Moses Joshua It has been suggested that the Mosaic genealogies are perhaps only 20 to 40 percent complete. Those who hold that the genealogies are telescoped place the creation of Adam and Eve around 10 to 30 thousand years ago, but perhaps as late as 60, years ago. However, prior to Abraham, there is little available Biblical or historical information on which to build a solid chronology. As a result, the early Hebrew convention of including just the most historically important individuals in the genealogical record, coupled with the broad meanings of ben, ab, and yalad, raise serious questions whether the Genesis genealogies may be regarded as an absolute chronology pointing back to a 6, year-old earth. The genealogies themselves provide a rationale for human origins dating earlier than six to ten thousand years ago. Creation of the universe and heavenly bodies When the universe was first proved to have a beginning, cosmologists were up-in-arms, since they had always believed in an eternally-existing universe with no First Cause. This period could have spanned as much as several billions years, or it could have been much less; the text simply does not tell us how long. The word suggests a period of time of unstated length which precedes the conditions described by Genesis 1: John Collins suggests that the perfect verb form used in Genesis 1: It is a completed verb form, meaning only that the creation was accomplished at some point in the past.
Radiometric Dating and Creation Science
It has to have it. Creation theory can survive either way – either 6, years, or long ages that “God” started and put into motion. But for strict evolutionists lots and lots of time is required Carbon is but one of several radiometric dating methods that evolutionists consult when they build consensus on the age of particular fossils and again by consensus, not by testable-repeatable science decide how to arrange what they think our ancient history must have been.
They believe that with enough time and chance – just maybe some unscientific reactions may beat the odds and “improve all by themselves.
The foundation of old age dating methods, upon which the assumption of an old Earth (and evolution) rest, is radiometric dating. Culminating this lecture is the astounding and seemingly irrefutable evidence showing how radiometric methods are misinterpreted to give erroneously old dates.
You present this as a given, whereas I point out that this is a theory, or even a hypothesis. Eelco on June 6, at 3: Here they are with my responses: But that was the main point in my original post: The halos are not the product of alpha decay damage. Most importantly, the radii of the concentric spheres have been shown to correspond to the ranges in the host minerals of the alpha-particles from the alpha-emitting isotopes in the uranium and thorium decay series.
If Ballieul thinks he has data to the contrary, he should submit it to peer-reviewed journals. The halos may be caused by radon, not polonium. Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: I also said in my first reaction that Radon is the more likely candidate, which I did not repeat a second time.
Fossil and Radioisotope Dating
We don’t have all the answers, but we do have the sure testimony of the Word of God to the true history of the world. Most individual creation scientists and creation science organizations are called “new-earth creationists. From internal biblical information, they have concluded that the earth, its life forms, and the rest of the universe were created by God, less than 10, years ago; i.
Most of them believe that creation took only six days or a total of hours. They further believe that only very minor changes within various biological species have happened since creation. No new species have evolved or been created since.
Is Earth Dating Correct? Before we examine a YE model it is essential to summarize standard dating methods. A discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of conventional radiometric dating (which yields billions of years for the age of the earth) is given at Dating the Earth.A few of the non-conventional dating ‘clocks’ (which invariably point to a young earth) are also discussed.
Radiometric Dating Radiometric Dating – A Brief Explanation Radiometric dating is the primary dating scheme employed by scientists to determine the age of the earth. Radiometric dating techniques take advantage of the natural decay of radioisotopes. An isotope is one of two or more atoms which have the same number of protons in their nuclei, but a different number of neutrons.
Radioisotopes are unstable isotopes: They continue to decay going through various transitional states until they finally reach stability. For example, Uranium U is a radioisotope. It will spontaneously decay until it transitions into Lead Pb The numbers and represent these isotopes’ atomic mass. In this instance, Uranium is called the “parent” and Lead is called the “daughter”.
By measuring how long it takes for an unstable element to decay into a stable element and by measuring how much daughter element has been produced by the parent element within a specimen of rock, scientists believe they are able to determine the age of the rock.
It’s great to see a place that teenagers can appreciate. Click here for a map of how to get here, then get here! It would appear that we are seeing the fruit of our labours. In , our grand opening spurned two national surveys, one of those by Angus-Reid. One year later, they repeated the poll to see the effect and change in opinion across the nation after Canada’s first Creation museum BVCSM opened its doors. The results of that poll were surprising – click here to read about it.
According to evolutionary scientists, radiocarbon dating (also known as carbon dating) is totally ineffective in measuring time when dealing with millions of years. In his book, Genes, People, and Languages, renowned Stanford University geneticist Luigi Cavalli-Sforza, in a discussion on the.
There are a number of other interesting aspects to this study. These rocks were also studied using paleomagnetic methods and a pole was determined for the rocks. The pole position obtained for these rocks prior to any knowledge regarding the absolute age fell on a well-dated segment of the Gondwana Apparent polar wander path. The age of the pole could be estimated using the age of the apparent polar wander path APWP and it suggested that the Carion granite magnetization was acquired around million years ago.
The geochronologic data coupled with the paleomagnetic blocking temperatures suggest an age of Furthermore, the paleomagnetic data indicate that the pluton cooled through a reversal of the Earth’s magnetic field in the 11 million year interval. It is the consistency of data like these that point to strong evidence against the earth being only years old.
Age Dating the Earth
In each case, an effort is made to indicate the major creationist contributions that have been made in exposing the errors of evolutionary dogma. Preparations for the work and the actual expedition itself were noted by global publicity regarding the expected, positive, evolutionary implications. A sequel to this paper will examine preliminary research data consistent with significant and recent biological isolation of Shiva and the implications this has for the age of the Canyon itself.
NORTHRUP The concept of plate tectonics with its corollary, continental drift, have been espoused by various creationists who have adapted them to fit the short time-span of young-earth catastrophism-Northrup , , , , , Austin Nevins , Tippetts , Elliott , and Hansen
Creationists make the claim that a global flood has messed up the precision of radiocarbon dating and hence, it cannot be relied upon. But if it is consistently cross-referenced by other methods, then the claim doesn’t quite work.
More extensive evidence, largely ignored or brushed over by most of the agnostic scientific community, is contained in the excellent book In the Beginning by Walter T. More on that later. Let’s first look at: If an animal mates with another animal not of its exact species, the result will be a sterile creature e. If animals of a given species mate and produce an abnormal offspring i.
Therefore, how could the macro evolutionary process advance? How could a “mutant” i.
Teaching Creation Thursdays ~ How Dating Methods Work
According to evolutionary scientists, radiocarbon dating also known as carbon dating is totally ineffective in measuring time when dealing with millions of years. In his book, Genes, People, and Languages, renowned Stanford University geneticist Luigi Cavalli-Sforza, in a discussion on the theory of human evolution, commented on radiocarbon dating, stating: Staunch evolutionist Richard Dawkins also dealt with the limitations of radiocarbon dating a few years ago in his highly touted book, The Blind Watchmaker.
A very common claim of young earth creationists in trying to reject the evidence for an old earth is to loudly proclaim that radiometric dating methods “makes assumptions” and that these “assumptions” are somehow fatally flawed or not supported by evidence.
Bruce Malone gave his life to Christ over 20 years ago, as the Lord miraculously preserved him through a close call with death. Since that time Bruce has looked for a deeper purpose in life and realized that rejection of Biblical truth, justified by belief in evolution, is the acid which is eating away at the moral foundation of our culture.
Bruce spent 27 years working as a research leader for the Dow Chemical Corporation, has a degree chemical engineering, and is responsible for key innovations which have resulted in 18 patents. But his passion is sharing the relevance and evidence for creation, so he retired early to become full time Director of Search for the Truth Ministries http: Bruce has spoken extensively at Colleges and Charities in 12 countries.
Since Bruce has spoken over times to more than 20, people and over 30, books have been distributed to students and prisoners. Bruce brings science alive through stories and demonstrations, showing that Biblical creation is the most rational explanation for the world around us. The purpose of both his books and lectures is to help the non-scientific layman understand the importance of creation while motivating and equipping them to share these truths. Bruce resides in Midland, MI with his wife Robin, and they have four children who are all actively serving the Lord.
Click here to contact Bruce to arrange a speaking engagement at your church or organization.
Scientific Evidence for a Young Earth
How does young earth creationism handle the evidence for millions of years in the fossil record? Subscribe to our Question of the Week: The trick with interpreting the fossil record is that most paleontologists also subscribe an atheistic version of evolution. They interpret the fossil record in terms of that particular worldview, inspect the interpretation, and note that it confirms the theory, which is more than a little circular.
The question, then, is how do creationists interpret the fossil record?
Science vs. Evolution A REVISED, ENLARGED, LARGE-PRINT CLASSROOM EDITION OF Inaccurate Dating Methods: Why the non-historical dating techniques are unreliable. 7: Pathlights Home / Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia / Natural Remedies Encyclopedia / .
At the time that Darwin’s On the Origin of Species was published, the earth was “scientifically” determined to be million years old. By , it was found to be 1. In , science firmly established that the earth was 3. Finally in , it was discovered that the earth is “really” 4. In these early studies the order of sedimentary rocks and structures were used to date geologic time periods and events in a relative way. At first, the use of “key” diagnostic fossils was used to compare different areas of the geologic column.
Although there were attempts to make relative age estimates, no direct dating method was available until the twentieth century. However, before this time some very popular indirect methods were available. For example, Lord Kelvin had estimated the ages of both the Earth and the Sun based on cooling rates. The answer of 25 million years deduced by Kelvin was not received favorably by geologists.
Both the physical geologists and paleontologists could point to evidence that much more time was needed to produce what they saw in the stratigraphic and fossil records.
Evidence against a recent creation
Renaissance Now, let’s look at some specific examples. One type of atom that does not normally react is Neon. See the picture to the left. It already has the correct number of electrons in it’s outside electron layer so Neon does not react.
Dendrochronology is the scientific method of dating the age of trees by the number of rings that they have grown. Young Earth creationists are not fans of it, because dendrochronology often finds that certain trees are older than the young Earth is supposed to be.
Introduction Many people have been led to believe that carbon dating along with other radioactive dating methods proves the earth to be much older than 6, years old. If the dates received from carbon dating are accurate, it would be a huge problem for those who believe in the Genesis account of creation. However, when one starts with the Bible and interprets the information received from carbon dating accordingly, one will soon learn that in no way does carbon dating disprove the young earth.
Carbon dating can be used to date objects that are millions or even billions of years old Carbon dating is one of the most popular radioactive dating methods used today. Ironically, despite its popularity, it is also one of the most misunderstood methods of dating. Many people mistakenly believe carbon dating can be used to date objects that are millions or even billions of years old.
A YOUNG EARTH? – A SURVEY OF DATING METHODS
Biblical Young Earth creationism generally takes the following positions regarding the biblical book of Genesis: This creation, described in Genesis as “good” and “very good”, was without flaw or defect. All people are descended from the first couple, Adam and Eve. Adam and Eve sinned , leading to their expulsion from the Garden of Eden. A global Noachian flood occurred, destroying all land-based, air-breathing life, except that on the Ark.
The dispersal of humanity was caused by God after the Tower of Babel.
The radiometric dating methods help to give evolution an appearance of legitimacy. However, we can show – using testable-repeatable science – that they do not work! Here are some ways to check: The pyramids of Egypt hold all kinds of organic (carbon-based) materials that are of known dates.
A disappointing public debate between popular US science telly presenter Bill Nye, and creationist zealot Ken Ham took place this week about whether creationism was a valid scientific position. Howls of anguish, cheers of victory and stifled yawns from supporters of both sides echoed round the internet. Hope for enlightenment was dashed though, as Ham trotted out the same old zombie canards, and Nye did his futile best to best them.
Alas there is nothing new under the sun. And nothing was gained from this exercise in vanity except for giving the cretinism of creationism a big stage. One commentator noted that Bill Nye lost the debate by agreeing to do it. If you wrestle with a pig, the pig likes it, and you get dirty. Or, as Richard Dawkins has said when asked to share a stage with various creationist brainwrongs, it looks better on your CV than mine. Or “never argue with an idiot: But Matt Stopera at Buzzfeed won by asking 22 creationists to grin like monkeys and pose what they presumably thought was a zinger of a challenge to science.
Bill Nye, are you influencing the minds of children in a positive way? Are you scared of a Divine Creator?