientific community, they are generally understood to have developed when sea-levels were significantly lower than today. Flood geologists argue that as the continents divided and the flood subsided, these major rivers drained the new continents, and the water flowed into the new low-lying areas, which would fill to become seas, leaving the sediments to dry out of their [[liquefaction|liquefied]] state. Secular scientists respond by citing sediment flows, which have the ability to act as a stream of sand, that has the ability to over millions of years, erode the underwater continental shelf.

=== Land canyons ===
As explanation for great land canyons such as the [[Grand Canyon]], flood geologists point to canyon formation events such as the catastrophic hot mud slides observed during the eruption of Mt. St. Helens. One particular hot mud slide at Mt. St. Helens carved a canyon 140 ft. deep and 17 miles long in a single day. Only a thin creek remains at the bottom of the canyon today, which would likely be interpreted as having carved the canyon "over millions of years," if it were not known first-hand that the canyon was carved in a single day.

=== Ancient accounts of a navigable Atlantic ===
Plato's ''Timaeus'' states:
: "In those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles [Straight of Gibraltar] ... and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent."<ref>http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html</ref>

=== Plate tectonics ===

A clear problem with a global flood is that of repopulation: after the flood, very few non-marine species would survive. In particular, most of those observed today could not possibly have survived - this includes all insects, the vast majority of birds (Some species of albatross may have survived), the vast majority of mammals, and possibly freshwater fish depending on the salinity of the floodwaters.

Flood geology models include a means for these species to survive, most typically via artificial assistance - an Ark, as described in [[Genesis]].

An often-proposed explanation is that of continental drift - that the continents may once have been united in a single supercontinent, which broke into fragments and drifted into the formations seen today during the time between the start of repopulation and today. Continental drift in principle is nearly universally accepted by all geologists, with flood geology differing only in time: While conventional geology estimates the breakup of the supercontinent to have occurred over approximately sixty million years, flood geologists mostly claim that the process occurred during the flood year, whilst a few claim that it occurred at the time of [[Peleg]].

Flood geologists propose several models which would explain how continental drift could proceed at the rapid pace required to allow the rearrangement of continents during or shortly after the flood, then slow to the currently observed rate. One of the best known of these is the runaway subduction model of Dr. [[John Baumgardner]].<ref>http://www.globalflood.org/platetec/about.html</ref>

=== Total destruction ===

Flood geologists argue that the scale of destruction of the Flood, especially if rapid plate tectonics was involved, would mean almost certain total destruction of the pre-Flood world, including any evidence of civilisations predating the Flood, along with the destruction of the [[Garden of Eden]].
After the Flood, and particularly after the [[Tower of Babel]], new civilisations developed, that either survive to this day or that we find archaeological evidence of today.

== Dating ==

Flood geologists date the flood to around 2350 B.C., based on [[biblical chronology]].
They argue that archaeological dates which purport to show civilisations and artifacts being older than the Flood (see Criticisms) are incorrect because they are based on the presumption that none of these methods would be altered by the effects of a global flood in such a way as to render conclusions drawn from them invalid.<ref>One example is Carbon Dating which is calibrated according to known background levels of C14 in the atmosphere, but this calibration does not account for likely altered levels due to extensive volcanism during the Flood. See [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5026/ Carbon dating into the future] (Creation Ministries International).</ref> [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetists]] state that the biblical flood would have occurred before the Egyptian pyramids were built and that the commonly cited Egyptian chronology is errant and built upon poor foundations. <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2503</ref> Also, Christian apologists argue that ancient Sumerian history supports the flood account given in the Bible. <ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a009.html</ref> In addition, ancient Sumerian literature speaks of a world wide flood. <ref>http://home.comcast.net/~chris.s/sumer-faq.html#A1.6</ref>

[[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists also state that the chronology used to dispute a worldwide flood based on tree rings is invalid.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=381</ref> <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp</ref><ref>http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_treerings.php</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/21066.htm</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/26/26_1a.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/sum29_4.html</ref>

==Creationist Scientists Defense of Flood Geology ==
Creationist scientists assert that there are multiple lines of evidence from the field of geology showing that flood geology is correct. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationism.org/topbar/geology.htm</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref><ref>http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html</ref><ref>http://globalflood.org/</ref> Creationist scientists also state that there was enough water to cause a worldwide flood and various other objections to a worldwide flood are invalid. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/flood.asp</ref> Despite that, Creation Scientists cannot prove Flood Geology, without using God of the blank arguments.

== Common Criticisms ==

Critics claim that there is not enough water on the Earth to actually cause a worldwide flood, or ever has been; in addition, many archaeological records (notably tree-ring records and the records of various early civilizations, including Egypt and Sumeria) stretch through the period of time most often given as that of the Great Flood, without any actual reference to such an event.<ref>For a summary of other criticisms, see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html</ref>

== History ==

Until the rise of uniformitarian [[geology]] in the early 19th century, most geologists accepted the Noahic deluge as part of geology. But [[James Hutton]] proposed in 1795 that geology ought to be based on the processes that we see happening now, thereby automatically ruling the Flood out of consideration. During the 19th century a number of "[[scriptural geologist]]s" held out against the rising acceptance of Hutton's principles, but they fought a losing battle and interest in flood geology virtually died out by the end of the 19th century.

However, in the second half of the 20th century, interest was revived amongst people keen to show that the biblical account was correct, and a small but growing number of geologists are now studying this field again, although the vast majority of geologists still reject the idea of a global flood on Earth. At the same time, there has been a recent resurgence of [[catastrophism]] in geological interpretation. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref>

Interest in Flood Geology was stimulated by the 1961 publication of ''[[The Genesis Flood]]'', by [[Henry Morris]] and [[John Whitcomb]]. Dr. Henry Morris had a number of arguments for geology supporting a worldwide flood. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/842/</ref>
{{Creation vs. evolution}}
== External Links ==
*[http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54 Geology and the Flood] by [[Henry Morris]], Ph.D.
*[http://www.creationism.org/symposium/symp3no2.htm Stratigraphic Evidence of the Flood] by Stuart E. Nevins.
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/flood_models.asp Flood models: the need for an integrated approach] by A.C. McIntosh, T. Edmondson & S. Taylor.
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html#anchorgeologycreationist Global Flood Geology from Creation Science Perspectives]
*[http://www.biblicalgeology.net/content/view/46 Biblical Geology: Properly Understanding the Rocks]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category: Young Earth Creationism]]
[[Category: Geology]]

Flood Geology

2012-02-13T19:37:46Z

SusanP: /* Genesis Flood account */

'''Flood geology''' is the study of the Earth's geology from the point of view that the Earth's geology was radically redefined by a [[Great Flood|global flood]] in the relatively recent past, as recorded in [[Genesis]], as well as the scores of flood stories in other cultures throughout the world.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/570/</ref>

== Genesis Flood account ==
Genesis provides the most detailed account of the global deluge, including specific dates, measurements, and even some key geological events during the flood. Consequently, flood geologists use it as a starting point for understanding the events of the deluge. Based on the Genesis account, flood geologists argue that the flood resulted from subterranean water erupting to the surface ("the springs of the great deep burst forth" <ref>Genesis 7:11, NIV</ref>), combined with 40 days and nights of rain. That is impossible, as the only way water can escape from the deep earth, is as steam, which would proceed to sterilize the entire planet. Furthermore, the atmosphere can only hold up to 160,000 liters of water per day, far lower than required to "cover the highest mountains". Although the rain stopped after 40 days, the flood waters continued to rise for 150 days, and lasted just over a year before Noah and the others on the boat were able to leave. During the flood, there was massive tectonic activity, including some land rising up and other land dropping, such that the waters ended up in newly-deepened oceans. All the animals and birds (except those on the ark), and large numbers of sea creatures perished, and many of them were buried so quickly that they became fossils, accounting for the vast majority of fossils existing today. Unf

== Evidence ==
Flood geologists base their belief in a relatively recent global deluge on several strands of evidence. While none of these strands alone is sufficient to ''prove'' that a global flood occurred, flood geologists argue that a global deluge is the most reasonable and [[parsimonious]] explanation for the evidence.

=== Sedimentary rock ===
Some sedimentary rocks are formed by sand and other sediments which precipitate from solution, and undergo [[lithification]]. Although only about 5% of the earth's rocks are sedimentary, 75%-80% of the Earth's land area is covered in sedimentary rock.[http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/distance/gg101/Programs/program21%20SedimentaryRocks/program21.html] Therefore, flood geologists point out, there is irrefutable evidence that at least 75% of the Earth's land was once covered in water.

Cross-bedded dune sandstone was formed only on dry land, and only occurs in 7 distinct strata, separated by water-deposited layers.

=== Sufficient water ===
There is enough water on Earth today to cover the entire surface to a depth of 2.7 kilometres (1.7 miles), if the surface was levelled out.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter12.pdf Noah’s Flood—what about all that water?], Chapter 4 of the ''Creation Answers Book'', Dr. Don Batten (Ed.)</ref> Continents emerge because the average ocean depth is 3.7 km.<ref>http://www.mos.org/oceans/planet/features.html</ref>. Flood geologists argue that geological activity during and after the flood lowered the ocean basins, causing water to flow from the continents into the basins, and leaving dry land.<ref>{{Bible ref|Psalms|104|6-9|version=NASB}} "You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. '''The mountains rose; the valleys sank down''' To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth."</ref>However, such an event would have generated earthquakes of unimaginable magnitudes, causing further salination of what remains of the land.<ref>http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/natural-disasters/tsunami-profile/</ref>

=== Fossils ===
Fossilization requires rapid burial in a sedimentary solution, and subsequent rapid lithification of the solution. Slow burial does not result in fossilization, because the remains decay prior to being fossilized. Therefore, every fossil was buried in rapidly deposited sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone.

=== Fossil fuels ===
Fossil fuel formation requires the burial of enormous amounts of organic matter under a sedimentary solution, and the application of heat and pressure. Slow burial processes do not produce fossil fuels, because the organic matter decays prior to conversion into a fossil fuel. Therefore, all fossil fuels on earth were quickly buried under sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone;

Similar processes have been observed in [[Spirit Lake]] following the eruption of [[Mount St. Helens]] in 1980.

=== Rock strata ===
Most sedimentary rocks are layered, forming sharply defined lines at varying depths. Were these formed over long periods, erosion would have softened these lines. The sharpness of the lines implies rapid deposition and lithification.

=== Pure sedimentary layers ===
If sedimentary layers were laid down over millenia, they would have experienced mixing. However, many rock strata are pure -- for example, the [[St. Peter Sandstone]], covering 500,000 sq miles of the United States, is 99.94% pure silica. While uniformitarian scientists state that it was deposited by the shore of a sea, they cannot explain how it remained so pure if it was laid out over a long period of time. However, the sorting processes of [[liquefaction]], consistent with a global flood, can make such an explanation. Despite that, it ignores the fact that each layer has the time to be compressed by the sediment into stone, and thus not mix. In the event of a catastrophic global flood, the sediment would have mixed, because there was no time to turn to stone.

=== Submarine canyons ===
Canyons can be found under the sea at the end of many major world rivers, including the Congo, Amazon, Ganges, and Hudson. They extend for thousands of miles underwater, thousands of feet under the sea; they are as deep as the Grand Canyon in places, and although not well understood by the mainstream scientific community, they are generally understood to have developed when sea-levels were significantly lower than today. Flood geologists argue that as the continents divided and the flood subsided, these major rivers drained the new continents, and the water flowed into the new low-lying areas, which would fill to become seas, leaving the sediments to dry out of their [[liquefaction|liquefied]] state. Secular scientists respond by citing sediment flows, which have the ability to act as a stream of sand, that has the ability to over millions of years, erode the underwater continental shelf.

=== Land canyons ===
As explanation for great land canyons such as the [[Grand Canyon]], flood geologists point to canyon formation events such as the catastrophic hot mud slides observed during the eruption of Mt. St. Helens. One particular hot mud slide at Mt. St. Helens carved a canyon 140 ft. deep and 17 miles long in a single day. Only a thin creek remains at the bottom of the canyon today, which would likely be interpreted as having carved the canyon "over millions of years," if it were not known first-hand that the canyon was carved in a single day.

=== Ancient accounts of a navigable Atlantic ===
Plato's ''Timaeus'' states:
: "In those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles [Straight of Gibraltar] ... and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent."<ref>http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html</ref>

=== Plate tectonics ===

A clear problem with a global flood is that of repopulation: after the flood, very few non-marine species would survive. In particular, most of those observed today could not possibly have survived - this includes all insects, the vast majority of birds (Some species of albatross may have survived), the vast majority of mammals, and possibly freshwater fish depending on the salinity of the floodwaters.

Flood geology models include a means for these species to survive, most typically via artificial assistance - an Ark, as described in [[Genesis]].

An often-proposed explanation is that of continental drift - that the continents may once have been united in a single supercontinent, which broke into fragments and drifted into the formations seen today during the time between the start of repopulation and today. Continental drift in principle is nearly universally accepted by all geologists, with flood geology differing only in time: While conventional geology estimates the breakup of the supercontinent to have occurred over approximately sixty million years, flood geologists mostly claim that the process occurred during the flood year, whilst a few claim that it occurred at the time of [[Peleg]].

Flood geologists propose several models which would explain how continental drift could proceed at the rapid pace required to allow the rearrangement of continents during or shortly after the flood, then slow to the currently observed rate. One of the best known of these is the runaway subduction model of Dr. [[John Baumgardner]].<ref>http://www.globalflood.org/platetec/about.html</ref>

=== Total destruction ===

Flood geologists argue that the scale of destruction of the Flood, especially if rapid plate tectonics was involved, would mean almost certain total destruction of the pre-Flood world, including any evidence of civilisations predating the Flood, along with the destruction of the [[Garden of Eden]].
After the Flood, and particularly after the [[Tower of Babel]], new civilisations developed, that either survive to this day or that we find archaeological evidence of today.

== Dating ==

Flood geologists date the flood to around 2350 B.C., based on [[biblical chronology]].
They argue that archaeological dates which purport to show civilisations and artifacts being older than the Flood (see Criticisms) are incorrect because they are based on the presumption that none of these methods would be altered by the effects of a global flood in such a way as to render conclusions drawn from them invalid.<ref>One example is Carbon Dating which is calibrated according to known background levels of C14 in the atmosphere, but this calibration does not account for likely altered levels due to extensive volcanism during the Flood. See [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5026/ Carbon dating into the future] (Creation Ministries International).</ref> [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetists]] state that the biblical flood would have occurred before the Egyptian pyramids were built and that the commonly cited Egyptian chronology is errant and built upon poor foundations. <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2503</ref> Also, Christian apologists argue that ancient Sumerian history supports the flood account given in the Bible. <ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a009.html</ref> In addition, ancient Sumerian literature speaks of a world wide flood. <ref>http://home.comcast.net/~chris.s/sumer-faq.html#A1.6</ref>

[[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists also state that the chronology used to dispute a worldwide flood based on tree rings is invalid.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=381</ref> <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp</ref><ref>http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_treerings.php</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/21066.htm</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/26/26_1a.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/sum29_4.html</ref>

==Creationist Scientists Defense of Flood Geology ==
Creationist scientists assert that there are multiple lines of evidence from the field of geology showing that flood geology is correct. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationism.org/topbar/geology.htm</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref><ref>http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html</ref><ref>http://globalflood.org/</ref> Creationist scientists also state that there was enough water to cause a worldwide flood and various other objections to a worldwide flood are invalid. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/flood.asp</ref> Despite that, Creation Scientists cannot prove Flood Geology, without using God of the blank arguments.

== Common Criticisms ==

Critics claim that there is not enough water on the Earth to actually cause a worldwide flood, or ever has been; in addition, many archaeological records (notably tree-ring records and the records of various early civilizations, including Egypt and Sumeria) stretch through the period of time most often given as that of the Great Flood, without any actual reference to such an event.<ref>For a summary of other criticisms, see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html</ref>

== History ==

Until the rise of uniformitarian [[geology]] in the early 19th century, most geologists accepted the Noahic deluge as part of geology. But [[James Hutton]] proposed in 1795 that geology ought to be based on the processes that we see happening now, thereby automatically ruling the Flood out of consideration. During the 19th century a number of "[[scriptural geologist]]s" held out against the rising acceptance of Hutton's principles, but they fought a losing battle and interest in flood geology virtually died out by the end of the 19th century.

However, in the second half of the 20th century, interest was revived amongst people keen to show that the biblical account was correct, and a small but growing number of geologists are now studying this field again, although the vast majority of geologists still reject the idea of a global flood on Earth. At the same time, there has been a recent resurgence of [[catastrophism]] in geological interpretation. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref>

Interest in Flood Geology was stimulated by the 1961 publication of ''[[The Genesis Flood]]'', by [[Henry Morris]] and [[John Whitcomb]]. Dr. Henry Morris had a number of arguments for geology supporting a worldwide flood. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/842/</ref>
{{Creation vs. evolution}}
== External Links ==
*[http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54 Geology and the Flood] by [[Henry Morris]], Ph.D.
*[http://www.creationism.org/symposium/symp3no2.htm Stratigraphic Evidence of the Flood] by Stuart E. Nevins.
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/flood_models.asp Flood models: the need for an integrated approach] by A.C. McIntosh, T. Edmondson & S. Taylor.
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html#anchorgeologycreationist Global Flood Geology from Creation Science Perspectives]
*[http://www.biblicalgeology.net/content/view/46 Biblical Geology: Properly Understanding the Rocks]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category: Young Earth Creationism]]
[[Category: Geology]]

Flood Geology

2012-02-13T19:35:38Z

SusanP: /* Creationist Scientists Defense of Flood Geology */

'''Flood geology''' is the study of the Earth's geology from the point of view that the Earth's geology was radically redefined by a [[Great Flood|global flood]] in the relatively recent past, as recorded in [[Genesis]], as well as the scores of flood stories in other cultures throughout the world.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/570/</ref>

== Genesis Flood account ==
Genesis provides the most detailed account of the global deluge, including specific dates, measurements, and even some key geological events during the flood. Consequently, flood geologists use it as a starting point for understanding the events of the deluge. Based on the Genesis account, flood geologists argue that the flood resulted from subterranean water erupting to the surface ("the springs of the great deep burst forth" <ref>Genesis 7:11, NIV</ref>), combined with 40 days and nights of rain. Although the rain stopped after 40 days, the flood waters continued to rise for 150 days, and lasted just over a year before Noah and the others on the boat were able to leave. During the flood, there was massive tectonic activity, including some land rising up and other land dropping, such that the waters ended up in newly-deepened oceans. All the animals and birds (except those on the ark), and large numbers of sea creatures perished, and many of them were buried so quickly that they became fossils, accounting for the vast majority of fossils existing today.

== Evidence ==
Flood geologists base their belief in a relatively recent global deluge on several strands of evidence. While none of these strands alone is sufficient to ''prove'' that a global flood occurred, flood geologists argue that a global deluge is the most reasonable and [[parsimonious]] explanation for the evidence.

=== Sedimentary rock ===
Some sedimentary rocks are formed by sand and other sediments which precipitate from solution, and undergo [[lithification]]. Although only about 5% of the earth's rocks are sedimentary, 75%-80% of the Earth's land area is covered in sedimentary rock.[http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/distance/gg101/Programs/program21%20SedimentaryRocks/program21.html] Therefore, flood geologists point out, there is irrefutable evidence that at least 75% of the Earth's land was once covered in water.

Cross-bedded dune sandstone was formed only on dry land, and only occurs in 7 distinct strata, separated by water-deposited layers.

=== Sufficient water ===
There is enough water on Earth today to cover the entire surface to a depth of 2.7 kilometres (1.7 miles), if the surface was levelled out.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter12.pdf Noah’s Flood—what about all that water?], Chapter 4 of the ''Creation Answers Book'', Dr. Don Batten (Ed.)</ref> Continents emerge because the average ocean depth is 3.7 km.<ref>http://www.mos.org/oceans/planet/features.html</ref>. Flood geologists argue that geological activity during and after the flood lowered the ocean basins, causing water to flow from the continents into the basins, and leaving dry land.<ref>{{Bible ref|Psalms|104|6-9|version=NASB}} "You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. '''The mountains rose; the valleys sank down''' To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth."</ref>However, such an event would have generated earthquakes of unimaginable magnitudes, causing further salination of what remains of the land.<ref>http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/natural-disasters/tsunami-profile/</ref>

=== Fossils ===
Fossilization requires rapid burial in a sedimentary solution, and subsequent rapid lithification of the solution. Slow burial does not result in fossilization, because the remains decay prior to being fossilized. Therefore, every fossil was buried in rapidly deposited sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone.

=== Fossil fuels ===
Fossil fuel formation requires the burial of enormous amounts of organic matter under a sedimentary solution, and the application of heat and pressure. Slow burial processes do not produce fossil fuels, because the organic matter decays prior to conversion into a fossil fuel. Therefore, all fossil fuels on earth were quickly buried under sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone;

Similar processes have been observed in [[Spirit Lake]] following the eruption of [[Mount St. Helens]] in 1980.

=== Rock strata ===
Most sedimentary rocks are layered, forming sharply defined lines at varying depths. Were these formed over long periods, erosion would have softened these lines. The sharpness of the lines implies rapid deposition and lithification.

=== Pure sedimentary layers ===
If sedimentary layers were laid down over millenia, they would have experienced mixing. However, many rock strata are pure -- for example, the [[St. Peter Sandstone]], covering 500,000 sq miles of the United States, is 99.94% pure silica. While uniformitarian scientists state that it was deposited by the shore of a sea, they cannot explain how it remained so pure if it was laid out over a long period of time. However, the sorting processes of [[liquefaction]], consistent with a global flood, can make such an explanation. Despite that, it ignores the fact that each layer has the time to be compressed by the sediment into stone, and thus not mix. In the event of a catastrophic global flood, the sediment would have mixed, because there was no time to turn to stone.

=== Submarine canyons ===
Canyons can be found under the sea at the end of many major world rivers, including the Congo, Amazon, Ganges, and Hudson. They extend for thousands of miles underwater, thousands of feet under the sea; they are as deep as the Grand Canyon in places, and although not well understood by the mainstream scientific community, they are generally understood to have developed when sea-levels were significantly lower than today. Flood geologists argue that as the continents divided and the flood subsided, these major rivers drained the new continents, and the water flowed into the new low-lying areas, which would fill to become seas, leaving the sediments to dry out of their [[liquefaction|liquefied]] state. Secular scientists respond by citing sediment flows, which have the ability to act as a stream of sand, that has the ability to over millions of years, erode the underwater continental shelf.

=== Land canyons ===
As explanation for great land canyons such as the [[Grand Canyon]], flood geologists point to canyon formation events such as the catastrophic hot mud slides observed during the eruption of Mt. St. Helens. One particular hot mud slide at Mt. St. Helens carved a canyon 140 ft. deep and 17 miles long in a single day. Only a thin creek remains at the bottom of the canyon today, which would likely be interpreted as having carved the canyon "over millions of years," if it were not known first-hand that the canyon was carved in a single day.

=== Ancient accounts of a navigable Atlantic ===
Plato's ''Timaeus'' states:
: "In those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles [Straight of Gibraltar] ... and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent."<ref>http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html</ref>

=== Plate tectonics ===

A clear problem with a global flood is that of repopulation: after the flood, very few non-marine species would survive. In particular, most of those observed today could not possibly have survived - this includes all insects, the vast majority of birds (Some species of albatross may have survived), the vast majority of mammals, and possibly freshwater fish depending on the salinity of the floodwaters.

Flood geology models include a means for these species to survive, most typically via artificial assistance - an Ark, as described in [[Genesis]].

An often-proposed explanation is that of continental drift - that the continents may once have been united in a single supercontinent, which broke into fragments and drifted into the formations seen today during the time between the start of repopulation and today. Continental drift in principle is nearly universally accepted by all geologists, with flood geology differing only in time: While conventional geology estimates the breakup of the supercontinent to have occurred over approximately sixty million years, flood geologists mostly claim that the process occurred during the flood year, whilst a few claim that it occurred at the time of [[Peleg]].

Flood geologists propose several models which would explain how continental drift could proceed at the rapid pace required to allow the rearrangement of continents during or shortly after the flood, then slow to the currently observed rate. One of the best known of these is the runaway subduction model of Dr. [[John Baumgardner]].<ref>http://www.globalflood.org/platetec/about.html</ref>

=== Total destruction ===

Flood geologists argue that the scale of destruction of the Flood, especially if rapid plate tectonics was involved, would mean almost certain total destruction of the pre-Flood world, including any evidence of civilisations predating the Flood, along with the destruction of the [[Garden of Eden]].
After the Flood, and particularly after the [[Tower of Babel]], new civilisations developed, that either survive to this day or that we find archaeological evidence of today.

== Dating ==

Flood geologists date the flood to around 2350 B.C., based on [[biblical chronology]].
They argue that archaeological dates which purport to show civilisations and artifacts being older than the Flood (see Criticisms) are incorrect because they are based on the presumption that none of these methods would be altered by the effects of a global flood in such a way as to render conclusions drawn from them invalid.<ref>One example is Carbon Dating which is calibrated according to known background levels of C14 in the atmosphere, but this calibration does not account for likely altered levels due to extensive volcanism during the Flood. See [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5026/ Carbon dating into the future] (Creation Ministries International).</ref> [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetists]] state that the biblical flood would have occurred before the Egyptian pyramids were built and that the commonly cited Egyptian chronology is errant and built upon poor foundations. <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2503</ref> Also, Christian apologists argue that ancient Sumerian history supports the flood account given in the Bible. <ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a009.html</ref> In addition, ancient Sumerian literature speaks of a world wide flood. <ref>http://home.comcast.net/~chris.s/sumer-faq.html#A1.6</ref>

[[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists also state that the chronology used to dispute a worldwide flood based on tree rings is invalid.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=381</ref> <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp</ref><ref>http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_treerings.php</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/21066.htm</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/26/26_1a.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/sum29_4.html</ref>

==Creationist Scientists Defense of Flood Geology ==
Creationist scientists assert that there are multiple lines of evidence from the field of geology showing that flood geology is correct. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationism.org/topbar/geology.htm</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref><ref>http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html</ref><ref>http://globalflood.org/</ref> Creationist scientists also state that there was enough water to cause a worldwide flood and various other objections to a worldwide flood are invalid. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/flood.asp</ref> Despite that, Creation Scientists cannot prove Flood Geology, without using God of the blank arguments.

== Common Criticisms ==

Critics claim that there is not enough water on the Earth to actually cause a worldwide flood, or ever has been; in addition, many archaeological records (notably tree-ring records and the records of various early civilizations, including Egypt and Sumeria) stretch through the period of time most often given as that of the Great Flood, without any actual reference to such an event.<ref>For a summary of other criticisms, see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html</ref>

== History ==

Until the rise of uniformitarian [[geology]] in the early 19th century, most geologists accepted the Noahic deluge as part of geology. But [[James Hutton]] proposed in 1795 that geology ought to be based on the processes that we see happening now, thereby automatically ruling the Flood out of consideration. During the 19th century a number of "[[scriptural geologist]]s" held out against the rising acceptance of Hutton's principles, but they fought a losing battle and interest in flood geology virtually died out by the end of the 19th century.

However, in the second half of the 20th century, interest was revived amongst people keen to show that the biblical account was correct, and a small but growing number of geologists are now studying this field again, although the vast majority of geologists still reject the idea of a global flood on Earth. At the same time, there has been a recent resurgence of [[catastrophism]] in geological interpretation. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref>

Interest in Flood Geology was stimulated by the 1961 publication of ''[[The Genesis Flood]]'', by [[Henry Morris]] and [[John Whitcomb]]. Dr. Henry Morris had a number of arguments for geology supporting a worldwide flood. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/842/</ref>
{{Creation vs. evolution}}
== External Links ==
*[http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54 Geology and the Flood] by [[Henry Morris]], Ph.D.
*[http://www.creationism.org/symposium/symp3no2.htm Stratigraphic Evidence of the Flood] by Stuart E. Nevins.
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/flood_models.asp Flood models: the need for an integrated approach] by A.C. McIntosh, T. Edmondson & S. Taylor.
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html#anchorgeologycreationist Global Flood Geology from Creation Science Perspectives]
*[http://www.biblicalgeology.net/content/view/46 Biblical Geology: Properly Understanding the Rocks]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category: Young Earth Creationism]]
[[Category: Geology]]

Flood Geology

2012-02-13T19:33:51Z

SusanP: /* Submarine canyons */

'''Flood geology''' is the study of the Earth's geology from the point of view that the Earth's geology was radically redefined by a [[Great Flood|global flood]] in the relatively recent past, as recorded in [[Genesis]], as well as the scores of flood stories in other cultures throughout the world.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/570/</ref>

== Genesis Flood account ==
Genesis provides the most detailed account of the global deluge, including specific dates, measurements, and even some key geological events during the flood. Consequently, flood geologists use it as a starting point for understanding the events of the deluge. Based on the Genesis account, flood geologists argue that the flood resulted from subterranean water erupting to the surface ("the springs of the great deep burst forth" <ref>Genesis 7:11, NIV</ref>), combined with 40 days and nights of rain. Although the rain stopped after 40 days, the flood waters continued to rise for 150 days, and lasted just over a year before Noah and the others on the boat were able to leave. During the flood, there was massive tectonic activity, including some land rising up and other land dropping, such that the waters ended up in newly-deepened oceans. All the animals and birds (except those on the ark), and large numbers of sea creatures perished, and many of them were buried so quickly that they became fossils, accounting for the vast majority of fossils existing today.

== Evidence ==
Flood geologists base their belief in a relatively recent global deluge on several strands of evidence. While none of these strands alone is sufficient to ''prove'' that a global flood occurred, flood geologists argue that a global deluge is the most reasonable and [[parsimonious]] explanation for the evidence.

=== Sedimentary rock ===
Some sedimentary rocks are formed by sand and other sediments which precipitate from solution, and undergo [[lithification]]. Although only about 5% of the earth's rocks are sedimentary, 75%-80% of the Earth's land area is covered in sedimentary rock.[http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/distance/gg101/Programs/program21%20SedimentaryRocks/program21.html] Therefore, flood geologists point out, there is irrefutable evidence that at least 75% of the Earth's land was once covered in water.

Cross-bedded dune sandstone was formed only on dry land, and only occurs in 7 distinct strata, separated by water-deposited layers.

=== Sufficient water ===
There is enough water on Earth today to cover the entire surface to a depth of 2.7 kilometres (1.7 miles), if the surface was levelled out.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter12.pdf Noah’s Flood—what about all that water?], Chapter 4 of the ''Creation Answers Book'', Dr. Don Batten (Ed.)</ref> Continents emerge because the average ocean depth is 3.7 km.<ref>http://www.mos.org/oceans/planet/features.html</ref>. Flood geologists argue that geological activity during and after the flood lowered the ocean basins, causing water to flow from the continents into the basins, and leaving dry land.<ref>{{Bible ref|Psalms|104|6-9|version=NASB}} "You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. '''The mountains rose; the valleys sank down''' To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth."</ref>However, such an event would have generated earthquakes of unimaginable magnitudes, causing further salination of what remains of the land.<ref>http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/natural-disasters/tsunami-profile/</ref>

=== Fossils ===
Fossilization requires rapid burial in a sedimentary solution, and subsequent rapid lithification of the solution. Slow burial does not result in fossilization, because the remains decay prior to being fossilized. Therefore, every fossil was buried in rapidly deposited sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone.

=== Fossil fuels ===
Fossil fuel formation requires the burial of enormous amounts of organic matter under a sedimentary solution, and the application of heat and pressure. Slow burial processes do not produce fossil fuels, because the organic matter decays prior to conversion into a fossil fuel. Therefore, all fossil fuels on earth were quickly buried under sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone;

Similar processes have been observed in [[Spirit Lake]] following the eruption of [[Mount St. Helens]] in 1980.

=== Rock strata ===
Most sedimentary rocks are layered, forming sharply defined lines at varying depths. Were these formed over long periods, erosion would have softened these lines. The sharpness of the lines implies rapid deposition and lithification.

=== Pure sedimentary layers ===
If sedimentary layers were laid down over millenia, they would have experienced mixing. However, many rock strata are pure -- for example, the [[St. Peter Sandstone]], covering 500,000 sq miles of the United States, is 99.94% pure silica. While uniformitarian scientists state that it was deposited by the shore of a sea, they cannot explain how it remained so pure if it was laid out over a long period of time. However, the sorting processes of [[liquefaction]], consistent with a global flood, can make such an explanation. Despite that, it ignores the fact that each layer has the time to be compressed by the sediment into stone, and thus not mix. In the event of a catastrophic global flood, the sediment would have mixed, because there was no time to turn to stone.

=== Submarine canyons ===
Canyons can be found under the sea at the end of many major world rivers, including the Congo, Amazon, Ganges, and Hudson. They extend for thousands of miles underwater, thousands of feet under the sea; they are as deep as the Grand Canyon in places, and although not well understood by the mainstream scientific community, they are generally understood to have developed when sea-levels were significantly lower than today. Flood geologists argue that as the continents divided and the flood subsided, these major rivers drained the new continents, and the water flowed into the new low-lying areas, which would fill to become seas, leaving the sediments to dry out of their [[liquefaction|liquefied]] state. Secular scientists respond by citing sediment flows, which have the ability to act as a stream of sand, that has the ability to over millions of years, erode the underwater continental shelf.

=== Land canyons ===
As explanation for great land canyons such as the [[Grand Canyon]], flood geologists point to canyon formation events such as the catastrophic hot mud slides observed during the eruption of Mt. St. Helens. One particular hot mud slide at Mt. St. Helens carved a canyon 140 ft. deep and 17 miles long in a single day. Only a thin creek remains at the bottom of the canyon today, which would likely be interpreted as having carved the canyon "over millions of years," if it were not known first-hand that the canyon was carved in a single day.

=== Ancient accounts of a navigable Atlantic ===
Plato's ''Timaeus'' states:
: "In those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles [Straight of Gibraltar] ... and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent."<ref>http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html</ref>

=== Plate tectonics ===

A clear problem with a global flood is that of repopulation: after the flood, very few non-marine species would survive. In particular, most of those observed today could not possibly have survived - this includes all insects, the vast majority of birds (Some species of albatross may have survived), the vast majority of mammals, and possibly freshwater fish depending on the salinity of the floodwaters.

Flood geology models include a means for these species to survive, most typically via artificial assistance - an Ark, as described in [[Genesis]].

An often-proposed explanation is that of continental drift - that the continents may once have been united in a single supercontinent, which broke into fragments and drifted into the formations seen today during the time between the start of repopulation and today. Continental drift in principle is nearly universally accepted by all geologists, with flood geology differing only in time: While conventional geology estimates the breakup of the supercontinent to have occurred over approximately sixty million years, flood geologists mostly claim that the process occurred during the flood year, whilst a few claim that it occurred at the time of [[Peleg]].

Flood geologists propose several models which would explain how continental drift could proceed at the rapid pace required to allow the rearrangement of continents during or shortly after the flood, then slow to the currently observed rate. One of the best known of these is the runaway subduction model of Dr. [[John Baumgardner]].<ref>http://www.globalflood.org/platetec/about.html</ref>

=== Total destruction ===

Flood geologists argue that the scale of destruction of the Flood, especially if rapid plate tectonics was involved, would mean almost certain total destruction of the pre-Flood world, including any evidence of civilisations predating the Flood, along with the destruction of the [[Garden of Eden]].
After the Flood, and particularly after the [[Tower of Babel]], new civilisations developed, that either survive to this day or that we find archaeological evidence of today.

== Dating ==

Flood geologists date the flood to around 2350 B.C., based on [[biblical chronology]].
They argue that archaeological dates which purport to show civilisations and artifacts being older than the Flood (see Criticisms) are incorrect because they are based on the presumption that none of these methods would be altered by the effects of a global flood in such a way as to render conclusions drawn from them invalid.<ref>One example is Carbon Dating which is calibrated according to known background levels of C14 in the atmosphere, but this calibration does not account for likely altered levels due to extensive volcanism during the Flood. See [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5026/ Carbon dating into the future] (Creation Ministries International).</ref> [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetists]] state that the biblical flood would have occurred before the Egyptian pyramids were built and that the commonly cited Egyptian chronology is errant and built upon poor foundations. <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2503</ref> Also, Christian apologists argue that ancient Sumerian history supports the flood account given in the Bible. <ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a009.html</ref> In addition, ancient Sumerian literature speaks of a world wide flood. <ref>http://home.comcast.net/~chris.s/sumer-faq.html#A1.6</ref>

[[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists also state that the chronology used to dispute a worldwide flood based on tree rings is invalid.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=381</ref> <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp</ref><ref>http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_treerings.php</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/21066.htm</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/26/26_1a.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/sum29_4.html</ref>

==Creationist Scientists Defense of Flood Geology ==
Creationist scientists assert that there are multiple lines of evidence from the field of geology showing that flood geology is correct. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationism.org/topbar/geology.htm</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref><ref>http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html</ref><ref>http://globalflood.org/</ref> Creationist scientists also state that there was enough water to cause a worldwide flood and various other objections to a worldwide flood are invalid. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/flood.asp</ref>

== Common Criticisms ==

Critics claim that there is not enough water on the Earth to actually cause a worldwide flood, or ever has been; in addition, many archaeological records (notably tree-ring records and the records of various early civilizations, including Egypt and Sumeria) stretch through the period of time most often given as that of the Great Flood, without any actual reference to such an event.<ref>For a summary of other criticisms, see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html</ref>

== History ==

Until the rise of uniformitarian [[geology]] in the early 19th century, most geologists accepted the Noahic deluge as part of geology. But [[James Hutton]] proposed in 1795 that geology ought to be based on the processes that we see happening now, thereby automatically ruling the Flood out of consideration. During the 19th century a number of "[[scriptural geologist]]s" held out against the rising acceptance of Hutton's principles, but they fought a losing battle and interest in flood geology virtually died out by the end of the 19th century.

However, in the second half of the 20th century, interest was revived amongst people keen to show that the biblical account was correct, and a small but growing number of geologists are now studying this field again, although the vast majority of geologists still reject the idea of a global flood on Earth. At the same time, there has been a recent resurgence of [[catastrophism]] in geological interpretation. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref>

Interest in Flood Geology was stimulated by the 1961 publication of ''[[The Genesis Flood]]'', by [[Henry Morris]] and [[John Whitcomb]]. Dr. Henry Morris had a number of arguments for geology supporting a worldwide flood. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/842/</ref>
{{Creation vs. evolution}}
== External Links ==
*[http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54 Geology and the Flood] by [[Henry Morris]], Ph.D.
*[http://www.creationism.org/symposium/symp3no2.htm Stratigraphic Evidence of the Flood] by Stuart E. Nevins.
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/flood_models.asp Flood models: the need for an integrated approach] by A.C. McIntosh, T. Edmondson & S. Taylor.
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html#anchorgeologycreationist Global Flood Geology from Creation Science Perspectives]
*[http://www.biblicalgeology.net/content/view/46 Biblical Geology: Properly Understanding the Rocks]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category: Young Earth Creationism]]
[[Category: Geology]]

Flood Geology

2012-02-13T19:32:32Z

SusanP: /* Pure sedimentary layers */

'''Flood geology''' is the study of the Earth's geology from the point of view that the Earth's geology was radically redefined by a [[Great Flood|global flood]] in the relatively recent past, as recorded in [[Genesis]], as well as the scores of flood stories in other cultures throughout the world.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/570/</ref>

== Genesis Flood account ==
Genesis provides the most detailed account of the global deluge, including specific dates, measurements, and even some key geological events during the flood. Consequently, flood geologists use it as a starting point for understanding the events of the deluge. Based on the Genesis account, flood geologists argue that the flood resulted from subterranean water erupting to the surface ("the springs of the great deep burst forth" <ref>Genesis 7:11, NIV</ref>), combined with 40 days and nights of rain. Although the rain stopped after 40 days, the flood waters continued to rise for 150 days, and lasted just over a year before Noah and the others on the boat were able to leave. During the flood, there was massive tectonic activity, including some land rising up and other land dropping, such that the waters ended up in newly-deepened oceans. All the animals and birds (except those on the ark), and large numbers of sea creatures perished, and many of them were buried so quickly that they became fossils, accounting for the vast majority of fossils existing today.

== Evidence ==
Flood geologists base their belief in a relatively recent global deluge on several strands of evidence. While none of these strands alone is sufficient to ''prove'' that a global flood occurred, flood geologists argue that a global deluge is the most reasonable and [[parsimonious]] explanation for the evidence.

=== Sedimentary rock ===
Some sedimentary rocks are formed by sand and other sediments which precipitate from solution, and undergo [[lithification]]. Although only about 5% of the earth's rocks are sedimentary, 75%-80% of the Earth's land area is covered in sedimentary rock.[http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/distance/gg101/Programs/program21%20SedimentaryRocks/program21.html] Therefore, flood geologists point out, there is irrefutable evidence that at least 75% of the Earth's land was once covered in water.

Cross-bedded dune sandstone was formed only on dry land, and only occurs in 7 distinct strata, separated by water-deposited layers.

=== Sufficient water ===
There is enough water on Earth today to cover the entire surface to a depth of 2.7 kilometres (1.7 miles), if the surface was levelled out.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter12.pdf Noah’s Flood—what about all that water?], Chapter 4 of the ''Creation Answers Book'', Dr. Don Batten (Ed.)</ref> Continents emerge because the average ocean depth is 3.7 km.<ref>http://www.mos.org/oceans/planet/features.html</ref>. Flood geologists argue that geological activity during and after the flood lowered the ocean basins, causing water to flow from the continents into the basins, and leaving dry land.<ref>{{Bible ref|Psalms|104|6-9|version=NASB}} "You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. '''The mountains rose; the valleys sank down''' To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth."</ref>However, such an event would have generated earthquakes of unimaginable magnitudes, causing further salination of what remains of the land.<ref>http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/natural-disasters/tsunami-profile/</ref>

=== Fossils ===
Fossilization requires rapid burial in a sedimentary solution, and subsequent rapid lithification of the solution. Slow burial does not result in fossilization, because the remains decay prior to being fossilized. Therefore, every fossil was buried in rapidly deposited sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone.

=== Fossil fuels ===
Fossil fuel formation requires the burial of enormous amounts of organic matter under a sedimentary solution, and the application of heat and pressure. Slow burial processes do not produce fossil fuels, because the organic matter decays prior to conversion into a fossil fuel. Therefore, all fossil fuels on earth were quickly buried under sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone;

Similar processes have been observed in [[Spirit Lake]] following the eruption of [[Mount St. Helens]] in 1980.

=== Rock strata ===
Most sedimentary rocks are layered, forming sharply defined lines at varying depths. Were these formed over long periods, erosion would have softened these lines. The sharpness of the lines implies rapid deposition and lithification.

=== Pure sedimentary layers ===
If sedimentary layers were laid down over millenia, they would have experienced mixing. However, many rock strata are pure -- for example, the [[St. Peter Sandstone]], covering 500,000 sq miles of the United States, is 99.94% pure silica. While uniformitarian scientists state that it was deposited by the shore of a sea, they cannot explain how it remained so pure if it was laid out over a long period of time. However, the sorting processes of [[liquefaction]], consistent with a global flood, can make such an explanation. Despite that, it ignores the fact that each layer has the time to be compressed by the sediment into stone, and thus not mix. In the event of a catastrophic global flood, the sediment would have mixed, because there was no time to turn to stone.

=== Submarine canyons ===
Canyons can be found under the sea at the end of many major world rivers, including the Congo, Amazon, Ganges, and Hudson. They extend for thousands of miles underwater, thousands of feet under the sea; they are as deep as the Grand Canyon in places, and although not well understood by the mainstream scientific community, they are generally understood to have developed when sea-levels were significantly lower than today. Flood geologists argue that as the continents divided and the flood subsided, these major rivers drained the new continents, and the water flowed into the new low-lying areas, which would fill to become seas, leaving the sediments to dry out of their [[liquefaction|liquefied]] state.

=== Land canyons ===
As explanation for great land canyons such as the [[Grand Canyon]], flood geologists point to canyon formation events such as the catastrophic hot mud slides observed during the eruption of Mt. St. Helens. One particular hot mud slide at Mt. St. Helens carved a canyon 140 ft. deep and 17 miles long in a single day. Only a thin creek remains at the bottom of the canyon today, which would likely be interpreted as having carved the canyon "over millions of years," if it were not known first-hand that the canyon was carved in a single day.

=== Ancient accounts of a navigable Atlantic ===
Plato's ''Timaeus'' states:
: "In those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles [Straight of Gibraltar] ... and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent."<ref>http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html</ref>

=== Plate tectonics ===

A clear problem with a global flood is that of repopulation: after the flood, very few non-marine species would survive. In particular, most of those observed today could not possibly have survived - this includes all insects, the vast majority of birds (Some species of albatross may have survived), the vast majority of mammals, and possibly freshwater fish depending on the salinity of the floodwaters.

Flood geology models include a means for these species to survive, most typically via artificial assistance - an Ark, as described in [[Genesis]].

An often-proposed explanation is that of continental drift - that the continents may once have been united in a single supercontinent, which broke into fragments and drifted into the formations seen today during the time between the start of repopulation and today. Continental drift in principle is nearly universally accepted by all geologists, with flood geology differing only in time: While conventional geology estimates the breakup of the supercontinent to have occurred over approximately sixty million years, flood geologists mostly claim that the process occurred during the flood year, whilst a few claim that it occurred at the time of [[Peleg]].

Flood geologists propose several models which would explain how continental drift could proceed at the rapid pace required to allow the rearrangement of continents during or shortly after the flood, then slow to the currently observed rate. One of the best known of these is the runaway subduction model of Dr. [[John Baumgardner]].<ref>http://www.globalflood.org/platetec/about.html</ref>

=== Total destruction ===

Flood geologists argue that the scale of destruction of the Flood, especially if rapid plate tectonics was involved, would mean almost certain total destruction of the pre-Flood world, including any evidence of civilisations predating the Flood, along with the destruction of the [[Garden of Eden]].
After the Flood, and particularly after the [[Tower of Babel]], new civilisations developed, that either survive to this day or that we find archaeological evidence of today.

== Dating ==

Flood geologists date the flood to around 2350 B.C., based on [[biblical chronology]].
They argue that archaeological dates which purport to show civilisations and artifacts being older than the Flood (see Criticisms) are incorrect because they are based on the presumption that none of these methods would be altered by the effects of a global flood in such a way as to render conclusions drawn from them invalid.<ref>One example is Carbon Dating which is calibrated according to known background levels of C14 in the atmosphere, but this calibration does not account for likely altered levels due to extensive volcanism during the Flood. See [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5026/ Carbon dating into the future] (Creation Ministries International).</ref> [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetists]] state that the biblical flood would have occurred before the Egyptian pyramids were built and that the commonly cited Egyptian chronology is errant and built upon poor foundations. <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2503</ref> Also, Christian apologists argue that ancient Sumerian history supports the flood account given in the Bible. <ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a009.html</ref> In addition, ancient Sumerian literature speaks of a world wide flood. <ref>http://home.comcast.net/~chris.s/sumer-faq.html#A1.6</ref>

[[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists also state that the chronology used to dispute a worldwide flood based on tree rings is invalid.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=381</ref> <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp</ref><ref>http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_treerings.php</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/21066.htm</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/26/26_1a.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/sum29_4.html</ref>

==Creationist Scientists Defense of Flood Geology ==
Creationist scientists assert that there are multiple lines of evidence from the field of geology showing that flood geology is correct. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationism.org/topbar/geology.htm</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref><ref>http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html</ref><ref>http://globalflood.org/</ref> Creationist scientists also state that there was enough water to cause a worldwide flood and various other objections to a worldwide flood are invalid. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/flood.asp</ref>

== Common Criticisms ==

Critics claim that there is not enough water on the Earth to actually cause a worldwide flood, or ever has been; in addition, many archaeological records (notably tree-ring records and the records of various early civilizations, including Egypt and Sumeria) stretch through the period of time most often given as that of the Great Flood, without any actual reference to such an event.<ref>For a summary of other criticisms, see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html</ref>

== History ==

Until the rise of uniformitarian [[geology]] in the early 19th century, most geologists accepted the Noahic deluge as part of geology. But [[James Hutton]] proposed in 1795 that geology ought to be based on the processes that we see happening now, thereby automatically ruling the Flood out of consideration. During the 19th century a number of "[[scriptural geologist]]s" held out against the rising acceptance of Hutton's principles, but they fought a losing battle and interest in flood geology virtually died out by the end of the 19th century.

However, in the second half of the 20th century, interest was revived amongst people keen to show that the biblical account was correct, and a small but growing number of geologists are now studying this field again, although the vast majority of geologists still reject the idea of a global flood on Earth. At the same time, there has been a recent resurgence of [[catastrophism]] in geological interpretation. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref>

Interest in Flood Geology was stimulated by the 1961 publication of ''[[The Genesis Flood]]'', by [[Henry Morris]] and [[John Whitcomb]]. Dr. Henry Morris had a number of arguments for geology supporting a worldwide flood. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/842/</ref>
{{Creation vs. evolution}}
== External Links ==
*[http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54 Geology and the Flood] by [[Henry Morris]], Ph.D.
*[http://www.creationism.org/symposium/symp3no2.htm Stratigraphic Evidence of the Flood] by Stuart E. Nevins.
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/flood_models.asp Flood models: the need for an integrated approach] by A.C. McIntosh, T. Edmondson & S. Taylor.
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html#anchorgeologycreationist Global Flood Geology from Creation Science Perspectives]
*[http://www.biblicalgeology.net/content/view/46 Biblical Geology: Properly Understanding the Rocks]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category: Young Earth Creationism]]
[[Category: Geology]]

Flood Geology

2012-02-13T19:30:02Z

SusanP: Water and earthquakes

'''Flood geology''' is the study of the Earth's geology from the point of view that the Earth's geology was radically redefined by a [[Great Flood|global flood]] in the relatively recent past, as recorded in [[Genesis]], as well as the scores of flood stories in other cultures throughout the world.<ref>http://www.icr.org/article/570/</ref>

== Genesis Flood account ==
Genesis provides the most detailed account of the global deluge, including specific dates, measurements, and even some key geological events during the flood. Consequently, flood geologists use it as a starting point for understanding the events of the deluge. Based on the Genesis account, flood geologists argue that the flood resulted from subterranean water erupting to the surface ("the springs of the great deep burst forth" <ref>Genesis 7:11, NIV</ref>), combined with 40 days and nights of rain. Although the rain stopped after 40 days, the flood waters continued to rise for 150 days, and lasted just over a year before Noah and the others on the boat were able to leave. During the flood, there was massive tectonic activity, including some land rising up and other land dropping, such that the waters ended up in newly-deepened oceans. All the animals and birds (except those on the ark), and large numbers of sea creatures perished, and many of them were buried so quickly that they became fossils, accounting for the vast majority of fossils existing today.

== Evidence ==
Flood geologists base their belief in a relatively recent global deluge on several strands of evidence. While none of these strands alone is sufficient to ''prove'' that a global flood occurred, flood geologists argue that a global deluge is the most reasonable and [[parsimonious]] explanation for the evidence.

=== Sedimentary rock ===
Some sedimentary rocks are formed by sand and other sediments which precipitate from solution, and undergo [[lithification]]. Although only about 5% of the earth's rocks are sedimentary, 75%-80% of the Earth's land area is covered in sedimentary rock.[http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/distance/gg101/Programs/program21%20SedimentaryRocks/program21.html] Therefore, flood geologists point out, there is irrefutable evidence that at least 75% of the Earth's land was once covered in water.

Cross-bedded dune sandstone was formed only on dry land, and only occurs in 7 distinct strata, separated by water-deposited layers.

=== Sufficient water ===
There is enough water on Earth today to cover the entire surface to a depth of 2.7 kilometres (1.7 miles), if the surface was levelled out.<ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter12.pdf Noah’s Flood—what about all that water?], Chapter 4 of the ''Creation Answers Book'', Dr. Don Batten (Ed.)</ref> Continents emerge because the average ocean depth is 3.7 km.<ref>http://www.mos.org/oceans/planet/features.html</ref>. Flood geologists argue that geological activity during and after the flood lowered the ocean basins, causing water to flow from the continents into the basins, and leaving dry land.<ref>{{Bible ref|Psalms|104|6-9|version=NASB}} "You covered it with the deep as with a garment; The waters were standing above the mountains. At Your rebuke they fled, At the sound of Your thunder they hurried away. '''The mountains rose; the valleys sank down''' To the place which You established for them. You set a boundary that they may not pass over, So that they will not return to cover the earth."</ref>However, such an event would have generated earthquakes of unimaginable magnitudes, causing further salination of what remains of the land.<ref>http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/environment/natural-disasters/tsunami-profile/</ref>

=== Fossils ===
Fossilization requires rapid burial in a sedimentary solution, and subsequent rapid lithification of the solution. Slow burial does not result in fossilization, because the remains decay prior to being fossilized. Therefore, every fossil was buried in rapidly deposited sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone.

=== Fossil fuels ===
Fossil fuel formation requires the burial of enormous amounts of organic matter under a sedimentary solution, and the application of heat and pressure. Slow burial processes do not produce fossil fuels, because the organic matter decays prior to conversion into a fossil fuel. Therefore, all fossil fuels on earth were quickly buried under sedimentary material which subsequently turned to stone;

Similar processes have been observed in [[Spirit Lake]] following the eruption of [[Mount St. Helens]] in 1980.

=== Rock strata ===
Most sedimentary rocks are layered, forming sharply defined lines at varying depths. Were these formed over long periods, erosion would have softened these lines. The sharpness of the lines implies rapid deposition and lithification.

=== Pure sedimentary layers ===
If sedimentary layers were laid down over millenia, they would have experienced mixing. However, many rock strata are pure -- for example, the [[St. Peter Sandstone]], covering 500,000 sq miles of the United States, is 99.94% pure silica. While uniformitarian scientists state that it was deposited by the shore of a sea, they cannot explain how it remained so pure if it was laid out over a long period of time. However, the sorting processes of [[liquefaction]], consistent with a global flood, can make such an explanation.

=== Submarine canyons ===
Canyons can be found under the sea at the end of many major world rivers, including the Congo, Amazon, Ganges, and Hudson. They extend for thousands of miles underwater, thousands of feet under the sea; they are as deep as the Grand Canyon in places, and although not well understood by the mainstream scientific community, they are generally understood to have developed when sea-levels were significantly lower than today. Flood geologists argue that as the continents divided and the flood subsided, these major rivers drained the new continents, and the water flowed into the new low-lying areas, which would fill to become seas, leaving the sediments to dry out of their [[liquefaction|liquefied]] state.

=== Land canyons ===
As explanation for great land canyons such as the [[Grand Canyon]], flood geologists point to canyon formation events such as the catastrophic hot mud slides observed during the eruption of Mt. St. Helens. One particular hot mud slide at Mt. St. Helens carved a canyon 140 ft. deep and 17 miles long in a single day. Only a thin creek remains at the bottom of the canyon today, which would likely be interpreted as having carved the canyon "over millions of years," if it were not known first-hand that the canyon was carved in a single day.

=== Ancient accounts of a navigable Atlantic ===
Plato's ''Timaeus'' states:
: "In those days the Atlantic was navigable; and there was an island situated in front of the straits which are by you called the Pillars of Heracles [Straight of Gibraltar] ... and was the way to other islands, and from these you might pass to the whole of the opposite continent which surrounded the true ocean; for this sea which is within the Straits of Heracles is only a harbour, having a narrow entrance, but that other is a real sea, and the surrounding land may be most truly called a boundless continent."<ref>http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/timaeus.html</ref>

=== Plate tectonics ===

A clear problem with a global flood is that of repopulation: after the flood, very few non-marine species would survive. In particular, most of those observed today could not possibly have survived - this includes all insects, the vast majority of birds (Some species of albatross may have survived), the vast majority of mammals, and possibly freshwater fish depending on the salinity of the floodwaters.

Flood geology models include a means for these species to survive, most typically via artificial assistance - an Ark, as described in [[Genesis]].

An often-proposed explanation is that of continental drift - that the continents may once have been united in a single supercontinent, which broke into fragments and drifted into the formations seen today during the time between the start of repopulation and today. Continental drift in principle is nearly universally accepted by all geologists, with flood geology differing only in time: While conventional geology estimates the breakup of the supercontinent to have occurred over approximately sixty million years, flood geologists mostly claim that the process occurred during the flood year, whilst a few claim that it occurred at the time of [[Peleg]].

Flood geologists propose several models which would explain how continental drift could proceed at the rapid pace required to allow the rearrangement of continents during or shortly after the flood, then slow to the currently observed rate. One of the best known of these is the runaway subduction model of Dr. [[John Baumgardner]].<ref>http://www.globalflood.org/platetec/about.html</ref>

=== Total destruction ===

Flood geologists argue that the scale of destruction of the Flood, especially if rapid plate tectonics was involved, would mean almost certain total destruction of the pre-Flood world, including any evidence of civilisations predating the Flood, along with the destruction of the [[Garden of Eden]].
After the Flood, and particularly after the [[Tower of Babel]], new civilisations developed, that either survive to this day or that we find archaeological evidence of today.

== Dating ==

Flood geologists date the flood to around 2350 B.C., based on [[biblical chronology]].
They argue that archaeological dates which purport to show civilisations and artifacts being older than the Flood (see Criticisms) are incorrect because they are based on the presumption that none of these methods would be altered by the effects of a global flood in such a way as to render conclusions drawn from them invalid.<ref>One example is Carbon Dating which is calibrated according to known background levels of C14 in the atmosphere, but this calibration does not account for likely altered levels due to extensive volcanism during the Flood. See [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5026/ Carbon dating into the future] (Creation Ministries International).</ref> [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologetists]] state that the biblical flood would have occurred before the Egyptian pyramids were built and that the commonly cited Egyptian chronology is errant and built upon poor foundations. <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2503</ref> Also, Christian apologists argue that ancient Sumerian history supports the flood account given in the Bible. <ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-abr/abr-a009.html</ref> In addition, ancient Sumerian literature speaks of a world wide flood. <ref>http://home.comcast.net/~chris.s/sumer-faq.html#A1.6</ref>

[[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists also state that the chronology used to dispute a worldwide flood based on tree rings is invalid.<ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=381</ref> <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/docs/tree_ring.asp</ref><ref>http://www.biblicalchronologist.org/answers/c14_treerings.php</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/origins/21066.htm</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/26/26_1a.html</ref><ref>http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/abstracts/sum29_4.html</ref>

==Creationist Scientists Defense of Flood Geology ==
Creationist scientists assert that there are multiple lines of evidence from the field of geology showing that flood geology is correct. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/geology.asp</ref><ref>http://www.creationism.org/topbar/geology.htm</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref><ref>http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html</ref><ref>http://globalflood.org/</ref> Creationist scientists also state that there was enough water to cause a worldwide flood and various other objections to a worldwide flood are invalid. <ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/AnswersBook/flood12.asp</ref><ref>http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/flood.asp</ref>

== Common Criticisms ==

Critics claim that there is not enough water on the Earth to actually cause a worldwide flood, or ever has been; in addition, many archaeological records (notably tree-ring records and the records of various early civilizations, including Egypt and Sumeria) stretch through the period of time most often given as that of the Great Flood, without any actual reference to such an event.<ref>For a summary of other criticisms, see http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html</ref>

== History ==

Until the rise of uniformitarian [[geology]] in the early 19th century, most geologists accepted the Noahic deluge as part of geology. But [[James Hutton]] proposed in 1795 that geology ought to be based on the processes that we see happening now, thereby automatically ruling the Flood out of consideration. During the 19th century a number of "[[scriptural geologist]]s" held out against the rising acceptance of Hutton's principles, but they fought a losing battle and interest in flood geology virtually died out by the end of the 19th century.

However, in the second half of the 20th century, interest was revived amongst people keen to show that the biblical account was correct, and a small but growing number of geologists are now studying this field again, although the vast majority of geologists still reject the idea of a global flood on Earth. At the same time, there has been a recent resurgence of [[catastrophism]] in geological interpretation. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.grisda.org/georpts/gr11.htm</ref>

Interest in Flood Geology was stimulated by the 1961 publication of ''[[The Genesis Flood]]'', by [[Henry Morris]] and [[John Whitcomb]]. Dr. Henry Morris had a number of arguments for geology supporting a worldwide flood. <ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=print&ID=84</ref><ref>http://www.icr.org/article/842/</ref>
{{Creation vs. evolution}}
== External Links ==
*[http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=articles&action=view&ID=54 Geology and the Flood] by [[Henry Morris]], Ph.D.
*[http://www.creationism.org/symposium/symp3no2.htm Stratigraphic Evidence of the Flood] by Stuart E. Nevins.
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v14/i1/flood_models.asp Flood models: the need for an integrated approach] by A.C. McIntosh, T. Edmondson & S. Taylor.
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/geologylinks.html#anchorgeologycreationist Global Flood Geology from Creation Science Perspectives]
*[http://www.biblicalgeology.net/content/view/46 Biblical Geology: Properly Understanding the Rocks]

==References==

<references/>

[[Category: Young Earth Creationism]]
[[Category: Geology]]

User talk:EJamesW

2012-02-11T23:51:08Z

SusanP: Created page with "{{warning}} ~~~~"

{{warning}}
[[User:SusanP|SusanP]] 18:51, 11 February 2012 (EST)

User talk:PhilipN

2012-02-10T04:34:18Z

SusanP: /* Retiring? :(:( */

{{welcome|sig=--[[User:JamesWilson|James Wilson]] 21:46, 17 November 2011 (EST)}}

==City template==
Definitely on the right track. Suggestions: add "province" (i.e for Canadian cities); change "mayor" to "current mayor"; add "charter" for date the city was first given a charter. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 16:20, 27 December 2011 (EST)
:Done ! There are many more info we could provide for a city but I think we should keep to the essential. --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 16:29, 27 December 2011 (EST)

== Song titles VS album titles ==

Typically, following most style guides, song titles go "in quotation marks," album titles ''in italics.'' [[User:ScottDG|ScottDG]] 16:46, 27 December 2011 (EST)
:Hi ScottDG, which articles are you referring to ?--[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 16:47, 27 December 2011 (EST)
::[[Dire Straits]], for one. [[User:ScottDG|ScottDG]] 17:05, 27 December 2011 (EST)
:::It is true. I did not write this article, I just added the infobox but I will be careful about this now. --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 17:10, 27 December 2011 (EST)

==Image requests==
A slight change from what you requested. I will look on Flickr for images released for free use via Creative Commons...so far I uploaded two for you. [[User:Karajou|Karajou]] 16:42, 28 December 2011 (EST)
::Thanks a lot, I will try to be more careful about which images I choose in the future. --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 16:44, 28 December 2011 (EST)

== Congratulations ==

Congratulations, your account has been promoted to blocking privileges, and also "rollback" privileges to make it easier to revert vandalism.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 18:19, 29 December 2011 (EST)
:Thanks Andy, I will try to use it wisely. --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 18:23, 29 December 2011 (EST)

== Letting you off the hook! ==

Hi, it's Bob Servant here. Your website is so sad and pathetic - we're not going to mention you in our new book. Sorry guys.

[[User:BobGS|BobGS]] 19:37, 1 January 2012 (EST)
:Hmmm. Philip, have a look at [http://bobservant.com/about.html this].--[[User:GFitz|GFitz]] 19:44, 1 January 2012 (EST)
::Great catch, good job blocking him, I had my suspicions but I let him a chance.--[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 21:11, 1 January 2012 (EST)

Alright. For that, I will refrain from vandalizing. The thing I am trying to achieve is the realization that until people decide to work together instead of warring, that nothing is truly going to be accomplished. However, this is a large goal, I admit. [[User:Mangoluv|Mangoluv]] 16:16, 2 January 2012 (EST)
:Good luck with that !--[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 16:18, 2 January 2012 (EST)

== Thank you ==

I made a mistake in the title for the entry Evergreen State College, and thank you for the correction! [[User:Lansing|Lansing]] 17:38, 10 January 2012 (EST)
:You're welcome --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 17:40, 10 January 2012 (EST)

== vandal rash ==

Recentchanges is filled with vandals. Can we do a checkuser? --[[User:JonM|JonM]] 23:44, 10 January 2012 (EST)
:Hi Jon, I do not have access to the checkUser, you may want to check this list: [http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3AListUsers&username=&group=checkuser&limit=50]. --[[User:PhilipN|PhilipN]] 23:49, 10 January 2012 (EST)

== World Heritage Sites ==
: Fine, thank you! --[[User:Joaquín Martínez|Joaquín Martínez]] 09:40, 24 January 2012 (EST)

== Retiring? :(:( ==

Please dont go! A single worker towards the good can bring about a revolution! If you do choose to go, you will be very missed, at least among us junior editors.
[[User:SusanP|SusanP]] 23:34, 9 February 2012 (EST)

User talk:PhilipN

2012-02-10T04:34:04Z

SusanP: /* Retiring? :(:( */ new section

Majoring in Mathematics

2012-02-10T04:31:56Z

SusanP:

This article is intended to provide a brief introduction to what college mathematics is all about. It is aimed at high school students who have enjoyed mathematics in high school, and are starting to think about what to study in college. This article is a work in progress -- please expand and leave suggestions at the talk page. The theorems and ideas mentioned here aren't all things that you'll necessarily encounter in classes; indeed, most of them you probably won't. Instead, they are presented to indicate the sorts of thinking and methods that go into mathematics, and the sorts of problems that mathematicians work on today.

Mathematics is a strong and marketable major for students, relatively (but not completely) free of [[liberal bias]].

Here is an outline of what I hope to write.

== What College Mathematics is Not ==
Before we look at the sorts of problems that actually ''are'' dealt with by mathematics in college, let's look at some that are not. Rest assured, many of the most painful aspects of math classes you've taken before aren't so bad in college!
# Simply learning more advanced versions of mathematical ideas from high school. Tired of learning tricks for integration? Majoring in math won't just teach you new methods to integrate functions -- if you've taken an introductory calculus class, chances are you already know the important ones! What it will do is force you to think carefully about basic questions about what an integral is. Given some subset of space, what does it really mean to find its volume?
# Doing lots of computations. Chances are you'll have to do a few, but most mathematics in college is based around "proofs" -- very careful and rigorous arguments which show that mathematical statements are true. Many proofs won't involve any computations at all!
# Learning a bag of tricks to do Olympiad-type problems. If you've ever taken the AMC, Math League, or other similar competition tests, and not done well, don't worry! Much of these tests check nothing more than whether you're familiar with some collection of techniques for solving special problems. One math professor at Harvard keeps in his desk a copy of a math competition on which he scored a perfect 0/120. Mathematical theory goes far beyond these problems.

Instead, college mathematics is about developing new ways to rigorously approach a wide array of problems. More than aiming to find tricky techniques to solve certain problems, it is about building powerful approaches that solve many problems, and learning to think rigorously about them.

== Major Topics of Study ==
Given that a math major won't just be getting more practice at the sorts of math encountered in high school, what is it about? Here's a list of some of the major fields that are the foundation of a mathematics education.

For each field, I plan to give a very general description and to describe a few problems/theorems that are nice results and capture some of the essence of a subject. I'll aim for a few paragraphs about each one. Then I will give a problem or two that is a much more open-ended question that has motivated the development of large amounts of theory. For now I have no written about any of these -- please leave feedback and suggestions on the talk page and I will try to arrive at the best set of motivating problems!

=== Algebra ===
# How many positions are there for a Rubik's cube. Brief discussion of group theory, and how a group acts on the Rubik's cube.

==== Bezout's theorem ====
It's a very basic fact that two lines intersect at exactly one point. But we can ask a similar question about other shapes. At how many points do two parabolas intersect? A circle and a line? The graphs of two cubics? A circle and a line may intersect at either 0 points (for example, the unit circle <math>x^2+y^2=0</math> and the line <math>y=2</math>), 1 point (if the line is tangent to the circle), or 2 points. It's easy to see that we can arrange for two parabolas to intersect at four points: just consider the examples <math>y=x^2-10</math> and <math>x=y^2-10</math>. Similarly, we can up with two cubics that intersect at nine points. You might be noticing a pattern here: a parabola is defined as the set of solutions to a polynomial equation in two variables, whose biggest exponent is 2: we say that a parabola has degree 2. For the same reasons, we say that a line has degree 1, and a cubic as degree 3. Bezout's theorem then gives a very rough answer to our question: a curve of degree m and a curve of degree n intersect in at most mn points.

We have seen that sometimes the number of intersections is less than this, but Bezout's theorem, properly generalized, says that the number of intersections is in fact ''equal'' to mn: in the case of the circle and the line given earlier, there are exactly two solutions as predicted, if we allow <math>x</math> and <math>y</math> to be complex numbers. Similarly, a point of tangency is in some sense a "double intersection", and should count twice: if we nudged the line just a little bit, the point of intersection would turn into two distinct points. After we make these adjustments (counting complex solutions, changing the setting to projective space, and counting points of tangency multiple times), Bezout's theorem provides a simple and elegant answer to our original motivating question: curves of degree m and degree n intersect at exactly mn points!

# Is the quintic solvable in radicals? And what in the world does this problem have to do with group theory?
# The ancient Greeks were fascinated by geometric constructions with straightedge and compass. They could bisect angles and take square roots, but they couldn't trisect angles or take cube roots. Why not?

==== Algebra and Number Theory ====
The development of the modern field of algebra has been deeply influenced by research in number theory. An example of a problem from number theory that has provided far-reaching motivation for work in pure algebra has been the question of unique factorization.

It's a well-known fact, the [[fundamental theorem of arithmetic]], that every integer can be factored in a unique way as the product of prime numbers. It's natural to wonder whether this unique factorization holds in other simple rings, for example, the set of complex numbers whose real and complex parts are both integers (for example, <math>3+7i</math>). These are the so-called Gaussian integers, and there is a good notion of "prime", and that every Gaussian integer can be uniquely factored into primes! For example, 7+0i is a Gaussian prime, while 5+0i is not: <math>5+0i</math> factors as <math>(2+i)(2-i)<math>, and both <math>2-i</math> and <math>2+i</math> are prime. In general, it turns out that
a Gaussian integer <math>a+bi</math> is prime if either one of <math>a</math> or <math>b</math> is zero, and the other is a prime congruent to three mod 4, or if <math>a</math> and <math>b</math> are nonzero, and <math>a^2+b^2</math> is a prime (in the usual sense).

So unique factorization works well for the Gaussian integers, but what about other settings? An example similar to the Gaussian integers is the set of real numbers of the form <math>a+b\sqrt{7}</math>: note that <math>(a+b\sqrt{7})(c+d\sqrt{7}) = (ac+7bd)+(ad+bc)\sqrt{7}</math>, so the numbers of this form are closed under multiplication. Here too, and in many other cases, there is a good notion of unique factorization. It was formerly assumed that <math>\mathbb Z[\sqrt{d}]</math> would have unique factorization, but this turns out not to be the case. Consider the ring of complex numbers of the form <math>a+b\sqrt{-5}</math>. We can write <math>6 = 2 \cdot 3 = (1-\sqrt{-5})(1+\sqrt{5})</math>. A bit more work shows that both of these are prime factorizations, and they're not equivalent! This discovery necessitated the careful investigation of unique factorization, a purely algebraic notion that had not been seriously considered. Ernst Kummer proposed a proof of [[Fermat's Last Theorem]] which failed only because it assumed some properties of unique factorization, but further consideration of this problem led to a revolution in algebra.

=== Linear Algebra ===
If you throw a beach ball into the air, letting it spin in any way whatsoever, and then catch it, all of its rotations will comprise one rotation about some axis. That is, there will be two "poles" that will end exactly where they started, and all other points will just have rotated around them. What does this have to do with orthogonal operators? What does it have to do with the fact that every cubic equation has at least one real root?

If you do the same with a ring (e.g. a Hula Hoop), spinning it and letting it fall on its original "footprint", there will be no points that land exactly on their original position (except in the case in which it didn't move at all.) What does this have to do with the fact that quadratic equations are ''not'' guaranteed to have any real roots?

(Something about eigenvectors of distinct eigenvalues of an orthogonal/Hermitian matrix being orthogonal, can't think of a cute example just now.)

=== Geometry ===

In college math, "geometry" does not refer to more work on Euclidean high school geometry. Instead, college geometry includes a challenging field known as "differential geometry." This includes Tensor Calculus, Riemannian Geometry,
Covariant Vector Fields, Minkowskian Manifolds, and General Relativity.

Some problems include:

# The Theorema Egregium - that there exists a quality inherent to a surface no matter how it is "bent."
# What happens if we remove some the Euclidean postulates taught in high school? Specifically, the parallel postulate?

==== The Double Bubble Conjecture ====
You've probably noticed that when you blow a soap bubble, it quickly stretches into a nearly spherical shape. But why should a bubble tend towards a spherical conformation, instead of a cube or an icosahedron? According to physics, the bubble will tend toward a shape with the lowest energy, and the physical effect of surface tension is that this lowest energy is achieved when the bubble is in the shape with the least possible surface area enclosing a given volume. For example, if we want to enclose one cubic inch of air, the smallest surface that could contain it is a perfect sphere. The proof of this case, for a simple bubble, involves techniques from the mathematical study of [[differential geometry]], but turns out not to be too difficult. Related problems in finding minimal surfaces, however, turn out to be quite fiendish, and involve computations of "mean curvature" related to the notions of curvature defined above. The double bubble conjecture is one such.

*insert a picture here!

What is the smallest possible surface area for two bubbles joined stuck together, each enclosing some fixed volume? Thinking back to childhood experience, we know such bubbles end up as two partial spheres, connected together at a perfectly flat surface. But there are many other possibilities: why couldn't it be two tetrahedra, connected along some wavy surface? Quite sophisticated mathematical techniques are needed to prove this seemingly obvious result. The proof was not completed until 2000, by a team of mathematicians including [[User:RSchlafly|Roger Schlafly]].

=== Topology ===
==== The Bridges of Konigsberg ====
The earliest roots of the modern study of topology (and [[graph theory]]) lie in [[Leonhard Euler]]'s investigations of a famous puzzle from the 1730s. The town of Konigsberg (now [[Kaliningrad]]) was bisected by a river, which contained two large islands. There were seven bridges connecting the islands, as indicated in the accompanying image. The problem asked for a walk through the town which would cross each bridge exactly once: every bridge must be crossed once, and none more than once.

[[Image:Konigsberg.jpg|center|alt=Layout of Konigsberg|Layout of Euler's Konigsberg]]

Euler proved that no such path existed, with the following simple and elegant argument: observe that the path one takes while on the islands is irrelevant to the problem at hand, and that all that matters is the order in which the bridges are traversed. Every time one enters one landmass by means of a bridge, he leaves it by means of another. This means that the number of bridges entering and exiting each landmass must be even, except possibly the landmass in which he starts and the one in which he ends (since he does not both enter and exit these). However, in Konigsberg, each of the four landmasses is served by an odd number of bridges! This means that no tour of the sort desired is possible.

This argument is fundamentally a "topological" one because of the recognition that the rigid shapes and geometry of the problem make no difference. If the shape of the islands were changed, or a bridge were moved but stayed between the same two islands, the solution of the problem would not be affected. The only thing that matters is the number of islands and which islands are connected by bridges. The modern field of topology is at its heart the study of geometric objects whose rigid shape is not important.

# Connection between topological spaces and algebraic groups
# Ham sandwich theorem (easy to state, harder to motivate solution. Possibly there's something better.

==== How can we tell the difference between a sphere and a torus? ====
This is the sort of question that motivated the development of the field of topology for many years. Recall that a [[torus]] is the shape of an inner tube, or the surface of a donut: it is a two-dimensional surface with one whole. If a torus were made out of clay, one could stretch and squish it, but it is intuitively clear that no amount of stretching could possibly deform in into a sphere: it's simply impossible to get rid of the hole! Similarly, a sphere made out of clay can't be deformed into a torus without ripping it. The question of why the two shapes are not the same is fundamentally a topological one: we are interested in some intrinsic geometric properties of these objects, but not their specific rigid shapes.

It turns out that methods from [[algebra]] provide the easiest way to prove that it is impossible to deform a sphere into a donut. Observe that a sphere has the following property: given any loop drawn on the sphere (say, a rubber band stretched around it somehow), it is possible to "contract" that loop to a point (i.e., to scrunch up the whole rubber band at one place). On the other hand, if a rubber band is placed on a donut in such a way that it loops around the central whole, there is no way to contract it to a single point. A crucial observation in the field of algebraic topology is that if a space can be obtained by squeezing and stretching a sphere, then it will still have the property that every loop is contractible. Since a torus doesn't, we conclude that it must be fundamentally different from a sphere. Arguments like this are the basis for the field of [[algebraic topology]], and this problem of contracting loops in a space is studied using the [[fundamental group]].

=== Analysis ===
# Riemann mapping theorem. State this in terms of conformal mappings of the unit disk and draw lots of pictures!

==== Fixed points ====
Often in mathematics or physics, it is interesting to think about what happens when we apply the same function repeatedly. For example, one might take a calculator, punch in a random number, and then hit the button "[[cosine|cos]]" repeatedly. What happens when we do this? If you try it, you might see something that looks like this:1.3, 0.267499, 0.964435, 0.569881, 0.841965, 0.665998, 0.7863, 0.706469, 0.760659, 0.724382, 0.748909, ...

It looks like these are getting closer and closer to some fixed number, and if you hit the button a few more times, you'd discover that indeed these terms approach some constant around C=0.739085. This is the value of C for which cos(C) = C. There's no way to solve for this C algebraically, but we can see from the [[intermediate value theorem]] that there must be some value of C for which this is the case, since cos(0) > 0 but cos(1) < 1.
Generally, a value x is called a '''fixed point''' of a function f if f(x)=x, and it is interesting to study when a function must have a fixed point. Although many functions have no fixed points, there are theorems that give certain conditions under which any function must have a fixed point.

One of the most famous such theorems is the Brouwer fixed-point theorem, which says in its simplest form that any continuous function <math>f: D^2 \to D^2</math> has a fixed point. This fact has a very intuitive description: if we take a sheet of graph paper (so we can label each point with coordinates), crumple it up, and set it on top of another sheet of graph paper, then there is some point on the crumpled up sheet which is directly above the corresponding point on the second sheet! While this sounds like a simple fact, proving it rigorously relies on the techniques of [[algebraic topology]].

Another celebrated example of a fixed point theorem is known as Sharkovsky's theorem. In addition to fixed points, some functions have points for which repeating the function several times yields the same result: for example, a value of x for which cos(cos(cos(x))) = x is called a 3-periodic point of the function cosine. Sharkovsky's theorem is the surprising result that if a continuous function f has points of period 3, then it has points of all other periods! For example, consider the quadratic <math>f(x) = -\frac{5}{2} x^2 + \frac{7}{2} +1</math> has f(0) = 1, f(f(0)) = f(1) = 2, f(f(f(0))) = f(f(1))=f(2) = 0. So 0 is a point of period 3 of f(x). Sharkovsky's theorem implies that there are points of every other period. For example, there is some x such that f(f(f(f(f(f(f(f(x)))))))=x! Solving this explicitly would involve solving a polynomial of degree 14, an impossible task. But Sharkovsky's theorem guarantees that there is '''some''' value of x satisfying this.

==== Mathematical Billiards ====
Imagine that you're playing a game of pool on a standard rectangular table, but with a twist: there's no friction, so after you hit the ball, it continues along its trajectory forever. Obviously if you hit the ball so that its path is perpendicular to one of the walls of the table, it will bounce straight back, then off the opposite wall, straight back again, etc.: the ball will follow a repeating pattern of bouncing between the two walls forever. Similarly, if you aim just right, you can hit the ball so that it moves in a diamond-shaped path forever, bouncing off the middle of the sides of the walls repeatedly. A trajectory of the cue ball is called "periodic" if it's like one of these, in that the ball eventually ends up back where it started, and moving in the same direction. A trajectory is said to have "period p" if it hits the wall exactly <math>p</math> times in the course of this repeating cycle. The two examples given above have periods of two and four, respectively. One question we might ask is whether there is an orbit of period <math>p</math> for every possible choice of p. Can you come up with a path on the standard billiards table that has period 3? If not, can you prove that one doesn't exist?

As is often the case is mathematics, we attempt to generalize these results on periodic orbits to other situations. What if the billiards table is not rectangular, but triangular? It's true, but extremely difficult to prove, that given any triangular billiards table, there exists a periodic orbit of '''some''' period. The existence of periodic orbits is an extremely subtle question. This can be generalized even further, to ask whether all polygons admit periodic orbits. What about polyhedra? Can you imagine some periodic billiards orbits on a cube-shaped "table" (no gravity! think billiards in space).

The orbits that aren't periodic turn out to be just as interesting as those that are. Imagine that you place the cue ball at random on your billiards table, and smack it in some random direction. Chances are it won't end up in a periodic orbit -- putting the ball in a periodic orbit requires a very careful shot. So the ball will bounce around forever without retracing its path. But will it ever come back to the point where it started, perhaps moving in a different direction? The answer to this question is "no", but the Poincare Recurrence Theorem gives a somewhat satisfactory replacement: given any distance (e.g., an eighth of an inch), and any angle (e.g. two degrees), after some amount of time, the ball will be within that distance of its starting point, and directed within that angle of its initial path! This is a very suprising fact.

While this problem seems extremely elementary, sophisticated mathematical techiques from a range of fields of geometry and analysis have been brought to bear on it. Even so, many easily-stated questions remain open.

# Periodic orbits in billiards in polyhedra. I think it should be possible to say some interesting things about this but with some real content. Possibly there's a better idea.

Hard problem: What does an integral really mean? Babble a bit about integrating the characteristic function of Q.

=== Probability and Statistics ===
# Discussion of Benford's law, application to recognizing fraud.
# Understanding the concept of the "random variable"
# Proving the Central Limit Theorem

Motivating problem: Deriving conclusions from rarely occurring events, such as multiple no-hitters by the same pitcher. Specifically, how many no-hitters must a pitcher toss before one can conclude from that evidence alone that he is a great pitcher?

===Partial Differential Equations===
If you take a uniform circular metal disk and hold the temperatures at the periphery to some fixed pattern (say, lighting fires at some places and applying ice at others), and give it plenty of time to reach equilibrium, can you calculate the final temperature at every point inside? What does this have to do with Fourier series? (Hint: It has '''everything''' to do with Fourier series. This is the problem that Joseph Fourier was studying when he invented the series.)

=== Other fields ===
# Logic: still need a good problem
# Number theory: connected to the other fields above in many ways. Prime number theorem?
# Set theory: some discussion of axioms, maybe talk about AoC.
# applied mathematics, emphasizing the solution of partial differential equations which are essential to mechanical engineering

=== Related fields ===
Many other subjects are often considered parts of mathematics as well. Depending on specific undergraduate programs, a math major may or may not be required to take courses in these areas, but many of the same ideas are used in these subjects as in the others.
# Computer science: something about algorithmic complexity: maybe the fact that primality testing may be done in polynomial time?
# Computer science: How can Fourier transforms be used to multiply enormous integers much faster than normal methods?
...

=== Interplay ===
None of these fields exists in a vacuum, and there is rich interplay between them. If you insert "algebraic" or "differential" before the name of just about any branch of math, you get a more specialized, but important field. Motivate some of these connections:
# Algebra+topology: discussion of fundamental group.
# Analysis+topology: discuss conservative fields, and hint at de Rham cohomology without actually saying those words.
# Algebra+analysis: find a good simple example of a Lie group showing up in the study of some differential equations.

== So What? ==
After finishing a major in mathematics, most people don't keep working in pure math. But the ways of thinking and skills that the study of mathematics provide make available a wide range of career opportunities.

Specifically, mathematicians seeking to remain connected to their field pursue career opportunities in:
*actuary or insurance work
*defense-related work
*market trading analysis for investment banks
*mathematical modeling

Less-related fields that are also of some interest to mathematicians are:
*computer programming
*accounting
*K-12 teaching

Some mathematicians enter entirely unrelated fields. Math majors have the highest average scores of students in any field on the LSAT and GMAT, the tests required for entrance into law school and business school <ref>http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1430654</ref>: the skills acquired in studying mathematics in invaluable in the logic section of the LSAT and for subsequent careers in law.

== Further Reading ==
Numerous expository books cover the topics mentioned on this page, along with many others, in a very accessible way. Below are a few recommended books whose content is comparable to that of this article.
# ''Mathematics: The New Golden Age'', by Keith Devlin. Accessible discussions of many important ideas.
# ''Professor Stewart's Cabinet of Mathematical Curiosities'', by Ian Stewart. A similar book covering the exciting side of mathematics and requiring little background.
# ''Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics'', by John Derbyshire. Focuses on the famous [[Riemann hypothesis]] and related material.
# ''Hexaflexagons, Probability Paradoxes, and the Tower of Hanoi: Martin Gardner's First Book of Mathematical Puzzles and Games''. A collection of articles by one of mathematics' foremost expositors.
[[Category:Mathematics]]
[[Category:Higher Education]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

Talk:Majoring in Mathematics

2012-02-10T04:29:54Z

SusanP: sig

This is an extremely rough outline for this new article. I will continue to expand it over the next few weeks based on feedback about the appropriateness of the problems and other suggestions for improvements. Please let me know what you think! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:12, 4 October 2009 (EDT)
::well I was a math major in college many years ago (before Rubic's cube!) Suggest adding statistics. [[User:RJJensen|RJJensen]] 23:17, 4 October 2009 (EDT)
:::Ah, good idea. At my undergrad school mathematics and statistics were separate programs, but I guess this isn't typical. I'll throw in a new section. I'm not much for statistics -- can anyone suggest some good problems? --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:20, 4 October 2009 (EDT)

Tremendous work, Mark. I'll try to add something for probability or statistics, which I studied.--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 23:22, 4 October 2009 (EDT)
:Great, thanks. These are subjects in which I'm inexpert. Now I'm inclined to move Probability/Statistics to a "field" along with algebra, analysis, etc. Please add a nice problem or theorem if you have any in mind! --[[User:MarkGall|MarkGall]] 23:24, 4 October 2009 (EDT)

Terrific analysis on what college mathematics is not. That should be required reading for many seeking to major in math!--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 22:30, 15 October 2009 (EDT)

Why is there no mention of the bible or theology in this article? It should be mentioned, as it is in [[Axiom_of_Infinity]], that the notion of an infinite set is somewhat blasphemous. [[User:Tomkup32|Tomkup32]] 10:58, 9 December 2009 (EST)

For Bezout's theorem, you have some inaccurate claims: the line x+y=0 and x+y=1 never interset. We need to move to projective space for the degree of the intersection to be exactly mn.

== Liberal bias ==

How can there be liberal bias in math? Does saying 1+1 = 2 have a motive?[[User:SusanP|SusanP]] 23:29, 9 February 2012 (EST)

Talk:Majoring in Mathematics

2012-02-10T04:29:34Z

SusanP: /* Liberal bias */ new section

Ancient astronaut theory

2012-02-10T04:24:53Z

SusanP: cat

'''Ancient astronaut theory''' is the theory that life on Earth was [[Intelligent design|intelligently designed]] and put here by an [[Extraterrestrial life|extraterrestrial]] visitor. The theory is generally given little credit and there is no definitive evidence, however its proponents point to ancient texts, sculptures and paintings, some of which depict alient-like life forms visiting and interacting with humans.

This theory is the base of the [[Raelism|Raëlian Church]].

==External Links==
*[http://creation.com/g-forces-space-travel-problem G-forces space travel problem]

[[Category:Theories | Psuedoscience]]

Talk:Vancouver

2012-02-10T04:23:18Z

SusanP:

== Copy-pasted ==
From the section '''History''' to '''Religion in Vancouver''' is taken from the Wikipedia's "Vancouver" section '''Demographics''' and the 2nd paragraph of the article. Is it okay to leave it like this? 
The religion data is out-dated. There are Census results for 2006. [[User:JonG|~ ]][[User_talk:JonG|JonG]][[Special:Contributions/JonG| ~]] 15:41, 23 December 2011 (EST)

:JonM suggests that the content on Wikipedia was copied from "the website of vancouver" but it's not even a month since this was added and the link to the Vancouver website doesn't seem to work and I can't find the content anywhere on the website. Even if this was on the Vancouver website, what would be the copyright situation there? It doesn't look like it's in the public domain. [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 15:16, 15 January 2012 (EST)
::It's a civic website, I think it's fine. If not, revert me.[[User:JonM|JonM]] 15:26, 15 January 2012 (EST)
:::Well I wasn't sure exactly since I couldn't find the precise source to be sure about the copyright situation. [[User:Adambro|Adambro]] 15:28, 15 January 2012 (EST)
::::K, revert me. I'll write up something to replace it when I have the time... :)[[User:JonM|JonM]] 15:47, 15 January 2012 (EST)
:Since no on seems to have gotten to it, i suppose its good, plagiarizing and all?[[User:SusanP|SusanP]] 23:23, 9 February 2012 (EST)

Conservapedia proven right

2012-02-10T04:20:21Z

SusanP: Remove name calling

'''''Conservapedia''''' content has often been proven right on topics ranging from science to politics to the World Cup, even with respect to statements that some [[liberals]] have ridiculed. Examples include:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Date of ''Conservapedia'' statement
!''Conservapedia'' statement
![[liberal]] response
!Result
!Date of Result
|-
|Dec. 26, 2006
|The [[Nobel Prize]] "selection process has become political, as it was not given to Ronald Reagan or Pope John Paul II or to anyone who criticizes the [[theory of evolution]]. The Nobel Prizes for literature and peace are mostly given to outspoken [[liberal]]s, such as Jimmy Carter."<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Nobel_Prize&oldid=7393</ref>
|[[Liberal denial]] insists that the Nobel Prize has integrity, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
|The Nobel Peace Prize was absurdly awarded to [[Barack Obama]] despite a lack of any beneficial, meaningful achievement, and even Obama supporters reacted with "shock" and "a belief that the award was premature, a disservice and a potential liability."<ref>http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/10/09/a_weighty_prize.html</ref>
|October 2009
|-
|Aug. 18, 2007
|Because [[Jon Stewart]]'s movies "almost always do very badly (critically and financially) people say that there is a "Jon Stewart Curse" that he brings to all his movies." <ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Jon_Stewart&oldid=271190</ref>
|His audience of [[public school]] kids are clueless.
|His subsequent hosting of the Oscars in 2008 set the modern record for its smallest number of viewers, and he has not starred in a movie since Conservapedia's observation in 2007.
|Feb. 24, 2008
|-
|2007-2011
|Conservapedia repeatedly calls [[Barack Obama]] and [[Michelle Obama]] [[liberal elite|liberal elitists]] before the 2008 election and in 2009. See also: [[Barack Obama and liberal elitism]] and [[Barack Obama and uncharitableness]] and [[Michelle Obama and liberal elitism]]
|Many liberals have a [[Messiah]] complex about Barack Obama and even comparisons to the caring and suffering servant Messiah [[Jesus Christ]] are made. The liberal press gives Obama a free pass on his uncharitable past and his liberal elitism.
|During a time of severe economic problems in the United States and the world, Barack Obama plays game after game of golf and takes lavish vacations and Michelle Obama goes on expensive shopping sprees. The liberal press and the liberal establishment are increasingly souring on Obama and even calling him lazy and incompetent.
|2008-2011
|-
|2007-2011
|Conservapedia repeatedly declares [[atheism]] is corrupt and wrongheaded and that the future of atheism does not look promising. See: [[Atheism]] and [http://conservapedia.com/Category:Atheism Conservapedia atheism articles]
||Many atheists chaffe under the constructive criticism and engage in a lot of kvetching and whining rather than repent and become [[Christianity|Christians]] (see: [[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]).
|In August of 2011, the American Spectator reports that [[Global atheism]] is declining and [[global Christianity]] is experiencing explosive growth.<ref>[http://spectator.org/archives/2011/02/28/thriving-christianity Thriving Christianity]</ref>
|2011
|-
|2007-2011
|Conservapedia repeatedly declares since its early beginnings that atheist community is filled with insincere, corrupt and cowardly individuals. See: [[Atheism]] and [http://conservapedia.com/Category:Atheism Conservapedia atheism articles] In addition, in 2010 Conservapedia [[Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?|creates a comedy/satire]] concerning the cowardice of [[Richard Dawkins]] (see: [[Atheism and cowardice]]). In July of 2010, a Conservapedia creates a series of comedies/[[satire]]s focusing on the follies of atheism and [[evolutionism]] (see: [[Essay:Comedy and satires concerning atheism and evolution]]).
||Many atheists chaffe under the constructive criticism and satires and engage in a lot of kvetching and whining rather than repent and become [[Christianity|Christians]] (see: [[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]).
|In 2010, the Global atheist convention dodges a debate with [[Creation Ministries International]]. In 2011, [[Richard Dawkins]] is accused of cowardice in the press and widely criticized in other venues for his refusal to debate Christian apologists [[William Lane Craig]]. [[PZ Myers]] repeatedly refuses to debate [[Vox Day]] in 2011. In 2011, in a foul mouthed diatribe [[Penn Jillette]] makes a lame excuse on why he won't debate a Conservapedian which is shown to be a farce. Jillette also dodges a debate the popular YouTube video creator [[Shockofgod]] and with the Christian apologist [[Sye Ten Bruggencate|Sye Ten Bruggencate]]. For more information please see: [[Atheism and cowardice]]
|2010-2011
|-
|2007-2011
|Conservapedia repeatedly says its web traffic prospects look bright.
|Liberals, particularly atheists and [[evolution]]ists, repeatedly proclaim the imminent death of Conservapedia and their predictions repeatedly end in failure.
|According to the web traffic companies Alexa, Compete and Quantcast Conservapedia's web traffic is healthy and has continues to grow. Conservapedia creates the essay [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder|Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]] which mocks atheists and evolutionists false predictions and obsessiveness.
|2007 to 2011
|-
|2007
|In 2007, Conservapedia creates its [[Homosexuality in animals myth]] article.
|Liberals tout a supposed "gay [[penguin]]" in a California zoo.<ref>http://americansfortruth.com/2009/07/15/gay-penguin-flies-straight/</ref> Liberals rabidly deny someone can be an [[ex-homosexuals|ex-homosexual]]. Ex-homosexual is faced with a $10,000 fine, spends $7,000 in legal fees, and is forced to go to pro-homosexuality classes by a liberal judge who claimed he engaged in a aggressive behavior in a discussion with homosexual man (during his discussion the ex-homosexual man was holding a baby).<ref>http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56702</ref>
|In 2010, the alleged gay penguin in a California zoo starts a romance with lady penguin and abandons his supposed male penguin lover. The homosexual activist [[Wayne Besen]] claims the penguin is living in denial and not an [[ex-homosexuals|ex-homosexual]] male penguin. (see: [[Homosexuality in animals myth]]).<ref>http://americansfortruth.com/2009/07/15/gay-penguin-flies-straight/</ref>
|2010
|-
|2008-2010
|Beginning in March of 2008, Conservapedia begins chronicling higher education moral corruption via its [[Professor values]] article. Starting in 2010, Conservapedia repeatedly warns students about picking their college majors on its main page. See: [[Worst college majors]] Conservapedia also cites [[Gerald Celente]] about future protests in Europe/Europe and cites Celente concerning useless college majors which needlessly rack up debts in young people. Conservapedia warns about a future "higher educational bubble".<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/archive91</ref>
|Liberal colleges and liberal press do not give enough attention to the issue of picking a college major. Nor does the liberal press sufficiently warn about future protests. Liberal press does not give adequate coverage to the issue of higher education moral corruption. Liberal press and liberal academia do not sufficiently warn about the poor education universities and colleges are often providing.
|In January of 2011, it is reported that a study shows that a very large percentage of college students are not developing higher thinking skills.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/01/18/106949/study-many-college-students-not.html</ref> The trend of liberal colleges closing their doors continues.<ref>http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2009/07/09/baldwin</ref><ref>http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/5312/losing_liberal_arts/</ref>

[[Occupy Wall Street]] and other Occupy protests happen in the United States and in Europe in 2011 and young people are very prevalent in the protests. Some protests turn violent and engage in property destruction. In November of 2011, the Daily Mail reports concerning the Occupy Wall Street movement and the trash/garbage associated with it: "If this is the product of our liberal arts colleges, why continue their tax exemptions and tax support? Universities are supposed to produce intelligent people who will make a positive contribution to society. Not these pigs".<ref>http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/46288</ref> In 2011, it is reported that Occupy movements are littering the streets.<ref>http://www.freestaterevolution.com/?p=1967</ref>

Young Occupy Wall Street protestors are caught on film mindlessly doing a pro-[[bestiality]] chant (see: [[Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant]]).
|The Occupy movements of 2011 are still prevalent in the world and the unemployment levels of young people remain high.
|-
|Dec. 22, 2008
|the theory of [[man-made global warming]] is not verified science, and there is no consensus<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Global_warming&oldid=592227</ref>
|"The science is settled" that rapid [[global warming]] is somehow occurring.
|Frigid temperatures, October blizzards, and rejection of the theory by the American public; liberals try to change the terminology to "[[climate change]]."
|2011
|-
|August 2009 to 2011
|Conservapedia indicates that [[Ben Bernanke]]'s investment portfolio dropped in value in 2008.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/Previous_Conservapedia_Breaking_News/Archives/August_2009</ref> In addition, Conservapedia declares, "Given the abysmal economic policy of Bernanke and the [[Obama administration]], Bernanke probably should invest in gold."<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/Previous_Conservapedia_Breaking_News/Archives/August_2009</ref> During the period of 2010-2011, Conservapedia cited the investor Jim Rogers who repeatedly suggests that people invest in commodites.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&redirs=0&search=%22Jim+rogers%22&fulltext=Search&ns0=1</ref><ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLL9YdR2y2g Jim Rogers : Missing out on Commodities?]</ref>
|Liberals call Conservapedians "gold bugs"
|As of November 2011, the price of gold has gone up dramatically. The price has gone from about $950 an ounce to about $1,700 an ounce.<ref>http://www.kitco.com/charts/popup/au1825nyb.html</ref>
Price of gold continues to have an overall upward trend. In August of 2011, the ''[[Financial Times]]'' has an article entitled "Gold remains world's most powerful trend".<ref>[http://video.ft.com/v/1135911356001/Gold-remains-world-s-most-powerful-trend Gold remains world's most powerful trend]</ref> The Wall Street Journal reports in 2011 that "Companies Stock Up as Commodities Prices Rise".<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704775604576120533736097682.html</ref> In November of 2011, Unilever warns about rising commodity prices.<ref>http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/unilever-warns-about-rising-commodity-prices-6256894.html</ref>
|August of 2009 to 2011
|-
|September 2009
|Conservapedia mentions that some Americans are turning to self-employment during the economic downturn as jobs are difficult to come by. In addition, Conservapedia mentions developing multiple streams of income in case the economy goes into a depression and many people lose their jobs. Conservapedia also gives resources and suggestions for low cost businesses.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/Previous_Conservapedia_Breaking_News/Archives/September_2009</ref>
|The liberal "graduate student at a [[sociology]] department somewhere in the United States" at the Total Drek blog seems to shiver in horror at the hard work involved. In addition, he appears to want people to have a defeatist cry in their beer attitude instead of having a proactive and creative can do attitude.<ref>[http://totaldrek.blogspot.com/2009/09/conservapedia-for-laughs-or-facepalms.html Conservapedia: For laughs or facepalms - Tuesday, September 08, 2009]</ref> In 2011, Conservapedia indicates that a sociology major is one of the [[worst college majors]] to have.
|[[Barack Obama]]'s [[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009|"stimulus" package]] fails. Many Americans lose their jobs and have their unemployment benefits run out. In 2011, Fox News reports that most unemployed no longer receive unemployment benefits.<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/05/most-us-unemployed-no-longer-receive-benefits/</ref> Homelessness increases and "[[Obamaville]]s" spring up.<ref>http://www.thebradentontimes.com/news/2011/11/09/community/national_hunger_and_homelessness_awareness_week_puts_spotlight_on_increasing_need/</ref> Unemployment in the United States and many other countries remains high.<ref>http://www.bls.gov/fls/intl_unemployment_rates_monthly.htm</ref><ref>http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Unemployment_statistics</ref> In 2011, Cafe Press is selling unemployed sociology major bumper stickers.<ref>http://www.cafepress.com/+unemployed_sociology_major_bumper_sticker,25387924</ref>
|World economy continues to skate on thin ice and the Eurozone is experiencing significant economic problems.
|-
|Nov. 28, 2009
|[[Counterexamples to Relativity]]: "the theory fails"
|Clueless liberals insisted the theory must be true regardless of counterexamples
|The basic assumption of the theory -- that nothing can go faster than the speed of light -- is disproved repeatedly by an experiment.
|November 2011
|-
|mid-June 2010
|[[Atheistic]] [[Britain]] would embarrass itself in the [[World Cup]]<ref>News archives for June 2010.</ref>
|[[Liberal denial]] shouts down any observation of the correlation between atheism and underachievement
|"England's performance at South Africa 2010 was officially their worst at a World Cup finals, according to Fifa."<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2010/8814195.stm</ref>
|July 2010
|-
|June 30, 2010
|In an [[Letter to Douglas Moo|open letter to a leader]] of a new revision to the [[NIV]] [[Bible]], ''Conservapedia'' expressed "concern that your Committee might produce a liberal translation that distorts and conceals references to the unborn child in appeasement of the pro-abortion position."
|No response to the letter, and a prior expression of ridicule of the [[Conservapedia Bible Project]] before that.
|The new version [[Feminist Bible|distorts and conceals numerous references]] to the unborn child in the Bible, apparently to appease the pro-abortion position.
|Nov. 1, 2010<ref>http://thechurchofjesuschrist.us/2010/10/new-niv-text-to-be-made-available-online-november-1/ (announcing availability of online version)</ref>
|-
|Sept. 19, 2010
|[[Newt Gingrich]] is the most [[Presidential Election 2012|likely to win the Republican nomination for President]]<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Presidential_Election_2012&oldid=819261</ref>
|Liberals, who have long opposed Gingrich, wrote him off as a candidate in mid-2011
|Newt leads in national polls and several key primary states
|November 2011
|-
|Feb. 28, 2011
|Predicted that [[Sarah Palin]] will not be the [[Republican]] nominee for president, after observing how [[Facebook]] (which personified her political approach) lost the [[Academy Award]] to ''The King's Speech''.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Presidential_Election_2012&oldid=852880</ref>
|The [[lamestream media]] continued to promote Palin as a leading contender for more than six months
|Palin announced she will not be a candidate for the nomination
|October 2011
|-
|August 2011
|In the late summer of 2011, a Conservapedian was very optimistic on [[Creation Ministries International]]'s [[Question evolution! campaign]] and continues to be very optimistic.
|Atheists and evolutionists whine about the campaign plus a YouTube atheist and/or evolutionist creates a fairly popular yet ultimately ineffective video which is easily refuted. See: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRz0ORtoIRg&feature=BFa&list=PL12B8A2B1F72664EC&lf=plpp_play_all 15 Questions Evolutionists STILL can't answer!]
|The website traffic of [[Creation Ministries International]] (CMI) sees significant growth post August 2011 (see: [[Essay: Grinding up American atheism into a fine pulp|CMI web traffic growth]]). Atheists and evolutionists have yet to adequately answer the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions that satisfactorily evolutionists cannot answer] which is the focus of the [[Question evolution! campaign]]. Global atheism continues to fall in the number of its adherents.
|Fall of 2011
|-
|July 2, 2011
|[[Chris Christie]] will endorse [[Mitt Romney]] for president
|The [[lamestream media]] insisted that Christie was a contender himself
|Chris Christie made a special endorsement of Mitt Romney for president
|Oct. 11, 2011
|-
|Sept. 20, 2011
|Large earthquakes are increasing in frequency.<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Counterexamples_to_an_Old_Earth&oldid=918691</ref>
|[[Liberal denial]] because this illustrates a [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth|Counterexample to an Old Earth]].
|Earthquakes then repeatedly strike, causing unnecessary deaths and public outrage at the lack of precautionary measures to fortify or evacuate buildings.
|October and November 2011
|-
|Jan. 3, 2012
|''Conservapedia'' declared [[Rick Santorum]] the winner of the [[Iowa Caucuses]] before all the results were in, and despite polling suggesting he would only attain third place
|For weeks the [[lamestream media]] insisted that [[Mitt Romney]] won
|Eventually the lamestream media admitted that Rick Santorum was the winner
|late January 2012
|-
|Feb. 7, 2012
|''Conservapedia'' declared [[Rick Santorum]] the winner of the [[Colorado]] primary relatively early in the evening, long before all the results were in, and despite Romney later surpassing Santorum during part of the night
|Liberals delayed for hours before admitting that Santorum would win
|Eventually the lamestream media admitted that Rick Santorum was the winner
|early February 2012
|-
|}

== References ==

<references/>
[[Category:Conservapedia]]

Conservapedia proven right

2012-02-10T04:20:13Z

SusanP: Remove name calling

'''''Conservapedia''''' content has often been proven right on topics ranging from science to politics to the World Cup, even with respect to statements that some [[liberals]] have ridiculed. Examples include:

{| class="wikitable"
|-
!Date of ''Conservapedia'' statement
!''Conservapedia'' statement
![[liberal]] claptrap in response
!Result
!Date of Result
|-
|Dec. 26, 2006
|The [[Nobel Prize]] "selection process has become political, as it was not given to Ronald Reagan or Pope John Paul II or to anyone who criticizes the [[theory of evolution]]. The Nobel Prizes for literature and peace are mostly given to outspoken [[liberal]]s, such as Jimmy Carter."<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Nobel_Prize&oldid=7393</ref>
|[[Liberal denial]] insists that the Nobel Prize has integrity, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
|The Nobel Peace Prize was absurdly awarded to [[Barack Obama]] despite a lack of any beneficial, meaningful achievement, and even Obama supporters reacted with "shock" and "a belief that the award was premature, a disservice and a potential liability."<ref>http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2009/10/09/a_weighty_prize.html</ref>
|October 2009
|-
|Aug. 18, 2007
|Because [[Jon Stewart]]'s movies "almost always do very badly (critically and financially) people say that there is a "Jon Stewart Curse" that he brings to all his movies." <ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Jon_Stewart&oldid=271190</ref>
|His audience of [[public school]] kids are clueless.
|His subsequent hosting of the Oscars in 2008 set the modern record for its smallest number of viewers, and he has not starred in a movie since Conservapedia's observation in 2007.
|Feb. 24, 2008
|-
|2007-2011
|Conservapedia repeatedly calls [[Barack Obama]] and [[Michelle Obama]] [[liberal elite|liberal elitists]] before the 2008 election and in 2009. See also: [[Barack Obama and liberal elitism]] and [[Barack Obama and uncharitableness]] and [[Michelle Obama and liberal elitism]]
|Many liberals have a [[Messiah]] complex about Barack Obama and even comparisons to the caring and suffering servant Messiah [[Jesus Christ]] are made. The liberal press gives Obama a free pass on his uncharitable past and his liberal elitism.
|During a time of severe economic problems in the United States and the world, Barack Obama plays game after game of golf and takes lavish vacations and Michelle Obama goes on expensive shopping sprees. The liberal press and the liberal establishment are increasingly souring on Obama and even calling him lazy and incompetent.
|2008-2011
|-
|2007-2011
|Conservapedia repeatedly declares [[atheism]] is corrupt and wrongheaded and that the future of atheism does not look promising. See: [[Atheism]] and [http://conservapedia.com/Category:Atheism Conservapedia atheism articles]
||Many atheists chaffe under the constructive criticism and engage in a lot of kvetching and whining rather than repent and become [[Christianity|Christians]] (see: [[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]).
|In August of 2011, the American Spectator reports that [[Global atheism]] is declining and [[global Christianity]] is experiencing explosive growth.<ref>[http://spectator.org/archives/2011/02/28/thriving-christianity Thriving Christianity]</ref>
|2011
|-
|2007-2011
|Conservapedia repeatedly declares since its early beginnings that atheist community is filled with insincere, corrupt and cowardly individuals. See: [[Atheism]] and [http://conservapedia.com/Category:Atheism Conservapedia atheism articles] In addition, in 2010 Conservapedia [[Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?|creates a comedy/satire]] concerning the cowardice of [[Richard Dawkins]] (see: [[Atheism and cowardice]]). In July of 2010, a Conservapedia creates a series of comedies/[[satire]]s focusing on the follies of atheism and [[evolutionism]] (see: [[Essay:Comedy and satires concerning atheism and evolution]]).
||Many atheists chaffe under the constructive criticism and satires and engage in a lot of kvetching and whining rather than repent and become [[Christianity|Christians]] (see: [[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]).
|In 2010, the Global atheist convention dodges a debate with [[Creation Ministries International]]. In 2011, [[Richard Dawkins]] is accused of cowardice in the press and widely criticized in other venues for his refusal to debate Christian apologists [[William Lane Craig]]. [[PZ Myers]] repeatedly refuses to debate [[Vox Day]] in 2011. In 2011, in a foul mouthed diatribe [[Penn Jillette]] makes a lame excuse on why he won't debate a Conservapedian which is shown to be a farce. Jillette also dodges a debate the popular YouTube video creator [[Shockofgod]] and with the Christian apologist [[Sye Ten Bruggencate|Sye Ten Bruggencate]]. For more information please see: [[Atheism and cowardice]]
|2010-2011
|-
|2007-2011
|Conservapedia repeatedly says its web traffic prospects look bright.
|Liberals, particularly atheists and [[evolution]]ists, repeatedly proclaim the imminent death of Conservapedia and their predictions repeatedly end in failure.
|According to the web traffic companies Alexa, Compete and Quantcast Conservapedia's web traffic is healthy and has continues to grow. Conservapedia creates the essay [[Essay: Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder|Conservapedia obsessive compulsive disorder]] which mocks atheists and evolutionists false predictions and obsessiveness.
|2007 to 2011
|-
|2007
|In 2007, Conservapedia creates its [[Homosexuality in animals myth]] article.
|Liberals tout a supposed "gay [[penguin]]" in a California zoo.<ref>http://americansfortruth.com/2009/07/15/gay-penguin-flies-straight/</ref> Liberals rabidly deny someone can be an [[ex-homosexuals|ex-homosexual]]. Ex-homosexual is faced with a $10,000 fine, spends $7,000 in legal fees, and is forced to go to pro-homosexuality classes by a liberal judge who claimed he engaged in a aggressive behavior in a discussion with homosexual man (during his discussion the ex-homosexual man was holding a baby).<ref>http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56702</ref>
|In 2010, the alleged gay penguin in a California zoo starts a romance with lady penguin and abandons his supposed male penguin lover. The homosexual activist [[Wayne Besen]] claims the penguin is living in denial and not an [[ex-homosexuals|ex-homosexual]] male penguin. (see: [[Homosexuality in animals myth]]).<ref>http://americansfortruth.com/2009/07/15/gay-penguin-flies-straight/</ref>
|2010
|-
|2008-2010
|Beginning in March of 2008, Conservapedia begins chronicling higher education moral corruption via its [[Professor values]] article. Starting in 2010, Conservapedia repeatedly warns students about picking their college majors on its main page. See: [[Worst college majors]] Conservapedia also cites [[Gerald Celente]] about future protests in Europe/Europe and cites Celente concerning useless college majors which needlessly rack up debts in young people. Conservapedia warns about a future "higher educational bubble".<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/archive91</ref>
|Liberal colleges and liberal press do not give enough attention to the issue of picking a college major. Nor does the liberal press sufficiently warn about future protests. Liberal press does not give adequate coverage to the issue of higher education moral corruption. Liberal press and liberal academia do not sufficiently warn about the poor education universities and colleges are often providing.
|In January of 2011, it is reported that a study shows that a very large percentage of college students are not developing higher thinking skills.<ref>http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2011/01/18/106949/study-many-college-students-not.html</ref> The trend of liberal colleges closing their doors continues.<ref>http://www.insidehighered.com/views/2009/07/09/baldwin</ref><ref>http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/5312/losing_liberal_arts/</ref>

[[Occupy Wall Street]] and other Occupy protests happen in the United States and in Europe in 2011 and young people are very prevalent in the protests. Some protests turn violent and engage in property destruction. In November of 2011, the Daily Mail reports concerning the Occupy Wall Street movement and the trash/garbage associated with it: "If this is the product of our liberal arts colleges, why continue their tax exemptions and tax support? Universities are supposed to produce intelligent people who will make a positive contribution to society. Not these pigs".<ref>http://blogs.dailymail.com/donsurber/archives/46288</ref> In 2011, it is reported that Occupy movements are littering the streets.<ref>http://www.freestaterevolution.com/?p=1967</ref>

Young Occupy Wall Street protestors are caught on film mindlessly doing a pro-[[bestiality]] chant (see: [[Occupy Wall Street and bestiality chant]]).
|The Occupy movements of 2011 are still prevalent in the world and the unemployment levels of young people remain high.
|-
|Dec. 22, 2008
|the theory of [[man-made global warming]] is not verified science, and there is no consensus<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Global_warming&oldid=592227</ref>
|"The science is settled" that rapid [[global warming]] is somehow occurring.
|Frigid temperatures, October blizzards, and rejection of the theory by the American public; liberals try to change the terminology to "[[climate change]]."
|2011
|-
|August 2009 to 2011
|Conservapedia indicates that [[Ben Bernanke]]'s investment portfolio dropped in value in 2008.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/Previous_Conservapedia_Breaking_News/Archives/August_2009</ref> In addition, Conservapedia declares, "Given the abysmal economic policy of Bernanke and the [[Obama administration]], Bernanke probably should invest in gold."<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/Previous_Conservapedia_Breaking_News/Archives/August_2009</ref> During the period of 2010-2011, Conservapedia cited the investor Jim Rogers who repeatedly suggests that people invest in commodites.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&redirs=0&search=%22Jim+rogers%22&fulltext=Search&ns0=1</ref><ref>[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLL9YdR2y2g Jim Rogers : Missing out on Commodities?]</ref>
|Liberals call Conservapedians "gold bugs"
|As of November 2011, the price of gold has gone up dramatically. The price has gone from about $950 an ounce to about $1,700 an ounce.<ref>http://www.kitco.com/charts/popup/au1825nyb.html</ref>
Price of gold continues to have an overall upward trend. In August of 2011, the ''[[Financial Times]]'' has an article entitled "Gold remains world's most powerful trend".<ref>[http://video.ft.com/v/1135911356001/Gold-remains-world-s-most-powerful-trend Gold remains world's most powerful trend]</ref> The Wall Street Journal reports in 2011 that "Companies Stock Up as Commodities Prices Rise".<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704775604576120533736097682.html</ref> In November of 2011, Unilever warns about rising commodity prices.<ref>http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/unilever-warns-about-rising-commodity-prices-6256894.html</ref>
|August of 2009 to 2011
|-
|September 2009
|Conservapedia mentions that some Americans are turning to self-employment during the economic downturn as jobs are difficult to come by. In addition, Conservapedia mentions developing multiple streams of income in case the economy goes into a depression and many people lose their jobs. Conservapedia also gives resources and suggestions for low cost businesses.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/Main_Page/Previous_Conservapedia_Breaking_News/Archives/September_2009</ref>
|The liberal "graduate student at a [[sociology]] department somewhere in the United States" at the Total Drek blog seems to shiver in horror at the hard work involved. In addition, he appears to want people to have a defeatist cry in their beer attitude instead of having a proactive and creative can do attitude.<ref>[http://totaldrek.blogspot.com/2009/09/conservapedia-for-laughs-or-facepalms.html Conservapedia: For laughs or facepalms - Tuesday, September 08, 2009]</ref> In 2011, Conservapedia indicates that a sociology major is one of the [[worst college majors]] to have.
|[[Barack Obama]]'s [[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009|"stimulus" package]] fails. Many Americans lose their jobs and have their unemployment benefits run out. In 2011, Fox News reports that most unemployed no longer receive unemployment benefits.<ref>http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/11/05/most-us-unemployed-no-longer-receive-benefits/</ref> Homelessness increases and "[[Obamaville]]s" spring up.<ref>http://www.thebradentontimes.com/news/2011/11/09/community/national_hunger_and_homelessness_awareness_week_puts_spotlight_on_increasing_need/</ref> Unemployment in the United States and many other countries remains high.<ref>http://www.bls.gov/fls/intl_unemployment_rates_monthly.htm</ref><ref>http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Unemployment_statistics</ref> In 2011, Cafe Press is selling unemployed sociology major bumper stickers.<ref>http://www.cafepress.com/+unemployed_sociology_major_bumper_sticker,25387924</ref>
|World economy continues to skate on thin ice and the Eurozone is experiencing significant economic problems.
|-
|Nov. 28, 2009
|[[Counterexamples to Relativity]]: "the theory fails"
|Clueless liberals insisted the theory must be true regardless of counterexamples
|The basic assumption of the theory -- that nothing can go faster than the speed of light -- is disproved repeatedly by an experiment.
|November 2011
|-
|mid-June 2010
|[[Atheistic]] [[Britain]] would embarrass itself in the [[World Cup]]<ref>News archives for June 2010.</ref>
|[[Liberal denial]] shouts down any observation of the correlation between atheism and underachievement
|"England's performance at South Africa 2010 was officially their worst at a World Cup finals, according to Fifa."<ref>http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/world_cup_2010/8814195.stm</ref>
|July 2010
|-
|June 30, 2010
|In an [[Letter to Douglas Moo|open letter to a leader]] of a new revision to the [[NIV]] [[Bible]], ''Conservapedia'' expressed "concern that your Committee might produce a liberal translation that distorts and conceals references to the unborn child in appeasement of the pro-abortion position."
|No response to the letter, and a prior expression of ridicule of the [[Conservapedia Bible Project]] before that.
|The new version [[Feminist Bible|distorts and conceals numerous references]] to the unborn child in the Bible, apparently to appease the pro-abortion position.
|Nov. 1, 2010<ref>http://thechurchofjesuschrist.us/2010/10/new-niv-text-to-be-made-available-online-november-1/ (announcing availability of online version)</ref>
|-
|Sept. 19, 2010
|[[Newt Gingrich]] is the most [[Presidential Election 2012|likely to win the Republican nomination for President]]<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Presidential_Election_2012&oldid=819261</ref>
|Liberals, who have long opposed Gingrich, wrote him off as a candidate in mid-2011
|Newt leads in national polls and several key primary states
|November 2011
|-
|Feb. 28, 2011
|Predicted that [[Sarah Palin]] will not be the [[Republican]] nominee for president, after observing how [[Facebook]] (which personified her political approach) lost the [[Academy Award]] to ''The King's Speech''.<ref>http://conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Presidential_Election_2012&oldid=852880</ref>
|The [[lamestream media]] continued to promote Palin as a leading contender for more than six months
|Palin announced she will not be a candidate for the nomination
|October 2011
|-
|August 2011
|In the late summer of 2011, a Conservapedian was very optimistic on [[Creation Ministries International]]'s [[Question evolution! campaign]] and continues to be very optimistic.
|Atheists and evolutionists whine about the campaign plus a YouTube atheist and/or evolutionist creates a fairly popular yet ultimately ineffective video which is easily refuted. See: [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sRz0ORtoIRg&feature=BFa&list=PL12B8A2B1F72664EC&lf=plpp_play_all 15 Questions Evolutionists STILL can't answer!]
|The website traffic of [[Creation Ministries International]] (CMI) sees significant growth post August 2011 (see: [[Essay: Grinding up American atheism into a fine pulp|CMI web traffic growth]]). Atheists and evolutionists have yet to adequately answer the [http://creation.com/15-questions 15 questions that satisfactorily evolutionists cannot answer] which is the focus of the [[Question evolution! campaign]]. Global atheism continues to fall in the number of its adherents.
|Fall of 2011
|-
|July 2, 2011
|[[Chris Christie]] will endorse [[Mitt Romney]] for president
|The [[lamestream media]] insisted that Christie was a contender himself
|Chris Christie made a special endorsement of Mitt Romney for president
|Oct. 11, 2011
|-
|Sept. 20, 2011
|Large earthquakes are increasing in frequency.<ref>http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Counterexamples_to_an_Old_Earth&oldid=918691</ref>
|[[Liberal denial]] because this illustrates a [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth|Counterexample to an Old Earth]].
|Earthquakes then repeatedly strike, causing unnecessary deaths and public outrage at the lack of precautionary measures to fortify or evacuate buildings.
|October and November 2011
|-
|Jan. 3, 2012
|''Conservapedia'' declared [[Rick Santorum]] the winner of the [[Iowa Caucuses]] before all the results were in, and despite polling suggesting he would only attain third place
|For weeks the [[lamestream media]] insisted that [[Mitt Romney]] won
|Eventually the lamestream media admitted that Rick Santorum was the winner
|late January 2012
|-
|Feb. 7, 2012
|''Conservapedia'' declared [[Rick Santorum]] the winner of the [[Colorado]] primary relatively early in the evening, long before all the results were in, and despite Romney later surpassing Santorum during part of the night
|Liberals delayed for hours before admitting that Santorum would win
|Eventually the lamestream media admitted that Rick Santorum was the winner
|early February 2012
|-
|}

== References ==

<references/>
[[Category:Conservapedia]]

Counterexamples to Relativity

2012-01-25T22:32:34Z

SusanP: Also added the orbital radius retreating

The [[theory of relativity]] is a mathematical system that allows no exceptions. It is heavily promoted by [[liberals]] who like its encouragement of [[moral relativism|relativism]] and its tendency to mislead people in how they view the world.<ref>See, e.g., historian Paul Johnson's book about the 20th century, and the article written by liberal law professor Laurence Tribe as allegedly assisted by [[Barack Obama]]. Virtually no one who is taught and believes Relativity continues to read the [[Bible]], a book that outsells ''New York Times'' bestsellers by a hundred-fold.</ref> Here is a list of 39 counterexamples: any one of them shows that the theory is incorrect.

#Despite wasting millions of taxpayer dollars searching for gravity waves predicted by the theory, none has ever been found.<ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/1102.3781</ref> ''Sound like [[global warming]]?''
#The orbital radius of the [[Moon]]'s orbit is increasing, contrary to what Relativity predicts.<ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/1102.0212</ref><ref>creation.com/moon&search=123233422queery=10101001.php</ref>
#Subatomic particles have a speed observed to be faster than the speed of light, which contradicts a fundamental assumption of Relativity.<ref>http://www.hindustantimes.com/Roll-over-Einstein-Law-of-physics-challenged/Article1-749189.aspx - note that a similar observation of faster-than-light speeds was also made in 2007 (with a larger margin of error).</ref> The Italian lab that "shocked the scientific world" has announced more precise results, confirming their previous announcement.<ref>http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/18/us-science-neutrinos-light-idUSTRE7AH0T720111118</ref>
#The [[Pioneer anomaly]].
#Anomalies in the locations of spacecraft that have flown by [[Earth]] ("flybys").<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23410705/</ref>
#Spiral galaxies confound Relativity, and unseen "[[dark matter]]" has been invented to try to retrofit observations to the theory.<ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.1873</ref>
#The acceleration in the expansion of the universe confounds Relativity, and unseen "[[dark energy]]" has been invented to try to retrofit observations to the theory.
#Increasingly precise measurements of the advance of the perihelion of Mercury show a shift greater than predicted by Relativity, well beyond the margin of error.<ref>In a complicated or contrived series of calculations that most physics majors cannot duplicate even after learning them, the theory of general relativity's fundamental formula, <math>G_{\mu\nu} = 8 \pi K T_{\mu\nu}\,</math>, was conformed to match Mercury's then-observed precession of 5600.0 arc-seconds per century. Subsequently, however, more sophisticated technology has measured a different value of this precession (5599.7 arc-seconds per century, with a margin of error of only 0.01), and leading promoters of Relativity (such as Professor Clifford Will) have omitted this in listing tests confirming Relativity.</ref>
#The discontinuity in momentum as velocity approaches "c" for infinitesimal mass, compared to the momentum of light.
#The logical problem of a force which is applied at a right angle to the velocity of a relativistic mass - does this act on the rest mass or the relativistic mass?<ref>The distinction between "rest mass" and "relativistic mass" is archaic. Modern textbooks use just "mass", which is the same as the old "rest mass". Problems of force applied at various angles to a particle's motion are solved (reasonably) straightforwardly in a formulation involving 4-momentum in spacetime.</ref>
#The observed lack of curvature in overall space.<ref>If space were curved, one would never expect the universe as a whole to be almost precisely flat. Yet it is.</ref>
#The universe shortly after its creation, when quantum effects dominated and contradicted Relativity.
#The [[action-at-a-distance]] of [[quantum entanglement]].<ref>Quantum entanglement has not yet communicated information faster than the speed of light, but has already exhibited action faster than the speed of light.</ref>
#The [[action-at-a-distance]] by [[Jesus]], described in [[John 1-7 (Translated)|John 4:46-54]], [[Matthew 10-19 (Translated)|Matthew 15:28]], and [[Matthew 20-28 (Translated)|Matthew 27:51]].
#The failure to discover [[gravitons]], despite wasting hundreds of millions in taxpayer money in searching.
#Newly observed data reveal that the fine-structure constant, α (alpha), actually varies throughout the universe, demonstrating that all inertial frames of reference do '''not''' experience identical laws of physics as claimed by Relativity.<ref>For a report on the data, see a paper submitted in 2010 by John Webb and Julian King of the University of new South Wales, Australia, to the ''Physical Review Letters''.</ref>
#The double star "W13" weighs "40 times as much as the sun—more than enough to form a [[black hole]]. So why is it not a black hole? The only explanation [a leading scientist] can think of ... does not make astrophysical sense."<ref>http://www.economist.com/node/17035953</ref>
#The inability of the theory to lead to other insights, contrary to every verified theory of physics.
#The change in mass over time of standard kilograms preserved under ideal conditions.<ref>[[Mystery:Why Is the Kilogram Losing Weight?]]</ref>
#The uniformity in temperature throughout the universe.<ref>http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn6092-speed-of-light-may-have-changed-recently.html ("A varying speed of light contradicts Einstein's theory of relativity, and would undermine much of traditional physics. But some physicists believe it would elegantly explain puzzling cosmological phenomena such as the nearly uniform temperature of the universe.")</ref>
#"According to Einstein’s view on the universe, space-time should be smooth and continuous" but observations instead show "inexplicable static" greater than "all artificial sources of" possible background noise.<ref>[http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/Cool-Astronomy/2010/1025/Is-the-universe-a-big-hologram-This-device-could-find-out. Hunt for gravitational waves discovers unexpected data instead].</ref>
#"The snag is that in quantum mechanics, time retains its Newtonian aloofness, providing the stage against which matter dances but never being affected by its presence. These two [QM and Relativity] conceptions of time don’t gel."<ref>http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=splitting-time-from-space</ref>
#The theory predicts [[wormholes]] just as it predicts [[black holes]], but wormholes violate causality and permit absurd time travel.<ref>http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v61/i13/p1446_1 . The popular science press promotes black holes to a far greater extent than wormholes.</ref>
#The theory predicts natural formation of highly ordered (and thus low entropy) black holes despite the increase in [[entropy]] required by the [[Second Law of Thermodynamics]].<ref>Contrived explanations have been suggested for this dilemma, such as Stephen Hawking proposing that the entropy of matter in a black hole is somehow stored in the surface area of its event horizon to be released back into its surroundings as the black hole decays by radiation, known as "Hawking radiation."</ref>
#Data from the [[PSR B1913 16|PSR B1913+16]] increasingly diverge from predictions of the [[General Theory of Relativity]] such that, despite a Nobel Prize in Physics being awarded for early work on this pulsar, no data at all have been released about it for over five years.
#The lack of useful devices developed based on any insights provided by the theory; no lives have been saved or helped, and the theory has not led to other useful theories and may have interfered with scientific progress.<ref>Contrary to the claims of Relativists, the GPS system has never been based on Relativity. The Time Service Department, U.S. Navy, observed that "The Operational Control System (OCS) of the Global Positioning System (GPS) does not include the rigorous transformations between coordinate systems that Einstein’s general theory of relativity would seem to require" in part because "the effects of relativity, where they are different from the effects predicted by classical mechanics and electromagnetic theory, are too small to matter – less than one centimeter, for users on or near the earth.”</ref> This stands in stark contrast with every verified theory of science.
#Relativity requires different values for the inertia of a moving object: in its direction of motion, and perpendicular to that direction. This contradicts the logical principle that the laws of physics are the same in all directions.
#Relativity requires that anything traveling at the speed of light must have mass zero, so it must have momentum zero. But the laws of electrodynamics require that light have nonzero momentum.
#Unlike most well-tested fundamental physical theories, the theory of relativity violates conditions of a conservative field. Path independence, for example, is lacking under the theory of relativity, as in the "twin paradox" whereby the age of each twin under the theory is dependent on the path he traveled.<ref>In defense of the theory, it is noted that it mandates conservation of the matter-stress-energy tensor (the only way to get ''real'' conservation, since matter and energy are interchangeable.) This follows from the "contracted Bianchi identity." [http://www.mth.uct.ac.za/omei/gr/chap6/node14.html] Also, the curl of the "gravitational field vector" is exactly zero in the absence of moving sources, due to symmetries of [[Riemann]]'s tensor. It follows, from [[Stokes' Theorem]], that the gravitational field is conservative and has a potential function. Energy is conserved.</ref>
#The Ehrenfest Paradox: Consider a spinning hoop, where the tangential velocity is near the speed of light. In this case, the circumference (<math>2 \pi R</math>) is length-contracted. However, since <math>R</math> is always perpendicular to the motion, it is not contracted. This leads to an apparent paradox: does the radius of the accelerating hoop equal <math>R</math>, or is it less than <math>R</math>?
#The Twin Paradox: Consider twins who are separated with one traveling at a very high speed such that his "clock" (age) slows down, so that when he returns he has a younger age than the twin; this violates Relativity because ''both'' twins should expect the other to be younger, if motion is relative. Einstein himself admitted that this contradicts Relativity.<ref>Einstein attempted to explain the paradox based on the acceleration that one twin uniquely undergoes, but the length of travel can simply be extended such that any effect from acceleration would be ''de minimis''.</ref>
#Based on Relativity, Einstein predicted in 1905 that clocks at the Earth's equator would be slower than clocks at the North Pole, due to different velocities; in fact, all clocks at sea level measure time at the same rate, and Relativists made new assumptions about the Earth's shape to justify this contradiction of the theory; they also make the implausible claim that relativistic effects from gravitation precisely offset the effects from differences in velocity.<ref>http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v227/n5255/abs/227270a0.html</ref>
#Based on Relativity, Einstein claimed in 1909 that the [[aether (science)|aether]] does not exist, but in order to make subatomic physics work right, theorists had to introduce the aether-like concept of the Higgs field, which fills all of space and breaks symmetries.
#In [[Genesis (ch.1)|Genesis 1:6-8]], we are told that one of God's first creations was a firmament in the heavens. This likely refers to the creation of the luminiferous [[aether]].
#[[Minkowski space]] is predicated on the idea of four-dimensional vectors of which one component is [[time]]. However, one of the properties of a [[vector space]] is that every vector have an inverse. Time cannot be a vector because it has no inverse.<ref>Time isn't a vector. It is a component of the vector space known as "spacetime".</ref>
#It is impossible to perform an experiment to determine whether Einstein's theory of relativity is correct, or the older Lorentz aether theory is correct. Believing one over the other is a matter of [[faith]].
#Despite a century of wasting billions of dollars in work on the theory, "No one knows how to solve completely the equations of general relativity that describe gravity; they are simply beyond current understanding."<ref>[http://www.mathunion.org/o/General/Prizes/2006/TaoENG.pdf Statement in awarding the coveted Fields Medal] [Dead link]</ref>
#Experiments in electromagnetic induction contradict Relativity: "Einstein’s Relativity ... can not explain the experiment in graph 2, in which moving magnetic field has not produced electric field."<ref>http://www.wbabin.net/weuro/qingping1.pdf</ref><ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/physics/0504223</ref>
#Relativity breaks down if a [[solenoid]] is traveling at or near the speed of light.<ref>http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?p=3244279</ref>

(add to list)

{{Relativity}}

== See also ==
*[[Counterexamples to Evolution]]
*[[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]]
*[[Counterexamples to the Bible]]

== References ==

<references/>

[[Category:physics]]

Human being

2012-01-25T22:28:00Z

SusanP:

{{merge|Homo sapiens}}
[[File:Human.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|
 
 
(picture obtained [http://www.flickr.com/photos/imelda/322994273/ Flickr], see [http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/deed.en License agreement]) ]]
"'''Human being'''" is a term for a [[homo sapiens|human]] that emphasizes the role of a human not merely as a social animal, but a thinking person. Judaism, Christianity and Islam hold that human beings were created in the image of [[God]]<ref>"Male and female He created them." (Genesis 1)</ref>.

The academic study of human beings falls under any of the following fields of study, which collectively are known as the "Social Sciences":
*[[Anthropology]]
*[[Psychology]]
*[[Sociology]]
*[[Economics]]
*[[Political science]]
*[[History]]
*[[Geography]]

==Origins of human behavior==
[[Philosophy]] and [[religion]] have long considered the origin of human behavior.

Much of [[Christianity|Christian]] theology holds that, while created in God's image, humanity is essentially [[sin]]ful, and, by embracing [[Jesus Christ]] as a savior, can be rescued from this sin. St. Paul wrote, "Not all flesh is alike, but there is one flesh for human beings, another for animals, another for birds, and another for fish." (I Corinthians 15:35-44)

[[Moral naturalism]] rejects divine revelation as the source of human behavior, ethics, and morals, holding that they emerged from natural causes. The nature of these natural causes is widely debated, ranging from features inherent in the nervous system of humans to natural pressures that led to emergence of the best course for survival as a society, much as instincts emerge as the best course for survival among animals in the wild.

==References==
<references />

[[Category:Philosophy]][[Category:Human Beings]]

User talk:Adambro

2012-01-10T17:48:39Z

SusanP: Created page with "{{welcome}} If you did not already know, please do not edit war, as you did with user:RedGoliath. Thank you.~~~~"

{{welcome}}
If you did not already know, please do not edit war, as you did with [[user:RedGoliath]]. Thank you.[[User:SusanP|SusanP]] 12:48, 10 January 2012 (EST)