All right, Hi, this William Ramsey. Welcome to William Ramsey Investigates on Tonight Show. Have a very special guest. He comes to us from Australia. His name is doctor Tasman Walker, and he is with a website, but he also has a background in the general subject of creationism. But a lot of his information that I saw was on creation
dot com. So it's c R E A T I O N dot com and we're going to talk about his inquiry and insights into something that's much different than people would think, which is the legacy of the Earth, out the dates of the Earth, and maybe also contradicts kind of evolutionary biology. But he can talk more about that. So doctor tas Walker, are you there.
It's good to be here, Bill, It's really nice to be on your program.
Great, thanks for gring to the interview for people may not have heard your background or your name. Can you talk about what led you kind of to this inquiry and then what's your kind of view of creation is? Is that contradicts kind of the modern scientific worldview?
Yeah, well, I guess you'd have to say it came out of my Christian commitment when I was in my early teens, I made a commitment to christ and I've always been interested in how things work, pulling things apart, putting things together, and I ended up becoming an engineer.
So that's really my background. So when I became a Christian, I wanted to figure out how everything fitted together and how it fitted in with science, and that really started a journey for me, and I guess it really came together when I read the book The Genesis Flood by Whitcombe and Morris. I was in my twenties when I read that. Before that, I really couldn't see how it
fitted together. And I connected with a group called Creation Science Foundation, which was active at the time in the city where I lived in Brisbane, Australia, and so I started getting their literature, creation magazine, Journal of Creation Thing and I became very interested in how things worked and how they fitted together. So yeah, so that's really my journey. I worked as an engineer. I was involved with POWERstation design,
POWERstation operation, POWERstation planning. In the state where I live. I was involved in the planning of a hydroelectric scheme which over many years and as a result of that, I was interested in geology, but really more as a mechanical engineer than as a geologist. But I became interested in well, I couldn't see how Noah's flood, which was a key thing to understanding how it or everything worked, I couldn't see how that fitted in with the geologic column.
So I developed a little back of the envelope model scheme for how it worked, and through various circumstances, I was prompted to write an abstract on that and submitted to a creation conference which was in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in quite a number of years ago, and I remember showing it to a fellow where I worked in the power industry. He was not a Christian, but I showed it to
him and he was interested to read it. And when he handed it back to me, he said, yeah, it's very interesting, he said, but no one will take any notice of you because you're not a geologist. You don't have any geological degrees. So as a result of that, it prompted me to go back as a mature student and study geology. And I got a Bachelor of Earth Science, Bachelor of Science in earth science, and we call it
an honors degree in science in earth science. And after i'd done that I ended up connecting with Creation Ministries International, which is where I am now as a speaker, researcher, write editor everything.
There's a lot of material there, so people should go check out creation dot com because we're going to kind of talk about nosed flood and geology, but there's so many other address there's a whole set of documentaries and things like that. But so you have an academic background and applied that. Now. I've had other guests where that we talk about how science and creation actually people like the early scientist Galileo guys who categorized all the animals
were all Christians. But that's something has happened more recently within the last couple hundred years. So you are seeing you're kind of a rare different than the modern scientific tradition in that you're seeing things through a biblical worldview.
Correct, Yes, yeah, that's correct. All the geology started with the biblical worldview, and it's mentioned in the science degree in various science textbooks, but only as a throwaway line and sort of can you believe they used to believe the Bible, but now we understand science and that sort of thing. So geology does have a Christian heritage as one of the early pioneers of geology, Nicholas Tino. He lived in the sixteen hundreds and he wrote a book
about geology which is used even today. His principles are sort of the very first principles that you learned do in geology. And he was a biblical creationist. He started with the Bible and used that as his way of interpreting the geological history of the area where he lived in Tuscany. So that's something that modern geologists don't really want to know, is that these guys that they're still
teaching about, we're biblical creationists. And so that chain. So it started out as a biblical believing the Bible, and that changed in the late sixteen hundred and seventeen hundreds with a change with the Enlightenment, so called Enlightenment, a desire to dispense with any with the Bible and find a sort of a secular, naturalistic way of explaining things.
Right, So this is it's marked the change, and you're trying to bring that back. Like when you look at and I know that catastrophism exists, there's all kinds of catastrophes. There was like the Krakatoa exploded. There's evidence of all these catastrophes. Can you talk about catastrophism in the context of Noah's flood and biblical history?
Yeah, well, no his flood, of course was a catastrophe. It lasted just over twelve months, and we always hear it ran for forty days and forty nights, and the waters not only came from the rain, but they came from under the ground. And so the waters rose, rose and rose, until every high mountain under the entire heavens
were covered. So we read about that, and for a long time I couldn't figure out how it tied in with science until I read the book The Genesis Flood, and Noah's flood is the key to understanding how the whole world youth hits together. And so Noah's flood the modern geologist. You've got a picture up there of Nicholas Tino,
but there's another guy called James Hutton. He was a Scottish physician and he was very interested in geology, and he wrote a book called Theory of the Earth, and he assumed, and he made the assumption that we have to explain geology by what we see happening. Now. It's interesting that geology is it's different from the sort of normal the sciences of chemistry and physics and those sorts of things where you actually do experiments and you measure
things in the present. So it's the repeatable experiment. So I did that as an engineer. I was very much involved in fluid dynamics, and you would set up experiments and make measurements and record them, and I would try to get my experiments to match or see how they agreed with experiments which had done in the US. And as a consequence of that, that's repeatable experiments which are done in the present, which can be observed and documented. And so that's the power of science which gives us
some modern technology. But when it comes to geology, you can't go back in time to see what actually happened. You have to make assumptions. So we can make the observation in the present. We can look at the rocks and see how they're related, and look at the landscapes, and we can do all those sorts of measurements on the fossils in the present. But the question how did they get here? Is how do you do that? Well? James Hutton is the guy. He lived in the sixteen hundreds.
He died in the late sixteen hundreds, I think it was, And he is the guy that basically said, well, you have to use what we can see happening now, so we can see things happening now, and we assume it's always been like that. So that was James Hutton's assumption. It's called the principle of uniformitarianism. And as a consequence of that, you end up with an earth that is untold, eons of time old. It's sort of James Hutton said, there's no vestige of a beginning, no sign of an answer.
He had an idea of an eternal cyclic called geological processes. It's called the rock cycle. It's been adapted into So that's the new philosophy that came in, and based on that philosophy, Darwin then he was very interested in geology, but he applied that. He applied that to the idea of biology, and so he used the slow and gradual changes in biology. So that's where the modern philosophies come in. And that's basically it's really naturalism, the idea that everything
made itself by natural processes. But it came in through geology.
Right, So you're saying just to we state that you're saying that Darwinism came out of an understanding of geology. Correct of absolutely. Okay, So there's different interpretations of the fossil record, right, So you have this different you have the different strata. You show that in some of your talks, but there's also kind of a different stratification of ages
or playsta scene or of these ages. How this is the geologic time scale, So how is the modern science interpreting this and how do you interpret this?
So basically, the geologists do a great job as far as you know, making observations of the rocks, and what you've got up there is a geological timescale. And so that came out of the eighteen hundreds where they as they started exploring things, they started naming things, and so they give the rocks different names, like the rocks around of Devon in England we're called the Devonian, the Chalk rocks and the English Channel on the British coast were
called the Cretaceous. So they gave them names to document them, and that's what appears in the geologic column. So you've you've got the Cambrian which came out of Wales, which what used to be called the Cambria, and then you've got then we have things like the Devonian and the Carboniferous where the coal deposits in England. So that's the observation.
So when you look at the geologic column, basically it's a record of what's actually observed and the names are fine, but the dates along the side, which they've got dates. The Cambrian is sort of five hundred million years old, six hundred million years old. You've got the Devonian three hundred million years old. So those dates come out of Hutton's assumption that present processes are enough to explain the rocks, and so out of that assumption comes along eons of time.
So the eons of time were there back in the early eighteen hundreds, even before that, back in the late seventeen hundreds. This concept of eons of time, and it comes from assuming that the present processes have always operated the way they have, and so the eons of time was long before radioactive dating. Radioactive radioactivity was discovered in the late eighteen hundreds and that was applied to dating, you know, radioactive dating in the early nineteen hundreds, and
it's a flood now. And people think that the long Ages were discovered by radioactive dating, but it wasn't. It comes out of an assumption. Assumption is that is that the present processes have always operated the way they have and that the global flood described in Genesis was not a real event and it did not impact their globe and so we can ignore it. So that's basically the assumption.
But there is proofs outside of the Bible that the flood existed. I think, like in sixteen or eighteen. Cultures have some type of myth that involves a flood. So there is in human records the event of something of the giant watering. And I think you even mentioned and I was aware of this that even at the highest peaks, and this is a statistic, is a fact, is that there's records of water somehow being there, or are records of fossils or remnants of aquatic life.
Right, yes, at the top of Mount Everest has got marine fossils, it's got sea lilies, and that the buds and stems of Cea lilies have been recovered from up the top of Mount Everest. So the idea of fossils and being on the top of mountains. Everybody knows that that's the case. But that's one of the evidences that what you'd expect from a global flood. The other thing that's important is to understand the movements of the crust of the Earth, the tectonics that occurred, so the flood
was just didn't come up. It involved a huge cataclysm on the Earth where the crusts of the Earth was fractured and it was folded, and sediments were deposited, they were metamorphosed, and then they were folded, and just an ongoing process which occurred. And I liken it to the it's not a very good analogy really, but the sinking
of the Titanic. You know, it took about three hours, but it was a process where there was a gash in the side and then the water filled it up, and then the ship listed and then it you know, it broke open, and you know, so there's this ongoing processes which occurred as a result of the sinking of the Titanic. But it's the same thing on the Earth.
There's ongoing processes which occurred over this one year period, enormous processes, and today you know, geologists with these long age glasses try to interpret it in terms of slow and gradual over millions of years.
So that worldview is what the earth is a built like a billion years old or something like that. And you do you have like a literal biblical worldview that's like similar to the time, like how Jews date time it started.
Well, when you think about the past, how do we know the date of anything? Basically it's history. Without history, it's virtually impossible to be able to put a date on something. And I use analogies like timing of a swimming race. You know, if you didn't if you didn't observe the timepiece when the race started, you can't know what the time was when the race finished, how long it took. So I look at the Bible. Is a history book, consider it to be a history book, a
Sherman to be a history book. There's good evidence for that, and there's good reasons for that. And so assuming is a history book, the chronological information is very clear. It's about four and a half thousand years ago to the flood, and before that another seven eight hundred years. That's about six thousand years to the creation event. And so if you don't have that it's really had to actually put a date on anything.
Right then, so you believe in the now do you also believe that the Genesis account the seven days as literal as well? So all the events, so those are literal? Then what in that? So the biblical worldview and then the modern science worldview or different? So how do you address the kind of view that there's these so you see, you think these scales are almost like evil evolution where there's really no proof, they're just putting times and dates
on that. How do you square the biblical worldview with this modern science worldview?
Well, he used the word worldview, and willview is a way of looking at the world. It involves beliefs, our belief system. And so when you say the science worldview, I would call that the naturalistic worldview. Right, So there's the there's a science of naturalism where the assumption is that everything happened by natural processes and it all made itself. So that's our worldview assumption. And then you've got the assumption that the Bible's recording true history, so you've got
the science that comes out of that assumption. So it's not science versus faith it's basically it's two faiths and the science of these two different faiths. And so as creationists, we accept everything that's observed, you know, the anything that evolutionists observe and document and measure, they're they're the facts.
It's the interpretations that we look at differently. We place different interpretations on these, just the same way that the people who have the naturalistic belief system they interpret it within that belief system.
So how does the creationists interpret the kind of geologic not the record, but like you know, the record of animals that have been caught in you know, dirt or whatever. That's all due to the events like the flood. Is that right?
Yes, basically most of the most of the geologic system was created formed during the Noah's flood. It was a monstrous event. And what is what we see on the earth, what we have access to is basically goes from the beginning of the flood where there was a huge you know, it was a highly energetic catastrophe beginning that occurred, and that goes from the pre Cambrian you know, and there would be dates on that of two billion years and so that was we would say, no, it's not two
billion years. It was early in the flood. It was the right of the very you know, very in the early weeks or days and weeks, and then it goes right through to basically to the Mesozoic, which is and the Cenozoic, which is the very most recent rocks would were formed towards the end of the flood. So not a lot was formed after the flood because humans have to live on the earth, and so you have the ice age after the flood. So basically the order on
the geologic column. A friend of mine, a colleague, Michael Ord, has written an article called, you know, the called the geologic column is a general order of the flood, but it's there are exceptions to it, and so that's that's the.
Soul you would interpret like all of the kind of wear and tear like at you know, some of these Grand Canyon or something like that, that would all be post flood where in tears that corrected.
Well, the Grand Canyon was laid down by the floodwaters as the waters were rising. So you have these you know, very horizontal, long thin layers a roupt these strata which they extend for hundreds of kilometers. So that was the water's washing sediments into the area, and then you have the floid waters of Noah's flood receding when they covered the whole area, that carved the flat surfaces at the top. You see a lot of flat surfaces in the Grand Canyon.
And then the canyon itself was carved by the tail end of the flood as the flood of the waters were almost drained off, and it was carved the canyon itself. And there's some amazing features in the canyon which point to the fact that there was water ponded on the top of the plateau there which which drained and formed these side canyons and this fractal shape for the canyon. So it's very fascinating and there's articles on creation dot Com about that, about the carving of the Grand Canyon.
So what are the things that are on top that indicate that there was water there.
Well, there's sediments which have been deposited by water that's on the canyon. Plus there's fossils in the sediments which indicate that they were you know, that these things were buried in water. And then what else. The fact that the canyons carved flat indicates that some sort of watery process has carved it flat. Now please continue interesting with the canyon. If you look at the canyon, there's we've got this belief system of geologists have this belief system,
the Long Age uniformitarian geologists. They don't like that term so much these days. But the people who believe that everything happened by slow and gradual processes and there never was a global flood, that's their belief. They see, for example, there's some one of the layers in the Grand Canyon is called the Coconino Sandstone, which looks like it's got very big sand dunes in it, very large sand dunes.
And because they're so large, the Long Age geologists can't interpret those as water laid because it would mean a watery flood of biblical proportion. And so whenever they come across something like this, they say, oh, it must have formed in a desert, right, So they interpret it as forming in a desert because of the large sand dunes. But there's quite strong evidence that these that point to
it actually forming in water. And it indicates how these interpretations lead us down a wrong path, you know, when they say there was a desert and then they then use it against against a biblical geologists they see, how could you possibly have a desert in the middle of Noah's flood, And it comes from their interpretation, not the actual fact, that it's not a fact itself.
And what other geologic proofs are there for people who aren't aware of Creation and Noah's flood? Can you think any other ones talking?
Oh, there's lots of evidences for Noah's flood. I talked about the flat the flat surfaces there all around the world. You find these flat surfaces on the top of plateaus where there's been erosion. That's an evidence of the waters of Noah's flood covering the whole area. Another evidence is as the waters, the waters of Noah's flood, they covered the whole continents of North America and Asia and all
the places the whole of the world. When the waters then started to drain off, the ocean basins sank gradually sank, and the continents were uplifted. And mainstream geologists would say that they talk about the the uplift of the continent. So it's it's accepted that this happened. So creation is see that as being the process as which ended the flood, and as the waters flowed off, they eroded the surface,
and they eroded out lots of rocks. And there's particularly one sort of very hard rock called a qurtzite, which were eroded from the rocky mountains. And these were theyse were carried by water to the west and to the east, and so you have what they these court side boulders. They can be up to eighteen inches across. They're rounded like they're being rounded in a water in being carried along by a watery river, and they cover such a
huge area. That's that's an evidence of enormous water flows which were connected with the tail end of the flood as the waters were flowing off the continents.
And what other Is there any other proofs other than that that you would add to the proofs of Creasia.
I wouldn't call it proofs. I wouldn't call it proofs. I'd say evidence. See, when you talk about the naturalistic uniformitarian worldview, they interpret the evidence within that framework, and then that interpretation is used as a proof, but strictly it's not. It's an interpretation. And so one of the other evidence is of the ublical worldview. Is I talked about the flat surfaces. I talked about the Cortsoe boulders.
As the waters of Noah's flood reduced even further, you find that the waters there's rivers which flow through mountain ranges, which is surprising because the landscape is supposed to have been eroded by rainfall and snow and ice and that, and so you'd expect the rivers to flow around the mountain ranges. But we find that they all over the world. They flow through mountain ranges, and it's called the water gap. Well,
that's easily explained as a consequence of Noah's flood. As the waters were going down, eventually parts of the earth arose above the waters, and the waters then went through gaps, flowed through anything which is a bit lower, and eroded that down to form a water gap. So there's water gaps, hundreds and hundreds of them in the Appalachians and other parts of the US. So water gaps are an evidence of Noah's flood. It's quite amazing, really, it's quite amazing.
It's amazing, But it is amazing because I would say that you're probably in a very small minority amongst people who interpret, like you said, interpret the signs and the deeds and the fossil record and things like that. So the fossil record is what you're saying is has been laid down during the flood events leading through the flood and then the receding of the waters is what made the fossil records not something gotcha?
That's right?
And what has have you debated kind of the modern naturalists and uh, you know, gradualists and what is your experience with that? I mean, I assume it's similar to a Christian debating like an evolutionary biologist or something like that. But what's the can you relate or tell about kind of what happens in your telling this view to kind of modern science.
Debates have occurred. I'm in writing on pens and paper articles and that which are published. And so the flood is so significant that it's very much a focus of opposition. You know, like if if if the flood occurred and if the world is young, then the then evolution is dead in the water. There's no way that there's no time for evolution to happen, so that it kills the
whole naturalistic worldview. And so the opposition into flood geology is very strong and so you find fine people which and particularly and that's connected with the Age of the Earth. It's flood geology. It washes away the millions of years. So and the age, the Age of the Earth, the young Earth kills, it kills naturalism.
Right. So even this quote that I have up is very important. So you see theory of evolution in geology intertwined and that interpretation is the either the modern scientistical view or the accretions view.
Right there, gotch and that's right, that's right, this guy on BBC saying it's he sees that in England was geology and the theory of evolution that changed us from a Christian to a pagan nation.
Yeah, and please continue.
So it's interesting that the Age of the Earth. There's a book by a lady called Sherry Lewis, and she wrote a book called The Dating Game, which gives something about the history of the Age of the Earth. I
think that's that's it. And she talks about how it was developed and so back in the late eighteen hundreds, you know, people they tried to figure out how the earth was and they used it measured the salt in the ocean, how the salt in the ocean was accumulating, or they measured the assumed that the Sun was gravitationally collapsing. And another guy by the name of Kelvin measured how the Earth was cooling, assuming it was once a molten ball, how long it would take to cool. So Kelvin was
a thermodynamicis calvinator fridges. I don't know if you have them in the States, but it comes after him, Lord Kelvin. So from these guys worked out that the world was about twenty million years old based on those assumptions, and Charles Darwin said he said about Calvin, he said, Lord Kelvin, is you know the guy that causes me more trouble
than anyone else. I just really dislike what he's come up with because twenty million years is nowhere near enough time for me for my idea of evolution, right, So he said, I need an enormous amount of time before the Cambrian for evolution. So that was Darwin. And so basically the physicist Calvern and these others who were physicists
and their calculations. The geologists and the biologists didn't like it because it was didn't fit in with what they wanted for their theories to work, which illustrates that the question is what age would you like age?
It shouldn't be upon somebody's own opinion or something that fit their theory, which is.
Still it shouldn't be, but it is because people work within a worldview, and so they look for evidence which is going to support their well view, and if they find evidence which contradicts it, they don't say, oh, my worldview is wrong. They'll say, oh, this is going to be interesting to explore this and to see how we can explain that, you know, so it becomes a people don't realize that that's how it works. Have you heard about the dinosaur soft tissue? Have you probably heard about that? Yeah?
I mean they're finding it, they're trying to rationalize it away. But yeah, can you talk a little bit about that.
Yeah, Well, Mary Schweizer was the first person. She's the one that found it at first, and of course it created an enose stir about finding blood cells in dinosaur bones which just looked like modern bones. She and the whole issue was and she said it this way. She said, I couldn't believe it. She said, I said to the lab technician, these bones are seventy million years old. How could blood cells survive that long? So that's worldview, right. She didn't say these blood cells prove that the world
is not seventy million years old. What she said is I've made a discovery. We're going to have to get lots of more research to find out how to explain it in fitting with a seventy million year age. So that's the way worldviews work, and so people accuse creationists of being biased. You start with the answer, but everybody does, everybody that starts with the answer, and so these world views can't be falsified. You know, evolution can't be falsified.
It's just anything that's contrary will look for you know, the person with that worldview will look for a way of explaining it within within his worldview.
And it is interesting because, in my understanding, the geologic record does not support evolutionary biology at all, because you don't see these changes that are supposed to be happening. Do you find that correct?
That's right. The characteristics of the fossils, there's three characteristics. One is they suddenly appear a particular creature and organism suddenly appears, and there's it's hard to find any evidence of a slowly, slowly organic trail leading up to them. Once they appear, they say the same. It's called stasis. Stephen J. Girl said, it's a it's a trade secret
of the fossil record. And the other thing is that they suddenly disappear, and so so that's basically the fossil record, you know, and it does not support evolution.
Yeah, it's interesting. I've read a little bit about Gold and Doclkins in they're actually supposed they're naturalists, but their cultural life is actually semi Christian, if not Christian. They really like the morality of it. It's really fascinating that they can be of two minds like that. Pretty fascinating. Yeah, we are at about thirty five minutes. Is there anything you'd like to add, anything I missed or where can people find your work or reach out to you in social media?
Yeah? Well, creation dot com. There's a lot of my work's been published there. There's videos there as well as lots of articles that I've written. I have a website called Biblicalgeology dot net where I've tended to write a material which is not of such a global interest, more and more local interests. And also I'm available on Facebook. I think Tasmin Walker on Facebook. People can contact me there.
And this is you right here right Biblical Theology and Independent Voices.
Biblical Geology geology dot net, so to be there if you go Biblical geology dot net forwards last.
Blogs, but it is here. Oh yeah, you have tons of information here.
There's lots of information and there's a blog as well, which is good, really good.
And you're on Facebook, so do you have a so this is is there a way to contact you through this website Biblical Geography.
Through the website, you can contact me. Plus through creation dot com you can send an email to me and you can get connected that way. That's the main way that I'm available. It's interesting. I developed a biblical geological model and that's what's on the Biblical Geology dot net so to actually identify what parts of the geologic column belong where, because when I started out as a creationist and reading the creationist literature, I could not see where
Noah's flood fitted in the geologic column. So I have and basically as a result of this, and quite a number of people use it now and this particular model, it's quite amazing. It starts with the Bible that assumes the Bible is recording true history, and it says what would have affected the geology and what would we expect to see and identify to be able to pinpoint the things.
And this is a referencing right here right a biblical geological that's it.
That's it now. And I presented that at the International Conference of Creationism in nineteen ninety four, which is a while ago, and a guy called Michael Ord picked up on that, and a few others have sort of they've done me a favor in that they've sort of said, well, we're going to use it. So they're using it and it works well. And as a consequence of that, I've
produced an article which has proved quite interesting. It's published on creation dot com called the Geological Transformation Tool Geological Transformation Tool, and that's basically anybody if when they go around touring somewhere or they're reading a book about geology or reading a national geographic and they start quoting dates and that you can go to that tool and you
put the dates in. There's a I should be diagrammed somewhere down there is there there, it is there, it is, there's a diagram.
Go up a bit, Go up a bit, this dis gotcha.
Yeah, there's a diagram. So that's a geologic column, and it shows where it fits within a biblical worldview. So you got the waters of Noah's flood rising, the waters of Noah's flood falling, and then you have the post flood. Now there's a lot of debate amongst creationists about where these actual lines fit, and so there's a little bit of to and fro on that, and I talk about that in the article, but that gives a very good first base. You sort of say, well, these are Devonian rocks.
You go the thing, look up Devonian and you see that's about as the waters we're sort of you know, they're getting towards their peak and or something like that. So it's a very good tool to be able to find your way around. It's not its preliminary and so, but it gives you a first good, good estimate.
So people can check that out at creation dot com. And also your website is again Biblical geology dot net. All one more Biblical Geology dot net.
Yeah that's right, Bill, that's right.
Okay, agree, Well that was really fascinating. It's really interesting to me to hear you talk about that, because I have a lot of questions about so of this, the naturalism and the assumptions and the geologic record how they interpreted. But I think you really made your points very well. So thank you so much for your time. Really appreciate it.
And I appreciate you. Williams Bill, it's really great to be hout to join your program. William Ramsey Investigates. All the best to you.
Likewise, God bless, godless,