Edward Boudreaux PhD

Edward Boudreaux PhDEdward A. Boudreaux, PhD, is a former Professor of Inorganic and Quantum Chemistry and Chemical Physics at the University of New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. He earned his B.S. in chemistry at Loyola University and his M.S. and PhD in Chemistry at Tulane University. For more on his life and career, see this biography page at Answers in Genesis.

Dr. Boudreaux collaborated actively with Carl E. Baugh in the formulation and revision of the Crystalline Canopy Theory.

Dr. Boudreaux is also a Contributing Writer at the Creation Science Hall of Fame

Brief reviewer’s comments

Here are his comments on the Hydroplate Theory, the Catastrophic Plate Tectonic Theory, and the Crystalline Canopy Theory, respectively:Edward Boudreaux, PhD, is a former Profressor of Inorganic and Quantum Chemistry and Chemical Physics at the University of New Orleans.

  1. Walt Brown’s HPT. Based on the information I can gather, the HTP suffers from a serious lack of adequate physical data (theoretical and/or factual) to support it. What’s even worse is that some of the so called supporting data are totally incorrect. Consequently, Brown’s HPT requires significantly more substantiation before it can be accepted as a viable theory.

  2. John Baumgardner’s CPT. The CPT has a substantial amount of physical modeling in support of it, so it does not suffer from the same deficiencies as the HPT. However, there are some features in the most recent model, which essentially have to invoke some miraculous intervention in order for the model to be totally functional. Baumgardner’s computer model is highly sophisticated and does provide an adequate scientific account of all the likely physical processes involved with the CPT. At the present time, except for the deficiencies cited above, the CPT the most scientifically sound model of all models thus far proposed.

  3. Carl Baugh’s Canopy Theory. I have had direct input into Baugh’s proposal and can assure that the scientific data presented do provide substantiation of the model. This is the best evidence that can be provided at this time, save complex computer modeling of the problem. This canopy model has the necessary theoretical support to vindicate it. All modeling of prior canopy models failed to provide any essential supporting data. In conclusion I am of the opinion that Baugh’s canopy model is acceptable.

RETURN TO GLOBAL FLOOD PEER REVIEW PAGE

Leave a Reply