Steve Harness” and Kevin Bracken”s Oct. 15 letters have prompted me to do a continuation of my Oct. 10 letter: Despite what many think, Antarctica actually had a warm climate at one time as evidenced by the volcano Mt. Erebus, which is still active, and large coal fields near the Queen Mead range, Coats Land and the Beadmore glacier region. This tells us that large forests were buried in Antarctica during the flood.
On page 652 of the New Geology, G.M. Price writes that fossil remains “uniformly testify that a warm climate has in former times prevailed over the whole globe.” This idea has been confirmed by many other well-known authorities such as Alfred R. Wallace and Sir Henry H. Howorth.
That this was once a tropical planet that was nearly destroyed about 4,400 years ago by a sudden 40-day deluge is evidenced by a find in the frozen wastelands of northern Siberia consisting of deep-frozen, perfectly preserved mastodons in the flesh with unchewed yellow buttercups still in their mouths.
The first creation was perfect and the second creation will be a reproduction of it. There can be no differences between the second and the first because perfection cannot be improved. In the first creation, in effect, the Earth was within a giant greenhouse. That”s how it will be again at the second creation when the Earth is made new. The two creations are about 7,000 years apart.
“Moreover the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold ” Isaiah 30:26.
There was a time when skeptics thought the Earth was flat. Now, skeptics mock the idea of a re-creation of the Earth. But is this mocking reasonable in the view of the implications of fulfilled prophecy in which there have been no erroneous predictions?
Bill Kettenhofen, Kelseyville
