I called up Ken Ham on live radio from a street in New Orleans over a decade ago and suggested that Phil Johson got lost in Cornell's new entomology library which with the push of a button a whole shelf would move electronically.
I dont think that Phil has a "type of argument" although one can see his legal training in the new outlines he provided to the debate.
Instead, Phil Johnson seems to be stuck on discerning where in academia the accounting for the "origins of genetic information is." The difference between Phil and me is that while we both have never carried out personal study of radioactive dating (unless my info on Phil is somewhat dated) I will and will constrain my thinking by what "times" might be involved. The reason Phil does not think future study times might be needed is because he thinks that the scientists themselves will change the science rather than the science "discovering" something it currently doesnt posses. In that I categorically differ from him, which is why I was willing to tell Ham that Phil was "lost" in his own outline and didnt read the details for the deconstruction it was not. There are other creationists with this ability. Please dont get me wrong.
Phil didn't think that the origins of the genetic information is in the biochemistry or physiology. I do. Yes, I think there are big changes coming in biology but I think that information measures might be projected (even if not original) onto biochemical data not that there will be some newly informed population of scientists. The change will be gradual not saltic on my view.
This does not make Phil J, formulaic by any means. At least that is how I see it. I have just recently realized that the scope of Phil's "alteration" within creationism might be supported by rejecting Weyl's support contra Kant of by a German author ( I have not read(more later if I can get a translation) writing around the time of the first world war as to how "people" are (in my own interpretation) a consistent class of the 2nd class of Cantorian ordinals. I think that will be in biochemistry not simple boolean overlays on data that informs genetics.
™ Version 4.2