Creationist versus Grand Canyon authority reported in Science (AAAS) News 19 May 2017.
Andrew Snelling, a geologist who works with Answers in Genesis, has twice applied for permission to collect rock samples from four locations in the Grand Canyon, as part of a study into the folding of Palaeozoic sedimentary structures. As the Canyon is part of a National Park, a permit is needed from the National Park Service (NPS) in order to collect samples. The NPS rejected the first application, and following the second one told him he would have to “first obtain GPS coordinates and photographs of each of his proposed sites and submit detailed information about how the samples would be extracted”. However, Snelling claims “The park has routinely authorized applications proposing far more aggressive sampling without the demand that the researchers first conduct an independent trip to locate each sampling site with specific GPS data”.
Intervention from Representative Trent Franks, a member of Congress for the state of Arizona, failed to move the NPS so Snelling has now filed a lawsuit claiming NPS is discriminating against him because of his belief in Creation and Noah’s Flood, and is acting contrary to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and contrary to an Executive Order entitled Promoting Free Speech And Religious Liberty issued by President Donald Trump. According to Gary McCaleb, senior counsel at the Alliance Defending Freedom, a Christian non-profit advocacy and legal group that is representing Snelling, “This case perfectly illustrates why President Trump had to order executive agencies to affirm religious freedom, because park officials specifically targeted Dr. Snelling’s religious faith as the reason to stop his research”.
Editorial Comment: This is not the first time the Grand Canyon National Park authorities have hindered research by creationist geologists. We know from personal experience. In the mid 1980’s John Mackay found a trackway of amphibian like prints in a Cambrian rock layer that should not have contained amphibians according to the evolutionary timetable. When asked for permission to further investigate the trackway, authorities ‘advised’ no serious investigation (rocks moved, etc.) could occur unless they could prove there were no other sites in the canyon where these prints occurred. In fact authorities would not even go and look at the site!
Of course if pro-creation Trump goes, any legal rulings pro-creation will go also. Evolutionist research does not depend on facts but on favours.
Evidence News vol.17 No. 11
14 June 2017
Creation Research Australia
Were you helped by this item? If so, consider making a donation so we can keep adding more answers. For USA tax deductible donations click here. For UK tax deductible donations click here. For Australia and rest of world click here.