The article appears to be advocating catastrophism.
To this day, the resulting steep-sided canyon walls can be seen,2 showing that horizontal sediment layers hundreds of feet thick were formed within hours during the eruption. This sparks the question: what other layered sedimentary rocks in earth's crust were formed rapidly?
Not so many. There are signs that tell if sediment was deposited quickly versus slowly. For example, rounded river rocks require erosion to smooth them out which implies deposition over time.
A new rock cap atop the mountain that formed after the 1980 eruption should have shown it to be on the order of tens of years. But standard analysis gave the totally incorrect date of 350,000 years.3 What other rocks have been dated incorrectly by following those standard dating protocols?
I am... weary of anything published by their own internal department. Especially since it is claiming that two basic physical principles (radioactive decay/diffusion of gases) are false.
Could the tree bark-rich coal beds have been formed by a catastrophe even more massively destructive than Mount St. Helens?
No. If the situation is destructive enough they will just burn.
Experts at the time of the 1980 eruption predicted that the area would take perhaps hundreds of years to rebound. Yet after only 20 years, biologists noted the speedy recovery of plants and animals on what had been a vast moonscape.6 Today, the 30-year-old blast zone is a lushly treed forest. Creation science models based on the records of Genesis expected to see this happen, since Genesis discloses that God created creatures for the very purpose of “filling” the earth,7 and since after the Flood the creatures aboard the Ark were able to quickly adapt to the new environments produced by the cataclysm.
I should note those "experts" were idiots. For starters, volcanic ash makes a good fertilizer so plant life would regrow quickly. And once you have plants, animals return to eat them. It doesn't prove genesis as God, having alot of time, presumably wouldn't care about how long it took to fill the earth. By contrast if you work of the idea that animals are rational consumers
than they will automatically go to new areas in order to maximize their utility- the area would lack competitors and at a certain point the plant growth would be thick enough that derived utility would exceed that from their current area.
Plants, of course, not being concious would simply go were their seeds are deposited. I think the surprise was that seeds can be deposited so far, but part of the reason was that some life survived being buried under the ash.
Because of the Mount St. Helens eruption, scientists know that sedimentary rock layers can form in only hours, rather than requiring millions of years.
They are being dishonest. The sediments already existed- they were just moved around. The layering
is new, but if the earth was young it wouldn't have any sedimentary rock to form said layers!