Archived - Ask the Expert: David McQueen

David R. McQueen was trained in mineralogy at the University of Tennessee (BA in geology) and at the University of Michigan (MS in geology). McQueen taught college geology at George Mason University, Virginia State University, East Tennessee State University, and the Institute for Creation Research’s Graduate School (1983-1987). Most recently he authored The Mineral Book (Master Books, Dec. 2014).

Below are the questions and answers submitted while David McQueen was the featured expert on

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 3, 2014 at 2:23pm

It is around 1 PM CT, so let me begin a conversation. First I want to thank MB/New Leaf for the opportunity to both ask and answer questions. My fellow creationists, J. Bergman and D. Faulkner, have done such a wonderful job over the last two months. They have set a good standard for me. How can I begin my session? How about this question: What is the "first mention" of minerals or rocks in Genesis? My mentor and former boss, the late Dr. Henry M. Morris, viewed as important the "first mention principle." In staff meetings at ICR in the mid-1980s, when I was a full-time flood geologist, he would bring up a topic (from astronomy, biology, geology,...) then ask: "Where is the first mention of "star" or "dinosaur" in the Bible?"

Comment by Floyd on November 4, 2014 at 4:54am

Hi, Professor McQueen
I was wondering if you could enlighten me on a number of things.

Genesis 2:7 “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being.”

1. What is your understanding of the makeup of the dust that was used to form man?

Genesis 2:10-12 “Now a river went out of Eden to water the garden, and from there it parted and became four riverheads.  11 The name of the first is Pishon; it is the one which skirts the whole land of Havilah, where there is gold.  12 And the gold of that land is good. Bdellium and the onyx stone are there.”

Evolutionists think that most of the gold in the Earth's crust and mantle was delivered to Earth by hypothetical asteroid impacts based on radiometric dating, but scripture clearly infers that the minerals were there before any impacts. God, said the earth and life on earth was ‘very good’. But since sin entered the world living organisms have been corrupted, for example information within DNA in the cell was ‘good’ until the fall of man then the DNA information became corrupted by mutations, viruses, etc.

So the further questions are:

2. Has minerals also changed in some way since the fall?
3. What is the meaning of good gold before the fall?
4. Does minerals such as gold, Bdellium and onyx have/had any benefits that aid/aided living organisms?
5. Are there any clues in, for example, the distribution of minerals such as gold on the earth which helps bear witness to the truth of scripture (i.e. what was the impact of the flood on these mineral deposits)? 

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 4, 2014 at 6:23pm


YOUR SUSPICION IS CORRECT!! Minerals have changed since the Fall of man and the creation. Romans teaches clearly that Adam's fall required our loving Creator God to force the Creation to "fall underneath Adam." From my Bible College training in the early 70s (Southeastern Christian College, Winchester, KY), I remember the Professors saying that a fallen mankind could not be allowed to have dominion over an unfallen world. Here, I think, is a mineral example: from the comments made by the Holy Spirit in Genesis 1-5 we can deduce that quartz (SiO2) was one of the created minerals. When you get a copy of my new book in December you will be able to read more about quartz; but for now I will remind you, Floyd, that quartz is an HEXAGONAL  mineral having six sides. I bet the original crystals that Adam and Eve may have had access to were perfect HEXAGONS. Now when we collect a quartz crystal (from for example the Hot Springs Arkansas area) is imperfect...bent, mind you, you can still see that it is hexagonal...but it has the imprent of the fall on it,,,,more later

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 5, 2014 at 8:37am

Dr. McQueen, 

There seems to be a teaching about flood strata that I have a hard time rectifying with observable evidences.  I have heard over and over on this site that all of the ancient archeological sites and discoveries are post-flood? For the most part that would infer within the context of mans written history.

Sites at Caral-Supe in Peru, Sumer, Jericho,Gobekli Tepe all were in existence prior to Egypt?  This is not conjecture, in Jerhico alone the vast layers have taken them down to close to 9,000 years.  Recent upgrades in AMS C14 testing along with tree ring and other corroborating evidences clearly show these as pre-flood?   AMS testing is at least accurate up to 5,000 years or more, especially when using other corroborating evidence to arrive at an accurate date + -.

So there seems to be remains of ancient pre-flood cultures all over the earth.  While there are places where strata is mile deep there are other places that are the results of other types of catastrophic events such as ingenious and volcanic areas like Southern California for instance.

Also the hermeneutics used and implied by  the fall.  As a Christian I certainly believe that with all my heart, no doubt mankind is sinful, but an application of the fall of man as Paul in Romans and others in Corinthians.  Can you tell me who first penned the idea of a good earth?  There are issues with this view, and what you mentioned above seems speculative at best. We have comments on this site about no thorns before the fall, one must ask when did God come out of his rest and make new plants, and insects that mimic thorns, and a host of other issues that continue to be applied to the earth due to the fall of man and sin. Do you know who produced this hermeneutic interpretation of these Scriptures?  

I have yet found anyone that knows themselves?  Also in my studies I don't know of any theologian or expert on Scripture that believes this is referring to a huge quantitative change in the original creation God advanced in the beginning and then he rested....?  Isn't Scripture clear about Gods work?

If I mentioned everything that "was good" but now is corrupted, like blood sucking insects, bats, and other venomous spiders, insects, reptiles, etc.  Some have taken their inferences to such a degree that one has to wonder if God recreated the whole systematics he laid down in the beginning?  No one was there in the beginning, yet we paint a picture that doesn't even fit with the observable record of Gods work in nature?  Your thoughts?     

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 5, 2014 at 8:44am

Dr. McQueen, 

What is your view on Bitumen?  It seems that Noah, used bitumen on his boat, post flood Babylon bitumen, Boats from egypt over 5,000 year s old covered in bitumen, many writings and other ancient cultures including those in California used bitumen.  Many on our site here are adamant that bitumen is a result of  post flood? No evidence I have been able to ascertain infers this at all, in fact there is every reason to believe Bitumen was a product used by sumer and many other pre-flood cultures and the technology of using bitumen is well known.  Bitumen was even used for fires around camp sites? So oil, bitumen, and other petroleum products existed prior to the flood, and I don't get the implication from evidence that bitumen is a post-flood product...your thought?

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 5, 2014 at 9:25am

LOU, THANKS FOR YOUR QUESTIONS. I WILL FINISH UP ON FLOYD'S QUESTIONS AS THE DAY GOES ON, BUT YOU DESERVE A COMMENT ON YOUR OBSERVATIONS. IN ANSWERING FLOYD'S QUESTION , I DID NOT GIVE CHAPTER AND VERSE ABOUT THE EFFECT OF THE FALL OF MANKIND ON MINERALS. Note the contrast between Romans 1:16-20..."...things that are made(KJV)..." vs Rom. 5:12-14....vs Rom. 8:17-23...21..."the creature itself(KJV) == "that the creation itself(NIV)...note that minerals are part of the original creation. More of my viewpoint for both of you as the day goes on...

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 5, 2014 at 10:29am

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 5, 2014 at 10:45am

Floyd, now let me go back to your first question:WHAT WAS THE CHEMISTRY OF THE DUST THAT ADAM AND EVE WERE MADE OF? (AS AN ASIDE:I noticed that you live in London. In 2003 my Clan Macdonald wife and I went to Skye to find her roots...we were at Gatwick for 2 hours and saw with our own eyes the "London Fog" we had read about in our geography books in the 1960s!!!!) Now on to yur question: I remember Dr. Henry Morris speaking to us about this during a staff meeting in the mid-80s in California. If you list all the chemicals in a human body...H2O, carbon, iron, etc...they are all the chemicals you would find in the soil of Eden. Moist soil would have water, carbon containing minerals like calcite (CaCO3), clay minerals like...kaolinite (Al4Si4O10(OH8))...this does not factor in CREATIO EX NIHLO...our Creator had all the elements he needed. I would joke with my students at the old Christian Heritage College in El Cajon (it has a new name now, I think)..."If our God was a few carbon atoms short during Genesis 1:27 or 2:7;He was the creator and could speak them into existance!!!"

Comment by Floyd on November 5, 2014 at 2:22pm

Thank you Professor McQueen, your answer makes sense to me and is reasonable. It’s interesting that you mentioned H20 since water is the Chemical H20 and the human body makes up about 60% - 70% of water. It answered one of my thoughts because I excluded water in the ‘dust’. But, I know we could not have originated from a chemical mix in the vast oceans because the structure of DNA reveals that it could not have arisen in a prehistoric watery soup. Looking forward to your further answers.

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 5, 2014 at 4:51pm

Floyd, You are welcome about your first question. NOW LET US MOVE ON TO #3...WHAT IS "GOOD GOLD"? SHORT ANSWER = PURE GOLD. ELABORATION==> In my ugrad days and also for my graduate work, my focus was the origin of Cu, Pb, Zn, Au, Ag deposits. This is the subset of Geology called "economic geology." It includes more than the five elements, their minerals, associated rocks...but you get the idea. My degree from Tennessee was a BA in 1974. Therefore I have been pondering ore minerals and the Bible for more than 40 years now. The gold in the passage, Genesis 2:11-12, is important to the geology of the Creation. Without a detailed study of the Hebrew word, here is, what I think at least, is a logical extension. If the Creator wanted to make Adam/Eve's life easy in the garden what kind of gold would He have provided? Now realize what my theology is here: I assume innocence lasted many months, not just a few days, as some argue. I imagine God walking with the newlyweds around Eden and pointing out this and that for months after their creation as adults. If he pointed out placer gold (discussed in some datail in my upcoming Mineral Book...available around Dec. 15), then that would be easy for the 3 of them to scoop the gold nuggets out of a streambed and look at them. As the first scientist/mineralogist, God would have pointed out to the couple native gold's softness, durability, and untanished beauty. If Adam was smart, he would have worked those nuggets (that night, mind you) into a necklace for Eve<smile>. Since the Bible is true, we can have the freedom to have "imagination extrapolation"...of course, within the limits of doctrine.

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 5, 2014 at 4:59pm

as I edited my own response...change " untarnished beauty"

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 6, 2014 at 10:00am

Lou, Thanks for your long "Instant message." I stepped away from my computer. We will discuss your excellent question about the relationship between a YE and the Ice Age. When I taught at the Christian College in El Cajon, California in the 1980s, I suggested to my students that "Ice Age" might best be called an "Ice Moment" based on the decades of work my friend Dr. Larry Vardiman on the nature of the Canopy and what it meant regarding the centuries just after the flood.

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 7, 2014 at 10:58am
FLOYD'S QUESTION #4....COULD THE GOLD, BDELLIUM, AND ONYX STONE...GEN 2:12 HAVE HAD A PART IN THE LONG LIVES OF THE PRE-FLOOD POPULATION? ANSWERED 11-7-14...Excellent question, never had it asked of me before. In the 10 years before Dr. Larry Vardiman retired from ICR's Graduate school, he ad his students followed up in great detail on Dr. Dillow's book, The Waters Above, that came out in the 1970s I think. Dillow's argument was that the vapor canopy of the Second Day of Creation was the best explanation for the long lives before the flood. Vardiman and his students showed that Dillow's old argument is wrong that the vapor equivalent of 40 feet of liquid water, worldwide (say with a base at 15,000 feet) formed a canopy. Vardiman, et al. showed that this sort of canopy would boil water in the Garden of Eden, without Eve putting the creamic pot on the woodburning stove! Therefore, I have to look to the pure (?factoring in the Fall?) DNA/RNA of Adam/Eve for those living 100s of years, not the canopy. As a mineralogist, I am confident that I know that the Gold of Gen 2:12 is native gold, placer gold, or massive gold-quartz veins cropping out near the Garden of Eden. Bdellium is more complex...some pre-1900 theologians thought it was diamond, but Dr. Morris' argument in his Study Bible is probably correct: that it is not a mineral at all. The onyx stone is some sort of silicate (at least SiO2). I discuss what onyx is in my book, so I will defer on that. I will look to the biologist in the Creation Community to answer about health effects of trace amounts of gold and silica.
Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 7, 2014 at 11:10am
Lou, Thanks for calling me "Dr. McQueen" in your posts prior to 11/7/2014. It turns out I do not have a doctorate. Not for lack of trying though. I was almost in the PhD program at the University of Michigan (Ann Arbor) back in the mid-70s when I was an NSF Graduate Fellow there. My creationist's views played a part in my not being allowed into the PhD program...but that is a long story. In the early 1990s, I worked on a PhD in environmental toxicology. I think I was mis-judged, but none the less, I was judged as having too weak a background in biology to continue. Around 2000, I was working on an EdD in science education. I was doing this at night, working more than 40 hrs/week at my Day Job, and with my dear wife's help, raising 4 teens...too much, I fell ill and had to drop out. What is that about Paul praying 3 times?
Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 8, 2014 at 8:33am

11-8-2014....FLOYDS FINAL QUESTION #5===GOLD, THE FLOOD AND APOLOGETIC VALUE...Yes, there is clear support for the truth of scripture in the mention of gold in Genesis 2. Eden, the specific geography of the rivers mentioned have been discussed for over 3000 years. As a flood geologist, who sees the events of Genesis 6, 7, and 8 as catastrophic and worldwide, there is a good evidence for the the truth of the Bible in what we DO NOT FIND. We can't find the gold of Gen.2. Why? The Genesis Flood destroyed every manmade object (all ancient buildings ...pyramids in Africa or in Mexico...they are all post-flood). The rivers of Noah's day are no more. As a geologist I have a theory that at least the first 6000 feet (below ground surface=BGS) was completely eroded. No preflood river valleys or placer gold deposits can be found. Do you see? It is just as we would predict.

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 10, 2014 at 12:46pm

LOU I AM AFRAID I HAVE NEGLECTED YOU WHILE I ANSWERED FLOYD'S QUESTIONS. Your first question revolved around sites in Peru, the ancient city of Jericho and other sites considered by many as 9000 BC...Lou asked if there is evidence of pre-flood cultures. This will take more than 100 words to fully answer...let me start with my flood geology view. Because the flood was catastrophic and worldwide and lasted (in total) over a year, I can't imagine any pre-flood structures surviving the Flood. So the pyramids of Egypt and Mexico are all post-flood. Now let me pause and think how to go to the next step....

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 10, 2014 at 1:26pm

11-10-2014...1 pm ct...THE ISSUE OF "WHAT DOES THE BRONZE AGE MEAN?" BEARS ON LOU'S question. I wanted to take Arch 101 as an elective all thru high school. Therefore, as a UGRAD at Tennessee I took intro archaeology. I memorized the Bronze Age dates and the earliest pharaoh's date. While I was doing this in 1973, I was already a YE I was aware of the 6000 to 10,000 year age of creation science. Where have I come in my thinking? If we divide the history of the universe into 3 2,000 year slots...then we have Abraham living about 2000 BC. THIS NEXT PART IS SIMPLEMINDED, BUT WILL SERVE AS A DISCUSSION TAKE-OFF-POINT...Therefore, the Flood...Genesis=6,7,8  Abraham= Gen 12, and I think this means that all large human structures in Peru, Egypt, Mexico, Stonehenge, etc. were post-flood. In the Bible this has them all begun by the grandchildren of Noah between Genesis 9 and 12....more later

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 11, 2014 at 12:03pm

FOLLOW UP ON LOU AND THE 6000 YR ARGUMENT....USSHER, SCOTALND AND ME... As I said, in the 1970s I focused on arguments for an age of the earth around 10, Dr. Barn's argument base on the decay of the magnetic field. Dr. Barns was a fine man...he was Dean of ICR's grad school in the early 1980s and I had hours of good chats with him during the time I was partime with ICR...before going fulltime in the Fall of 1983. At some point in the 1980s, I began arguing Bishop Ussher's date.

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 11, 2014 at 12:07pm

the reason for my focus on Ussher, in part, comes from the fact my great-grandfather came over from Scotland. We Scots like to, using East Tennessee vocabulary, "get a rise out of the debate." I picked the date that drives the evolutionary community crazy!!!

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 11, 2014 at 12:11pm

11-11-2014 1100 CT....Now do not misunderstand , Lou, I really do believe in a YE...scientifically....and Biblically. I think the genealogies contained in the first 11 Chapters are also chronologies. Therefore , you can get around 10,000 yrs by sci. arguments (like Barnes above), but you can only get to 4000BC = Gen. 1:1 by a Bible argument.

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 11, 2014 at 12:27pm

LIsten I think there are issues with the chronologies of the Biblical dates ,that really leave out some.  Also recent discoveries show there were more Pharaohs unknown up until now.  Also if I amy humbly say, the genesis account does not give any dates?  THese date extrapolations are mans views.  I think that there is more than just the evidence of the narrative, there ie the evidence left in nature by Gods work in the world?  I JUst am open to a longer period of time, but definitely a YE view and not millions or billions of years with respect to the earth.  Also in a previous mention you made a comment about cultures post flood, well I get that of coarse there were post flood cultures...  BU ere were pre-flood cultures and the bible is explicit about some of those cultures, so is archeology?  So I wonder how we get around a 9,000 year old Jericho dig. Sumer, Babylon pre-flood, and other towns that existed and are spoken of?  Egypt existed prior to the flood as well. So I suggest the observable evidences of ancient cultures are clearly found on  he surface on many areas, and they are indeed for the most part pre-flood cultures. I guess its one thing to implore they are all post-flood, but where is the argument from the evidences all over the globe of post flood cultures?  Thats my question>  NOt all cultures were completely buried?  THey were all destroyed but their remnants exist? 

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 12, 2014 at 6:10am

11-12-14...0500...LOU, THANK YOU FOR YOUR REASONED RESPONSE TO MY COMMENTS, LET US CONTINUE OUR DISCUSSION, MY CHRISTIAN BROTHER....ISSUE ONE: THE DESTRUCTION OF PREFLOOD CULTURES AND THE MEANING OF EGYPTIAN ARCHAEOLOGY. Master Book's series "The wonders of creation" is a good resource for our discussion. My own "Mineral Book," which should be available in a month, has photos in it of jasper, brass and bronze items from post-flood cultural sites. When was the Bronze Age? A number of Christian archaeologists has commented on this. I hope you have on your shelf the "Archaeology Book," in the series. It has a detailed discussion of Egyptology, the meaning of Bronze Age and dozens of other issues. Here is my view as a Flood Geologist. I have been given as a gift of God the opportunity to go to both Biblical Ai and Qumran through a research grant provided by Dr. Don Patton of MIOS. A few years ago I got to spend a few days with Dr. Wood at Ai and Dr. Price at Qumran. I discussed with both men the issues revolving around phrases like "late Bronze Age." So I have seen professionally done archaeological sites and seen evidence of some of the cultures you mention, Lou, in your post. Everything discussed in Joshua about Ai and the Dead Sea Scrolls site at Qumran are both post flood, in the first 10 feet below grade (BG)???100 feet BG...but depending on where you are in Israel you go far enough BG and you will hit rocks and unconsolidated sediments (by analogy, like the Mississippi River embayment of TX, LA, MISS and on north). Are these Rocks flood year or Post-flood? Dr, Snelling and Dr. Steve Austin have both studied this issue...see their publications over the last 10 years....I will continue my thoughts in the next post...

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 12, 2014 at 7:26pm

David I agree with you that Ai and Qumran would of coarse be post flood, we ahve no differences of opinion on those cities. I will be patient to hear your next application.  

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 13, 2014 at 2:53pm

LOU, LET ME RETURN TO THE EGYPT = YOUR COMMENT WAS...NOT all cultures were completely buried...This will take more than one post...11-13-2014 at 1:30 PM CT...I am editing my 11-12 post...that should read...Christian archaeologists HAVE commented...NOW ON TO EGYPT...I was introduced to egyptology in Junior High in the 1960s and have been interested in pyramids, mummies, and the Valley of the Kings ever since. As I see it, many of my Christian friends view ancient Egypt in 3 ways: 1) Egypt as mentioned in the Bible (one example RE:Abraham Gen. 12 :10-20...Which Pharaoh is it in 12:20? Does anyone know?, 2) Egypt as covered by evolutionary, humanistic, National Geographic treatment. This view of Egypt accepts all C-14 dates and all of the "primitive man to civilized man" evolution of culture ideas and 3) the view that my own late father-in-law took...Ancient extra-terrestrials view. I can remember discussing with him in the mid-1970s the Eric van Danigan (spelling problem here) view that: "the primitive Egyptians could not have built the pyramids." This view puts the Nazca lines, huge ancient structures (temples of eastern Mexico) outside the reach of "mere primitive early cultures." Several MB published books comment on this latter issue: my book on p. 62 has a reference to Dr. Morris' (1995,2012) Study Bible comments on Genesis 4:22 also the MB book by Landis (2012) of the title: The Genius of Ancient Man. I think the first view best fits Egyptology into aYE view.

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 14, 2014 at 12:15pm

LOU, LET ME RETURN TO THE THREAD OF ===> ...NOT ALL CULTURES WERE completely burried...Let me draw a mental picture of what I think you are thinking  and then you tell me if I have the right picture===>a pre-flood structure a hit by the flood is partly covered and somehow manages to escape erosion and ends up in Modern Viet-Nam covers by a triple layer canopy. So you and I go ...find it...and begin to try to figure out where it fits in Genesisi 1-12. As a flood geologist my worry is how could it survive? We would need to also look at the upper 5000 of the geology under that part of Viet-Nam to know for sure...more later Lou....11-14-14 1100 CT

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 15, 2014 at 4:15am
My edit of the previous post....should read upper 5000 feet ...the rocks under the viet-nam temple would tell us the flood geology setting...for example if 100 feet below the temple we find limestones with trilobites, snails and clam fossils...the temple would be my next post I will talk about what it would mean if we found the temple,s foundation on granite
Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 15, 2014 at 9:13am

meaning of granite foundations at this hypothetical ancient the 1700s , flood geologists of the day would use a rock-time vocabulary of PRIMARY = dating from Creation Week, SECONDARY = post-fall of man to the end of the flood, then (depending on which naturalist you followed} either TERTIARY= 3rd division (alone) or QUATERNARY= some would add the 4th division of earth history. In another post, I will talk about the 3rd and 4th divisions, but the 1st and 2nd are enough for now. Now, Lou let us go get H.G. Well's Time machine...pick up our brother Floyd...and all three of us go back to 1700 at this site. So here is our logic if we find rocks without fossils, like an igneous granite, these are PRIMARY going back to Day 1 or Day 3 of the creation week. If the temple's foundation is on these types of rocks, maybe Lou is right and we have found a temple from the preflood world. But if the rocks have fossils in them...especially marine invertebrates ....then we have the temple built on rocks of the flood...therefore, the temple is post flood....that's enough for now...11-15-14 0830 CT

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 15, 2014 at 11:29am


It is interesting your mention marine fossils in building materials, If Egypt existed before the flood, and I well believe several of its major buildings and other ancillary buildings found throughout Egypt are pre-flood your assumption that all marine fossils are flood induced? So since the floor of the original ocean is now at the top of Everest, and other mountain chains also existed prior to the flood? These mountains have fossil evidences of marine biology on them as well.  The block cut out of many buildings in the Americas as well as middle east also contain such?  Certainly the mountains in many areas were at one time near sea level but due to some catastrophe and volcanic movement rose as well. When God made land, a process was set n place and the earth certainly has changed over andover due to various natural and suer natural processes. David many of the greatest experts from all walks of life see the evidences of egypt as not post flood but pre-flood?  When you apply a Viet-nam Site to my question does it really answer my original post about egypt and Jericho?  That building may well be post-flood which is your conclusions.  I get that.  YOur "assumption would be that all fossils are a result of the wwFlood? I have posted numerous times about sea floor fossil layers one on top of the other in Irvine California and other areas.  With respect to the catastrophic flood, I don't see how the flood would lay down perfect sea bed fossil areas one on tope of the other, fully developed?  This just doesn't jive with the floods evidences?  The are layers f forests found in coal beds that have forests growing on top of one another that are fossilized, what of the chinese volcanic forests as well? I think ME and my YE colleagues such as yourself should be asking and exploring these things a lot more.  Your assumption is this does not fit with YE or the Bible?  I am trying to get Ye experts to examine the Scriptures and the evidences of pre-flood cities, and the discoveries that co-inside with these cities that are indeed part of our archeological history.  Thats all.  To say Egypt was built after the flood and didn't exist before, I struggle with that because the evidence is overwhelmingly clear what the bible does say.  I mentioned in passing to you about the family of NOah and the record of the cities  post flood?  Abraham mentions 26 cities in Genesis 10, Noah's sons went of to the coastlands exc.  How did they now these existed?  Because they were there before the flood?  What of Babylon and Egypt post flood, these must of existed prior to the flood?  I think there is an issue as well with C-14 testing that YE people automatically discredit, but the advances in C-4 testing and now even Christians are using it in dating bones etc.  I don't except anything over 7,000 years as legit because of other issues, but certainly C-14 has a half life 1,500 years and a date of 3,000 year co-aberrated with other evidences is nothing to just pass off as sec-science and incorrect.  Yes they have an old age view and I think arbitrary view about many of these issues, but some of the testing and advanced technology of pre-flood civilization seems clear to me... I know that much of my stuff here has been somewhat cryptic, but I hope in the next month or so to write an article and site my evidences and post it on going deeper site which is my site. It bothers me that pre-flood evidences of cultures are being shunned by well meaning YE people.  The evidence is strong.  And if I am correct---it doesn't change a thing?  Except some people who have written books on the subject will have to back off from their presuppositions.  This does not affect YE view at all????  I think we should just let this go for now, because we're talking apples and oranges.

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 15, 2014 at 9:44pm

David, as a side note you defined 3 different scenarios about Egypt:

1) Egypt as mentioned in the Bible (one example RE:Abraham Gen. 12 :10-20...Which Pharaoh is it in 12:20? Does anyone know?,

2) Egypt as covered by evolutionary, humanistic, National Geographic treatment.This view of Egypt accepts all C-14 dates and all of the "primitive man to civilized man" evolution of culture ideas and

3) the view that my own late father-in-law took...Ancient extra-terrestrials view.

I don't accept any of these and have been very clear to you as to what I actually do infer?  In a nut shell:

1.  Many creationists are not aware of new techniques used for C-14 testing.  They are still arguing old articles and views of C-14.  NEw testing, cleaning, and corroboration with other techniques, as well many of these tests are done several times to get the best testing results....  Several Christians tested bones from dinos and came up with the allsaurus at 16,000 years.  THey also verified that human bones and Mammoth bone and dino bones were all contemporaries of one another.  Should we as Creationists throw out the baby with the bathwater?

2.  You have not once alluded to the biblical narrative in Genesis of cities that existed pre-flood. The fact of the matter many of the cities have been dig up and excavated layer above layer, you put off all the work Christians and non-christians but all experts on Jerhico as one of the oldest continuously occupied sites in the middle east? Again my questions is why are we YE people discrediting and rejecting huge amounts of evidences of pre-flood? 

3.  I do not buy into primitive man to advanced man, I believe all human finds are human totally and not "hominids" so I don't buy that stuff at all.  But the fact of the mater is they existed, and H*** erectus looks to possibly be part of Noah's family line given the bottleneck of the flood as Neanderthals and others were later.  

4.  Ancient aliens etc. I think is absurd, but given the mathematical capabilities of an earth exactly like ours in the Universe is such a huge number, and the biblical council of Gods Word mentions many different non-humans, it wouldn't surprise me of some where other races could exist. Also I believe there was very advanced technology that existed prior to the flood.  I mentioned the use of Bitumen, and Boats 75 ft lang, the quipi used by Carel and Egypt certainly have some ties, both Egypt and other cultures have poured stone technology as well as South America.  So I understand full well what has been written by authors that assume any civilization found is post flood.  How do you explain the volcano in India that had occupation of human evidences then 14 ft of ash from the volcano, and then new habitation after.  This volcano is known to be 74,000 years old.  I may not buy the dating at all, but why are "we" brothers and sisters not examining evidences that has been left for us to pour over.  

Your a geologist, I stated that the volcanic outcrops throughout southern California, we are talking billions of granite outcrops there is no evidence of such outcrops being affected by receding waters?> 

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 15, 2014 at 10:16pm

So since this is apple and oranges... Lets assume for the sake of conversations that two possibly three cultures for sure existed prior to the flood, Although I think there could have been thousands....

"IF" that was true, then how would the biblical narrative be changed, how would Christ's sacrifice, or the New Testament Scriptures and hermeneutics be changed? If the discoveries I alluded to were indeed pre-flood cultures this doesn't impact YE one iota????

The people that would be impacted would be people that have assumed and written on the subject and implied certain views and have disregarded evidences?   

David I most humbly am YE in my understanding of the earth and creation and the narrative of Genesis, but I also wrestle with trying to rectify some of these ideas with what the bible, and evidence, actually says.  

I pray we examine these evidences....  

Comment by Miriam J Douglas on November 16, 2014 at 8:55pm

My question isn't nealry as sophisticated as those stated above, but since I'm new to this website, please forgive.  How do I teach my 6 year old son, who is prone to collecting any bit of rock material out of the driveway, that minerals and rocks point to the Creator? It seems to be a less direct path than the biological (like scabs are God's band-aids).  Thanks for the advice!

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 16, 2014 at 11:25pm

Dear Miriam,

I remember receiving a rock sample box for my birthday when I was 6 or 7, I was very fond of that box.  I also was given a child's book on minerals with super pictures of different gems and minerals.  Possibly reading the narrative of how GOd crated the land in Genesis and all creation consist of the dust and earth and water. 

As a side note by the time I was 10 years old I knew that the things I observed in nature and the animals I worked with were not part of an accident.  I collected horned toads, snakes, insects, pulled over rocks, and observed birds of all kinds, coyotes, rabbits, butterflies, I helped doctor birds and other animals, kept lizards and turtles for pets, also snakes.  I knew that there was a Creator/God by what i had observed and kept.  It was all too wonderful. I was not raised on biblical creationism and in spite of my lack of connection to the church or christian teaching in that area, I rememebr in college 1970 writing a paper for my English class and received an "A".  The topic was "Evolution vs. The Bible".  I was able to mount a good enough argument that my professor was convinced I knew what I was talking about.  I can only say that from the time I was about 10 years old, in spite of my sin and not being a Christian per se, I can surely say that I knew in my heart of hearts that Evolution was false...  Like Solomon, I received an education at a young age from observing nature.  I believe God put his creation in my heart and I never considered anything within the context of that argument outside of a Creator /God. Cheers!!  At 64years old, it is all too wonderful, I still collect and breed reptiles, and study them, God can plant that seed in your sons heart in my humble opinion.  Not everyone has that unction, but I can only encourage you and I share this with the idea that he can and will connect the dots given exposure and biblical education....nothing better than hands on nature. God has left us with foot prints of HIs work in the world. Nature implores evidence by its own existence, it is evidence that we all can grasp, Gods Word says that no man is ignorant and all men are accountable.  I suggest that of all Scripture that comes to me, even greater than the narrative than Genesis, is the first chapter of the book of John.  

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. 

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 17, 2014 at 8:20am

Miriam and Lou, I have enjoyed reading your conversation. Let me start out with a brief comment to both of you. Lou, thank you for your patience with me as we discuss ancient civilizations. I thought that my "imagination discussion" about the Viet-Nam temple did actually cover three possibilities. I have printed out our conversation (Floyd included) since early November (11-4??) and will go back and re-read what you have written. From your comments, I have misunderstood your view. Now on to Miriam. Yes, how wonderful it is that you allow your children to collect rocks. A collection forms the basis of discussion. In my book about minerals, look at Chapter 8 beginning on p78 for my thoughts about this case mineral collection. More later for both of you...thanks...Prof. McQueen...11-17-14...0700

Comment by Miriam J Douglas on November 17, 2014 at 9:41am

Thank you, Lou, for sharing your story and your heart!  It makes me so excited to see how God speaks to you through fascination and wonder.  And now I'm wondering if it isn't just the same for my son...a fascination with the variety, texture, feel of the little things he collects will prompt him to thank God for the fun of it all.  And I do believe that fun is a great word for what He puts around us to enjoy!  Can't wait for the book to come out on Minerals!!

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 17, 2014 at 10:08am


IMHO--teach your son "that"  Scripture from John and have him memorize this and learn it and get it into his heart, because the connection of "all things" comes back to a Creator/Designer God, if he carries this in his heart he will critically look at what the world says and compare it to his own observation and knowledge, that spiritual warfare that he will run into in his life will always be challenging him, but tempered with the truth, that all things exist and consist because of Christ....he will know the truth and the truth will set him free. Cheers to you and your son! 

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 17, 2014 at 5:36pm

David, you have not misunderstood what I have said, I know nothing about Vietnam temples, you gave me a scenario and your conclusion, I can only say I can accept that as post flood because I don't know anymore about that...  I thought on the counter wise that I had made an argument for YE people should be exploring some of the anomalies and clear evidences of pre-flood civilizations.  I can tell you believe they are all post flood.  That leaves us at an impasse.  I respect you sir, and your considered view, while I believe that there is ample evidence that challenges the current interpretation I understand that most authors do not want to have such a conversation nor be challenged even by fellow YE people with a different view.

I thank you for your considered response obviously you have a plethora of experience and I respect that, it's not what I believe is a fully robust view, only because the "loose ends" are still blowing in the wind....It is my hope that YE brethren will come to the  table and go deeper...  I have had exchanges with many on the subject, and there seems to be a total rejection of evidences, for a party line view, that fails to answer real questions right in front of our faces.  

I think we should just end this thread here, and I appreciate the exchange and know you have a great heart in that the way you conduct yourself.  I appreciate this exchange, and in the future I shall write a paper on the subject and bring to bare "evidences" that YE people are unwilling or unable to respond to. Someone needs to look at these things....without marginalizing the questions, but examining the evidences to see if they are true. We as Christian brothers are to reason together and seek the truth.... We have the Scriptures which are God breathed, our view what ever it is, should homogenize with the Scriptures.  I am concerned brother....  Blessings and Gods peace to you brother.  Lets end this post and the next time I bring this up, I shall be much more clear on the evidence....

I pray that in the future that we as YE Christians don't have egg on our face by adopting views that are not consistent with evidence nor observable, inferring hermeneutics that are not accepted by scholars and experts, lastly discrediting chronology and dating methods that have come a long way in corroborating time lines. I am concerned that unless we examine these truths and evidences our set strategy and view will crumble....  This is my concern.  

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 20, 2014 at 11:22am

Miriam, I have enjoyed Lou's encouragement to you regarding science, The Gospel of John and your son. I add my compliments to what you are doing. And how. Collections are the foundation (or should be) of all field science...field mineralogy, field geology, field biology...keep it up...DRM

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 20, 2014 at 11:41am

LOU...I RESPECT YOUR POST ABOUT "...ENDING THIS THREAD..." AND AFTER ONE MORE COMMENT BY ME, i WILL MOVE ON TO OTHER THINGS YOU AND FLOYD AND MIRIAM HAVE BROUGH UP. NOW LOU, I want to be careful about data, fact and theory. Your "egg on our face" comment above is well taken. I began reading about creation science in the late 1960s when my Public High School Biology Teacher allowed James and I to take the Creation side in an "in class" debate. Our teacher argued for evolution. James (who was my best friend and ended up being the best man in our wedding in 1972) and I had exactly one 10 page booklet as our source. The adults in our life (pastors,parents,etc.) did not know about the 1961 Genesis Flood book or any other. Now why am I telling this story? I have been studying this issue for 45 years now, yet in HONESTY I may have overlooked data, the way James and I did in 1968 (?). Therefore, Lou, as a scientist and a Bible student I MAY HAVE OVERLOOKED data. Your conclusion about me is true: I do love to argue Usser's 4004 BC date (as explained above) and I am a 6000-year old universe guy and I do not think any ancient human-built structure could have survived the Genesis Flood. YET, because of Roman 3, I KNOW I AM sinful, fallible, and proud of my own theories. I do nto want to become what some have called a "CULT OF ONE." I have thought  about the Garden of Eden for 40 years. I have an idea about the types of conversations the three of them had walking in (Gen 3:8) "the cool of the day." Yet I cannot elivate my speculations to the level of doctrine and say, "No, you must believe what I say about the conversations of Gen. 3:8....later, my Brother,   11-20-14....1030 CT

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 21, 2014 at 2:26pm




"IF" that was true, then how would the biblical narrative be changed, how would Christ's sacrifice, or the New Testament Scriptures and hermeneutics be changed? If the discoveries I alluded to were indeed pre-flood cultures this doesn't impact YE one iota????

The people that would be impacted would be people that have assumed and written on the subject and implied certain views and have disregarded evidences?  

**** FROM MCQUEEN ON 11-21-14 @ 1 PM....I guess I have not stated the obvious (in my mind); YES, there were hundreds for years worth of civilizations before the Flood. The latter part of Genesis 4 I have thought a lot about...v22...Zillah and Tubal-Cain were working in at least copper, brass or bronze (depending on the translation of the Hebrew words). So I can see some of my earlier comments may have been misleading. Also something I have not made clear is my view on the ongoing debate about "a bell fround in coal" or "a hammer found in iron-rich sedimentary rocks." I have held in my hand some of these "pre-flood" objects and have an ongoing interest in these. Therefore, I can see an individual after running away from the rising flood waters, climbed on a floating mat of vegatation (like Dr. Steve Austin has talked about over the years in regard to coal seams...John Mackay of Australia has also worked on this). The human is washed away by a huge wave and his backpack gets stuck on the floating mat. Inside he has bread, water and his mother's favorite bell. The floating mat is burried late in the flood (month 5-8???) and is compressed into coal. Coal miners in the 1980s (or whenever) are mining the coal and find the bell surrounded by bituminous coal. If we could document this, then the bell is a legitimate pre-flood object. This sort of thing would be part of the "disregarded evidence" that you mention in your quote above.

Comment by Robert Dagenais on November 22, 2014 at 9:11pm

Prof. McQueen

Can you please comment on plate tectonics, mountain building and magnectic pole reversals? I am firmly in the "Old Earth" camp along with Hugh Ross and some of the mainstream denominations. Thanks.

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 23, 2014 at 9:44am

Dear Robert, 

I wish YE peoples and OE peoples could explore their views more openly...  I am curious, what one thing has you convinced at  the earth is old, if I can ask? What is the one thing you really camp out on and are convinced about that. What if the earth was younger than millions or billions of years, does your view implore that it must be "that", or could you accept a scenario of a younger earth?  Could that one thing I asked you about above also have room for a younger earth?  Not implying 6,000 years but a younger earth?  Your thoughts?

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 24, 2014 at 9:45am

HI MR DAGENAIS, From looking at your profile, I see you live in Monroe, little town of Mangham is 30 SE of Monroe, LA!!!! From looking at your posts, I see that you have a conversation with my new found friend Lou H. and also share an interest in astronomy, which I have enjoyed since the mid 1960s....... PT, Mtn building and magnetic poles (and the data from the ocean floor)...excellent questions which I will take up in three posts over the next couple of days. By the way, I value a conversation with you regarding the old earth and especially Hugh Ross's mention. In my full time days (83-87) with ICR, when we were in California, I was part of several hours of discussion with Hugh Ross. At first he met with Dr. Gish and me, I guess in 1986. Then Dr. Henry Morris required the whole science staff to met with Hugh for 4 hours. He told Dr. Morris to his face how he was wrong about the data of Astronomy, especially the H-Russell Diagram. Then Dr. Morris, but most vocally Dr. Gish, pointed out errors in Hugh's thinking...good day...good discussion. now on to...PLATE TECTONICS...I became convinced around 1980 that there is abundant evidence for plate tectonics in our modern world. In addition, using my model of earthhistory (see my paper in the first International Conference on Creationism (1986)), the modern position of the plates solidified around 300 to 1000 ys after the flood. For today let us say 300 years. As  a defender of Ushers' 4004 BC date for the creation, this puts me firmly into the YE, flood geologist camp. My first book, MINERAL BOOK, is to be released in mid-December and if you read p. 66-71, it presents the argument for a young universe and earth from a mineral viewpoint...radiohalos, etc. BUT NOW BACK TO PT. I think the clearest way to think about PT is captured in this phrase: Plate tectonics, YES, modern Continental Separation (CS), NO. In the preflood world we have evidence of the creation of one world continent. This then split into plates during the Genesis Flood and rapidly moved, moved back (with mountain building collisions), then moved again. As an over-generalization for our discussion purpose, there was clear PT focused on the Flood Time, but no substantial CS in the time after Christ's resurrection. More later...11-24....BTW, Happy Thanksgiving to all Floyd, Miriam, Lou, and Robert!!!!!!....0830...DRM 

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on November 25, 2014 at 8:12am

ROBERT, I AM INTERESTED IN YOUR COMMENTS TO LOU regarding old earth arguments...What is the "smoking gun" in your thinking? NOW ON TO YOUR SECOND QUESTION regarding MOUNTAIN BUILDING.

I grew up in the Appalachian Mountains (hereafter AM), therefore I will use the AM to answer your question. My hometown, Johnson City, TN is in the Valley and Ridge geologic area and consists of sandstones, shales, and limestones considered Cambrian and Ordovician. These SED RXs are folded and faulted, with the overthrust faults running NE to SW. Driving east and south of this part of Upper East TN, I could take you to complex IG and MM Rxs of NC, SC, and the area of the Great Smoky MTNs National Park. As I discussed in my 1986 ICC paper (mentioned in a previous post), the SS and SH of this Cambrian sequence were deposited in the first Phase of the flood (what I call F1), then due to changes in chemistry of that Flood Year Ocean, the limestones of what is called the Knox Group (and dolomites) were directly precipitated from the ocean. WITH THAT BACKGROUND, WHAT ABOUT THE ACTUAL TECTONIC action that created the AM??? The forces came from the SE to the NW from a repeated(?) collision between the eastern US and Africa. Therefore, I argue that the AM provide geologic/tectonic evidence for a "catastrophic sedimentation and mountain building." One example of this argument comes from Dr. John Morris' work in rock mechanics: the limestones (as one example) within the Knox Group could not be harden into stone and folded into the anticlines and synclines that we see in East TN. Play-Doh would be a better analogy to the consistency during the Flood of these SS,SH, and carbonate rocks...11-25-14...0700

Comment by Lou Hamby on November 25, 2014 at 9:42am

David just read an article Dr. Oard,and while I don't agree with some of his stuff, I find it interesting that the article which is very in depth, he agrees with Holt that the Flood line is in the upper sedimentary layers

the name of the article is: Defining the Flood/post-Flood boundary in sedimentary rocks

Here is his summation excerpt from Dr. Oard:  

"The Flood/post-Flood boundary would be above these features. The surficial woolly mammoth fossils found in loess in Siberia, Alaska and the Yukon are likely post-Flood. (my underline)

As it turns out, there are many areas of the world where the Flood/post-Flood boundary is in the late Cenozoic. I agree with Holt’s view that the boundary is near the surface of the sediments or sedimentary rocks at the earth’s surface in most areas.  HOw does Dr. Oard deal with pre-flood fossil evidences of Wooly Rhinos in other parts of the world?  

I totally agree that these rhinos for the most part in those areas are indeed post-flood.  But that does not address the issue of the other fossil areas many in the US?  David I am sure we both agree that mega fauna lived on beyond the flood...  

My thoughts:

Given this view it seems very probable that Pre-flood evidences may well be found in such upper layers, especially where there is no flood layer at all, have you seen the pictures I have posted on the forum of Southern California's 3 counties that are all igneous rock (below)?  What I notice is there is "no" evidences at all that the flood recession pulled any of this rocks of which there are billions, into the gulf of Mexico between the Mexican side and Baja side.  None at all?  How do you see this in relation to the flood and the deep crevice of the Grand Canyon just a few hundreds of miles away which drained into the same area (Colorado River)?, would you assume the igneous rock of Southern California to be post flood?  


Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on Wednesday

LOU, I AM CERTAINLY ENJOYING OUR CONVERSTION AND HAPPY THANKSGIVING TO YOU TOMORROW....NOW YOUR last are key words I wrote down. MIKE OARD,CZ RXS, WOOLY RHINOS, MEGAFAUNA GETTING OFF THE ARK, S. CA IG RXS...3 COUNTIES PERHAPS POST FLOOD AND GREAT PHOTO OF THE where to begin? OARD, At the mention of his name I went to my library and pulled off his Frozen Record book and 2 of the True N. Series Guides the GRCA and Zion and Bryce. A year ago I called Mike and spoke to him about doing a similar guide to the Great Smokey Mountains Nat. Park...he could not help me then, but still a good idea I think. Thanks for pointing out the Oard article about the flood/postflood boundary...I will look for it. You are right, Lou, that you and agree that megafauna walked off the ark. Creatures like mammoths and mastodons are "frozen fossils" in places like Siberia. And are part of post-flood residual catastrophy (what I call PF-RC) deposits. I need to be away from for an hour...I'll be back... 

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on Saturday

AS I PREPARE TO ANSWER A FEW MORE QUESTIONS FROM LOU AND OTHERS....Let me say thank you to Master Books and Creation Conversations (April K. especially) for allowing me the ministry here during November. My conversations with all of you have been used by our LORD to enrich my life, thinking, and ministry. David...PS since it tis the 29th...we can now say...Merry CHRIST-mas!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Comment by Professor David R. McQueen, MS,E on Saturday

PLAN THROUGH MONDAY...MCQUEEN'S ANSWERS...I am looking forward to the next few months. I will drop back from being the November "expert" to question asker and comment-maker. MY GOAL is to cover these areas: Robert Dagenais's final question about reversal of magnetic poles, Lou's thread from early November suggesting that I am overlooking "observable data" that would indicate that we have structures and cultural remains from the pre-flood world. Lou's question (just above with the granitic photo) about areas with "no flood layer at all." and I want to make a final comment from my book (the Mineral Book...which should be ready in 20 days...I ship) about minerals, Romans 1, and design by God....11-29-14...0800 CT

About CC

Connecting Christians who believe in Biblical Creation — discussing beliefs, sharing ideas, and recommending evolution-free resources. Please keep all posts relevant to the topics of this community.

Rules of Engagement
Zero Tolerance Policy
Statement of Faith
Creation Terms

Homeschool Curriculum


Creation Conversations 2018

What's new @ CC for 2018? 

Creation networking and much more in store for Creation Conversation Members. You'll not want to miss this new year!

© 2019   Created by Creation Conversations.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service