5) Young earth creationists will point out all kinds of things that upset the apple cart: for example, geologists in the past emphasized and taught uniformitarian principles as the key to understanding the geological column (for example, with the Grand Canyon). Now, influenced by the actual observation of catastrophic events and their results (like Mt. St. Helens), the pendulum has swung and much of the geological record is thought to have been caused by catastrophes (like floods, perhaps?) – which has implications for the fossil record. They also like to point out other things: how quickly things can fossilize or from which were previously asserted to take long periods of time ; how in the Bible, when God creates, in other places in the Bible, He makes things “fully formed”, i.e. with the appearance of age ; accounts worldwide of a global deluge ; interesting features in geological formations like polystrata fossils ; the adaptability that is already present within a species (prime example: bulldogs and greyhounds can breed ; as can tea cup poodles and St. Bernards [genetically at least] – consider that their skeletons will look nothing alike though…) ; the fact that genetic codes seems to taking on more and more harmful mutations (i.e. we have devolution, not evolution) ; carnivores who don’t eat meat but vegetables ; lions and tigers who can breed ; the discovery of fresh dinosaur bones with intact red blood cells, etc. Within the evolutionary framework, or model, all of these things are problematic to a greater or lesser degree – but they make perfect sense in a creation model. So yes, I think there is evidence for this position as well.
More on Monday.