The Age of the Earth

How old is the earth? First published in Refuting Evolution , Chapter 8 Evolutionists fallaciously think that billions of years of time makes particles-to-people evolution possible. So Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science presents what it claims is evidence for vast time spans. This is graphically illustrated in a chart on pages 36— The Bible states that man was made six days after creation, about 6, years ago. So a time-line of the world constructed on biblical data would have man almost at the beginning, not the end. Also, Christians, by definition, take the statements of Jesus Christ seriously. This chapter analyzes rock formation and dating methods in terms of what these two competing models would predict.

Young Earth creationism

Consider also the most popular explanation offered for the photo right , that a concretion formed around an s-era hammer as minerals precipitated out of the surrounding limestone. From Adam until Real Science Radio , in only generations! Another paper, in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology Eugenie Scott ‘s own field on High mitochondrial mutation rates , shows that one mitochondrial DNA mutation occurs every other generation, which, as creationists point out , indicates that mtEve would have lived about generations ago.

Question: “Is there any evidence for the Bible’s view of a young earth?” Answer: There is a profusion of evidence for the Bible’s view of a young r, the old-earth perspective has held a monopoly in the public schools, in the major academic centers, and in the popular media for generations.

History[ edit ] Biblical dates for creation[ edit ] The first major comprehensive draft of Genesis was composed by the Yahwist in the late 7th or the 6th century BC, during the Babylonian captivity , with later additions made by the priestly source in the post-exilic period. The poor world is almost 6, years old. In particular, discoveries in geology required an Earth that was much older than thousands of years, and proposals such as Abraham Gottlob Werner ‘s Neptunism attempted to incorporate what was understood from geological investigations into a coherent description of Earth’s natural history.

James Hutton , now regarded as the father of modern geology, went further and opened up the concept of deep time for scientific inquiry. Rather than accepting that the Earth was deteriorating from a primal state, he maintained that the Earth was infinitely old. As these processes were very gradual, the Earth needed to be ancient, in order to allow time for the changes to occur.

While his ideas of Plutonism were hotly contested, scientific inquiries on competing ideas of catastrophism pushed back the age of the Earth into the millions of years — still much younger than commonly accepted by modern scientists, but a great change from the literalist view of an Earth that was only a few thousand years old. The energetic advocacy and rhetoric of Lyell led to the public and scientific communities largely accepting an ancient Earth.

By this time, the Reverends William Buckland , Adam Sedgwick and other early geologists had abandoned their earlier ideas of catastrophism related to a biblical flood and confined their explanations to local floods.

Young Earth creationism

How accurate are carbon-dating methods? All methods of radioactive dating rely on three assumptions that may not necessarily be true: Rate of Decay It is assumed that the rate of decay has remained constant over time.

Thousands not Billions: Challenging the Icon of Evolution, Questioning the Age of the Earth [Donald DeYoung] on *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. “Evolutionary models for life, earth, and space are questioned today by a significant group of scientists worldwide. They are convinced that the earth and the entire universe are the result of a supernatural creation event which.

They believe OE theory and in the claimed processes of evolution, but maintain that the initial matter and scientific laws were brought into existence by God Gen 8. They would also take a figurative non-literal interpretation of the Genesis account of creation. On this definition a theistic evolutionist could also be described as a creationist simply because they believe God created all things. But the usual assumption of Creationism is also that no macro-evolution is involved, and so all living organisms were created substantially as they now exist, although it is accepted that small changes micro-evolution within created ‘kinds’ Gen 1.

On this definition it is not necessary to assume an old earth and Young Earth YE Creationism is the belief that the universe and the Earth are just 6, to 10, years old as inferred from a literal interpretation of the Old Testament. There are several key organisations working in Creation Science e.

Age of the Earth

Reference to a case where the given method did not work This is perhaps the most common objection of all. Creationists point to instances where a given method produced a result that is clearly wrong, and then argue that therefore all such dates may be ignored. Such an argument fails on two counts: First, an instance where a method fails to work does not imply that it does not ever work. The question is not whether there are “undatable” objects, but rather whether or not all objects cannot be dated by a given method.

The standard model for the formation of the Solar System (including the Earth) is the solar nebula hypothesis. In this model, the Solar System formed from a large, rotating cloud of interstellar dust and gas called the solar was composed of hydrogen and helium created shortly after the Big Bang Ga (billion years ago) and heavier elements ejected by supernovae.

This age is obtained from radiometric dating and is assumed by evolutionists to provide a sufficiently long time-frame for Darwinian evolution. And OE Christians theistic evolutionists see no problem with this dating whilst still accepting biblical creation, see Radiometric Dating – A Christian Perspective. This is the crucial point: Some claim Genesis in particular, and the Bible in general looks mythical from this standpoint.

A full discussion of the topic must therefore include the current scientific challenge to the OE concept. This challenge is mainly headed by Creationism which teaches a young-earth YE theory. A young earth is considered to be typically just 6, years old since this fits the creation account and some dating deductions from Genesis.

Why I Reject A Young Earth View: A Biblical Defense of an Old Earth

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.

Dr. Hovind: It only takes one proof of a young earth to decide between CREATION and EVOLUTION. 0. This magic bullet mentality, the tendency to rely on a single, isolated argument to win all the chips, has gotten creationists into more trouble than possibly anything else.

And the Star huggers are born. Van Snyder You first. Dan Deilgat The fog of evolution… Denesius You can look at it as a single data point defining a trend, or a random result leading to a conclusion. Anechidna Like the theory but doubt the logic and the physics of matter collation and planetary body formation too great to permit water to survive this process.

Also the early collision of the moon and earth is a factor to consider for the deuterium atoms on the moon are different to those on earth. And that makes perfect sense too considering that Oxygen is third most abundant element in the Milky Way Galaxy — behind only Hydrogen and Helium. The light from the stars that we see is light from billions of years ago- therefore the same applies to the other celestial entities out there.

Planets around other stars, in particular. While the idea of finding other forms of life around other stars is an interesting one, more important is the reality that humanity will need to move beyond the Earth one day, as population continues to increase and resources become ever scarcer. By studying what happened in the formation and existence of our own surroundings, we can project that to what we see, and potentially figure out if the ancient worlds that we can view through our telescopes and satellites are indeed unable to support life.

The 10 Best Evidences from Science that Confirm a Young Earth

Can science prove the age of the earth? No scientific method can prove the age of the earth and the universe, and that includes the ones we have listed here. Further, it has to be assumed that the clock was never disturbed.

Dating Calculator: To find the percent of Carbon 14 remaining after a given number of years, type in the number of years and click on Calculate.

Moon Dust and the Age of the Solar System Answers in Genesis , the leading young-earth creationist ministry, disowns cosmic dust arguments. The most amazing thing about the cosmic dust argument is that it is still being used! It has coasted along on obsolete evidence, and nothing but obsolete evidence, for the last 25 years!!

It nicely illustrates how creationists borrow from each other and never do any outside reading. The obsolescence of this argument has been brought out in numerous debates and published in countless books, journals, and newsletters. It can be discovered by anyone who exercises his or her library card. It’s not a state secret! What does it take to get through to the creationist brain?? The earliest use of the cosmic dust argument that Van Till Van Till et al, could find was in an article by Harold Slusher, which was published in the June issue of Creation Research Society Quarterly.

Slusher made several blunders which are handed down in the “scientific” creationist literature to this very day. In the cosmic dust argument received its big kick-off from Henry Morris’ book, Scientific Creationism. Pettersson’s upper estimate for the influx of cosmic dust, a figure he considered risky, was based on particles he collected from two filtration units in the Hawaiian Islands.

The Age of the Earth

Is there any evidence for the Bible’s view of a young earth? However, the old-earth perspective has held a monopoly in the public schools, in the major academic centers, and in the popular media for generations. It is no wonder then that most scientists share the old-earth perspective. But there are dissenters among the scientific community, and their numbers are growing. Because more and more scientists are confronting a growing body of evidence which challenges the old-earth paradigm.

A Generic Young Earth Model. The following is a generic model combining features and concepts from a number of similar YE models, and in particular from the YE models proposed by Setterfield and objective is to present plausible concepts rather than one particular model.

History[ edit ] Biblical dates for creation[ edit ] The first major comprehensive draft of Genesis was composed by the Yahwist in the late 7th or the 6th century BC, during the Babylonian captivity , with later additions made by the priestly source in the post-exilic period. The poor world is almost 6, years old. In particular, discoveries in geology required an Earth that was much older than thousands of years, and proposals such as Abraham Gottlob Werner ‘s Neptunism attempted to incorporate what was understood from geological investigations into a coherent description of Earth’s natural history.

James Hutton , now regarded as the father of modern geology, went further and opened up the concept of deep time for scientific inquiry. Rather than accepting that the Earth was deteriorating from a primal state, he maintained that the Earth was infinitely old. As these processes were very gradual, the Earth needed to be ancient, in order to allow time for the changes to occur. While his ideas of Plutonism were hotly contested, scientific inquiries on competing ideas of catastrophism pushed back the age of the Earth into the millions of years — still much younger than commonly accepted by modern scientists, but a great change from the literalist view of an Earth that was only a few thousand years old.

Creation vs. Evolution

Primary source references As a preface to this document, I want to point out that it is a shame that we have to continue to refute the same arguments that evolutionists keep bringing up over and over again in their attempts to argue against the fact of creation, which fact has been well established since the day the earth was created ex nihilo several thousand years ago. It is also a shame that the masses have bought all this based on some circular reasoning about fossils, where fossils tend to be found buried, similarities between various life forms, the presence of certain decay products in rocks, and other inherently speculative arguments about the past, based on phenomena that exist in the present.

If I hope to accomplish anything, it will be to simply encourage critical thinking.

The generally accepted age for the Earth and the rest of the solar system is about billion years (plus or minus about 1%). This value is derived from several.

Outlook Other The earth is only a few thousand years old. So we should expect to find plenty of evidence for its youth. The following series of articles presents what Answers in Genesis researchers picked as the ten best scientific evidences that contradict billions of years and confirm a relatively young earth and universe. Despite this wealth of evidence, it is important to understand that, from the perspective of observational science, no one can prove absolutely how young or old the universe is.

And we do have such a witness—the God of the Bible! He has given us a specific history, beginning with the six days of Creation and followed by detailed genealogies that allow us to determine when the universe began. Based on this history, the beginning was only about six thousand years ago about four thousand years from Creation to Christ. Interpreting the facts of the present becomes especially difficult when reconstructing the historical events that produced those present-day facts, because no humans have always been present to observe all the evidence and to record how all the evidence was produced.

Age of the Earth – part 2 – Helium Diffusion Rates with Dr. Larry Vardiman – Origins