“But,” say some sincere Christians, “everyone knows the Earth is billions of years old.” How do we know that? Genesis surely does not indicate an old age for the Earth, and neither does science. We have been brainwashed through our education, the media, and our associates and have purchased another gold brick sold by thumb-sucking liberals.

“Well,” says another “isn’t it possible that God could have created the world over a long period of time?” Of course it is possible, and even if one admitted it was also probable, that wouldn’t make it true. God could have done it any way He wanted, but the evidence and the Bible clearly indicate a young Earth.

According to a group of mathematicians, all of whom were evolutionists, it would have taken not five billion years for man to evolve but billions of times longer! So they need even more time for their myth. Of course, the age of the Earth has been increased by scientists for many years to mold current thinking to fit their implausible story. In Darwin’s day, the Earth was only 100 million years old, but now we are told it is at least 4.5 billion years old!

The estimated ages for an ancient Earth are usually based on “clocks” that are unreliable, uncalibrated, and unknowable. A good example is the coral growth rates that were thought to require hundreds of thousands of years, but now it is believed that no coral formation need be over 3,500 years old! There are many such proofs of a young Earth, yet blind evolutionists keep demanding an old Earth.

Similar to coral formations, stalactite and stalagmite formations in caves are said to take long ages to form proving the Earth is ancient; but now we know that the evidence is specious, and such growth can form in only a few years. The cave guides can prate on and on about the “ancient” formations, but the evidence refutes their canned spiel.

A curtain of stalactites, some five feet in length, grows from the foundation ceiling beneath the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. The memorial was built in 1923, so those stalactites have been produced in less than a hundred years!

Further evidence of non-uniformitarianism relating to stalagmites is found in the Carlsbad (NM) Caverns where a bat was found encased inside a stalagmite! That is impossible if many years are necessary to form stalagmites and stalactites because the bat would have decayed or been eaten by predators in a very short period of time. Looks as if we have to discard another “clock” used by evolutionists to prove an ancient Earth.

The Great Barrier Reef is less than 4,200 years old and that date is ascertained because we know the growth rate for the last 25 years.

Geologists know that each stratum of sedimentary rock laid on top of each other show no signs of erosion as they were laid down over “millions” of years. Everyone knows that exposure of stratum over millions of years would have resulted in massive erosion. However, the record shows the opposite. That is because “millions of years” is a myth. The stratums were laid during and after the Flood so there was no time for erosion.

Another indication of a young Earth are large trees (which pass through several rock layers vertically) that could not have stood upright for millions of years without rotting while they were slowly buried. These polystrate fossils were buried during the Flood.

Thick layers of “rock” bent without fracturing, indicate that the rock was soft when bent and no doubt happened following the Flood of Noah. Firm strata will break but it will not bend except in the evolutionary textbooks.

Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!) dinosaur bones but that’s impossible. Not even the most fanatical evolutionist declares that bones can lie in strata for 65 million years and still be “fresh.” So, obviously those dinosaur bones were not millions of years old.

Moreover, evolutionists told us that it takes thousands or maybe millions of years for wood to petrify but now we know that wood can petrify in less than a hundred years!

We have been taught that oil was produced deep in the Earth about 25,000,000 years ago; however, high grade oil has been produced out of cow manure in a laboratory in twenty minutes! And there goes another one!

The Earth can’t be almost five billion years old because the rivers of the world have been constantly carrying sodium to the ocean, and if the world were 4.5 billion years old, there would be much more sodium in the ocean than there is!

Studies have been done to chart the volume and rate of sediment accumulation in the Mississippi delta, and that area could not be much older than 4,000 years! The age is found by dividing the weight of sediments deposited yearly into the total weight of the delta. If the Earth were only a few million years old, the Gulf of Mexico would be full of sediment!

The oldest living things on Earth, according to the American Forestry Association, are the bristlecone pines that grow on the White Mountains of California. They are at least 4,600 years old, no doubt having sprung up from seeds soon after the Flood. Again, an indication of a young Earth. And if the world is ancient, there should be trees much older than 5,000 years.

There is an average 7 or 8 inches of top soil that sustains all of life on the Earth, while the Earth beneath the top soil is as dead as the moon. Scientists tell us that the combination of plants, bacterial decay and erosion will produce six inches of top soil in 5,000 to 20,000 years. If the Earth had been here for 5 billion years, we should have much more top soil than the 7 or 8 inches.

Newspapers in March of 1980 reported that the sun’s diameter appears to have been decreasing by about one-tenth percent per century. That means the sun is shrinking about five feet per hour, and that’s no problem if you are a Creationist. But, you have big trouble if you are an evolutionist!

Dennis Petersen aptly addressed this problem: “If the sun existed only 100,000 years ago it would have been double its present diameter. And only twenty million years ago the surface of the sun would be touching the Earth.” (Emphasis his.) But then we know that didn’t happen, don’t we? Obviously the Earth and the universe are very young.

We are told that man has been on the Earth one million years, but the population does not reflect that age. There would not be enough room for people to stand if the population grew at the same rate as the Jewish people, a reasonable standard. The Jews started with Jacob about 3,700 years ago, and there are 14,000,000 Jews in the world today. So, assuming 2.4 children per family, and a life-span of 43 years, the world would be packed with people if man had been on the Earth only one million years. That is considering the almost perpetual malice, mistreatment and murder of Jews.

Make no mistake, evolutionists must have an ancient Earth or their house of cards comes
tumbling down, so they have influenced, inculcated, and indoctrinated many people with their “billions of years.” They made an assumption and jumped to the wrong conclusion.

Assumptions are necessary in science; however, facts must be added to support or refute an assumption. Evolution is a belief system; in fact, it is a very religious system!

While evolutionists prate on and on about the ages of the rocks, we Creationists will stand firmly on the Rock of Ages.

It’s a young world after all!

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

All creationists and all thinking people (but then I repeat myself) have always believed that “In the beginning, God created the heaven and the earth.” That is settled; however, when the universe and Earth were created has not been settled for many people. Was it billions of years ago or less than 10,000 years ago? That is the question and it is a fact that most Americans believe in a young universe and Earth but almost half do not.

In Matt. 19 Christ said that man was made at “the beginning.” So, no matter what the myth-makers in their ivory towers declare, whenever the beginning was, man was there. That fact alone negates all kinds of evolution! That settles the origins issue for believers but now we must convince the weak, the wavering, and the wrong souls that the Earth is young.

A recent column by one of my favorite columnists, Lord Monckton at World Net Daily declared, “One should no longer believe that a bishop [Archbishop Ussher] was correct in calculating that the world began 6,000 years ago.” (Famous historian Josephus believed the same as Ussher!) Even some creationists accept the columnist’s erroneous conclusion. What about the science to support an ancient Earth? It is not sufficient to say, “But every sane person knows that the Earth is billions of years old.” After all, in ancient times some men said, “Everyone believes that the world rests on the back of a giant elephant,” (some said a giant turtle) or “Any fool can see that the Earth is flat.”

It seems that few creationists have taken on the highly qualified scientists with counter arguments to demand some answers about the age of the Earth and Universe. I will do so even though my doctorate is not in science.

When discussing the age of the Earth, the ancient-earther always supports his position with modern dating methods, but that dog won’t hunt and can’t hunt because it is crippled in two legs! Modern dating methods are not reliable! It seems necessary for me to declare that rocks and fossils are not found stamped with a date of origin! Their ages are assumed by using various “clocks,” which I will cover in this series. Some of the “clocks” indicate a young age for the Earth. It depends on what “clock” is being used and what assumptions are being made.

While Archbishop Ussher’s Bible dates are not inspired, they are rather accurate when compared to other “clocks.” The fact is the Earth and the universe are very young–not very ancient–much to the consternation of the evolutionists who must have long periods of time to develop their cockamamie story of macro-evolution.

Dr. Stephen Moorbath, an evolutionist associated with the University of Oxford, wrote: No terrestrial rocks closely approaching an age of 4.6 billion years have yet been discovered. The evidence for the age of the earth is circumstantial, being based upon . . . indirect reasoning.” I can assure you that most evolutionists are astute at “indirect reasoning,” and are experts in circular reasoning. Some evolutionists are Professors of Tautology.

Evolutionist Fredreck B. Jeaneman declared: “The age of our globe is presently thought to be some 4.5 billion years, based on radio-decay rates of uranium and thorium. Such ‘confirmation’ may be short-lived, as nature is not to be discovered quite so easily. There has been in recent years the horrible realization that radio-decay rates are not as constant as previously thought, nor are they immune to environmental influences. And this could mean that the atomic clocks are reset during some global disaster, and events which brought the Mesozoic [dinosaur age] to a close may not be 65 million years ago, but rather, within the age and memory of man.” Wow, that from an evolutionist!

Criticism of modern dating methods continues to grow and many evolutionists run from confusing, comical, and contradictory decay rates like a mythical vampire flees the morning sun! One reason is that fossil rock may be contaminated. Many other contingencies are possible that might affect the date. Furthermore, a “global disaster” would disturb the status of the rocks. Do you think maybe that a worldwide flood qualifies as a “global disaster”? So the world Flood could reset all the radiometric clocks because of the swirling waters, volcanic eruptions, the atmospheric pressure, vast temperature fluctuations, magnetic reversals at the poles, etc., thus producing the long dates evolutionists must have–or get new jobs that might require them to work.

NASA hired the famous John (Jack) Eddy to write a book which enabled him to do research in the great astronomy libraries such as Harvard and the Naval Observatory. He used those facilities to do research on the Maunder Minimum (unexplained period of drastically reduced sunspot activity between 1645 and 1715) and his findings were published in the journal Science as a cover story. National Geographic also documented his work. That public exposure led to radio and television shows and lectures.

At a scientific conference at Louisiana State University Dr. Eddy, an ancient-earther, shocked the audience when he said, “I suspect that we could live with Bishop Ussher’s value for the age of the Earth and Sun. I don’t think we have much in the way of observational evidence in astronomy to conflict with that.” Another kick in the teeth for evolutionists by an evolutionist!

So, maybe Archbishop Ussher was not nuttier than a Snicker’s Bar after all, but evolutionists are!

(Four more columns will follow dealing with modern dating methods.)

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

I hope to prove to thinking people that scientific creationism has better answers for the questions posited by scientists, be they evolutionists or creationists.

Note that the debate title referred to “origins.” However, evolutionists run from that topic as if their hair was on fire. They want to start the creation/evolution discussion at Darwin’s warm mythical pond and focus on non-life becoming life. That’s slime-to-slug-to-sloth-to-scholar evolution, or, expressed another way, molecules-to-monkeys-to man. But I insist on knowing the origin of the universe and how the little pond arrived when nothing existed!

Evolutionists, not wanting to open that can of worms, tell us that cosmology is different from Darwinian evolution. But if words mean anything, origins must deal with origins so how did we get here?

What’s the origin of the universe? There are only four possibilities that explain our presence in the universe: (1) The universe created itself, but then that is contrary to the First Law of thermodynamics that says no new matter is being created, so a well-established scientific law disqualifies that possibility. (2) The universe has always been here, but that is contrary to the Second Law of thermodynamics that says everything is running down and if the universe had always been here, it would have totally unwound and disintegrated. Evolution requires the universe to run up to complexity not down to death. (3) The old Greek notion that the universe is not here. Everything is an illusion! That is contrary to the law of common sense, a law not known to most evolutionists! (4) God did it! Maybe you can guess which one I chose.

That’s it. Most modern evolutionists hold tenaciously to number one hoping that a pushy creationist will not ask them about the First Law. Creationists have the same four possibilities as to origins but they choose number four–God did it. Ockham’s Razor demands that choice!

Another origin problem is the origination of natural laws. Focus on Earth Science, a high school text, tells students that nothing created everything as the natural laws (where did they come from?) were suspended (by whom?). We are told the Big Bang “…represents the instantaneous suspension of physical laws, the sudden, abrupt flash of lawlessness that allowed something to come out of nothing. It represents a true miracle–transcending physical principles….” Hey, here’s a scoop: some evolutionists believe in “true miracles”–just not Bible miracles! Of course, no rational person believes nothing created something, anything, or everything. However, evolutionists must believe that since they can’t believe God did it even if He did it! Which He did!

So, natural laws were suspended so the Big Bang could “kick off” this thing called “life,” but when and how and by whom did the natural laws originate? And what power “suspended” those laws? What about the laws of gravity, inertia, First and Second Laws, Laws of Planetary Motion, etc.? Since we are discussing origins, when and by whom did those laws arise? Those laws are here so there had to be a Cause!

Moreover, maybe some evolutionist will inform us how a massive explosion took place and resulted in an incredible universe that runs like a Swiss clock with planets, stars, and moons. Evolution requires a random, haphazard cosmos; instead the universe is orderly, precise, and functional.

After the evolutionist, who must have enormous faith, explains the origin of the universe and the natural laws that no one disavows, I want to know man’s origin! According to evolutionary scientists this globe was at one time rock, so how did plants originate followed by animal life? How did goo-to-you evolution get started? After we nail down evolution from amoeba-to-aardvark-to- astronaut, we can discuss the fossil record, natural selection, mutations, and adaptations.

When we get an explanation for the origin of the universe, the natural laws, and man; we can then look at the physical condition of the earth and see whether evolution or creationism has the better explanation.

One of the greatest mysteries of life is how life appeared abruptly in the Cambrian strata, the lowest level of the geologic column in which are found an abundance of complex fossils! The lower four-fifths of the rock of the earth’s crust are without any signs of life! Then, all at once, life abruptly appears out of nowhere! Maybe, as if it had been created? Evolution requires ancestors but there aren’t any so their model doesn’t work. The creation model works perfectly since all scientists admit that the Cambrian Explosion seems to indicate that the fossils began without precursors.

The physical condition of the earth screams carnage, cataclysm, and change. The strata all over the earth, the sea creatures on mountaintops, the mass burial of land and sea creatures, elephants and whale fossils on mountains all fit with creationism not evolution. By the way, elephants don’t climb mountains and neither do whales!

In the fossil record we see distinct creatures, not the gradual formation and transition from one creature to another as evolution demands. There are changes but never from one species to another. No new information is ever introduced. A dog is always a dog, a cat is always a cat, and a horse is always a horse–of course. Again, creationism is the best model, not evolution.

How does evolution provide the origin of mind/intelligence, meaning, conscience, altruism and morality? It has no answer; however, the creation model provides a concrete, correct, and complete answer.

The main proof of evolution is based on the assumption that evolution is factual but that assumption is a farce, a fraud, a fake, not a fact. Evolution is a cockamamie religion about which we can dicker, discuss, and debate–but it will never be true.

Evolution is a sacred cow that needs to be butchered and made into hamburger. Ken Ham helped in that process and posterity will credit him with changing the world’s perception of creationism.

Good job, Ken.

http://bit.ly/1iMLVfY  Watch these 8 minute videos of my lecture at the University of North Dakota: “A Christian Challenges New Atheists to Put Up or Shut Up!”

Copyright 2014, Don Boys, Ph.D.