It’s A Young Earth After All

Richard OvermanCreation Education Resources, Inc.

PO Box 1853Orange Park, FL 32067-1853(904) 269-9007 (Voice/fax)cer@creationeducation.orgwww.creationeducation.org

Primary Source

The bulk of theinformation and graphicsin this presentation comesfrom this book. Please seethe CER book store forordering information.

How To Date A System OrObject

• Observe the present state of the system

• Measure the process rate within thesystem

• Assume certain things about the past

• Calculate the time necessary for thatprocess to produce the present state

Dating Assumptions

Uniformitarian (Evolutionist) assumptions• Known initial condition• Closed system• Uniform rate

Catastrophism (Creationist) assumptions• Perfect initial condition• Creator is outside influence• Flood accelerated processes

History Of Earth Age Science

1700’s- Scientific community accepts young earth- Geologists attempt to explain geologic events withinthe context of scripture

1785- James Hutton proposes that geologic study can onlyrefer to natural on-going processes at current strengthand intensity- Hutton’s views not widely accepted

Early 1800’s- “Progression” observed in fossil record- Clergyman-Geologists find ways to compromisescripture by “re-interpreting” the days of Genesis- Leads to acceptance of Hutton’s views

History Of Earth Age Science

1830- Charles Lyell publishes his “Principals of Geology”which contributes to the ultimate overthrow ofcatastrophism and acceptance of millions of years.

Late 1800’s- Lord Kelvin provides calculations from physicsshowing the earth is not old enough for evolutionists.

1896- Phenomenon of radioactivity discovered by HenryBequerel leading to radiometric dating.

SCRIPTURAL COMPROMISE, NOT SCIENTIFICADVANCES, FACILITATED THE TRANSITION FROM

YOUNG EARTH TO OLD EARTH BELIEFS.

What Is Radiometric Dating?

• Aliases– Isotopic dating– Radiometry

• Based on the nuclear decay of various elements– Measure the amount of parent and daughter elements– Assume no daughter element to start with– Assume no gain or loss of daughter or parent element

from or to the outside– Assume decay rate constant– Age based on the amount of time for parent to decay into

identified amount of daughter element

What Is A Daughter Isotope?

U238 Decay Series

Parent

Daughter

238U

234Th

234Pa

234U

230Th

222Rn

226Ra

214Pb

218Po

214Po

210Pb

214Bi

206Pb

210Po

210Bi

α

α α

α α αα α

Intermediate

Scientific Validity of RadiometricDating

• Are they reliable?

– Give predictable expected results?

• Are they consistent?

– Agreement between various methods?

Looking For Pre-existingDaughter Isotopes

• “The Cause of Anomalous Potassium-Argon‘Ages’ for Recent Andesite Flows at Mt.Ngauruhoe, New Zealand and the Implicationsfor Potassium-Argon ‘Dating’”.

• Paper by Andrew Snelling.• Don’t be intimidated by the title.• Impact is simple and profound.

The Lava Sample

• Collected samples from 3 lava flows knownto have solidified in 1949, 1954, and 1975

• Samples should have dated to be 48, 43, and22 years old respectively

• Argon gas is assumed to percolate out of thelava until it solidifies

Dating The Rocks

• Sample sent to laboratory• Mineral content measured• Assume no 40Ar to begin with (40Ar not retained in

lava until it solidifies)• Decay rate from Potassium to Argon known and

assumed constant• Assume no 40Ar can get in or out of the rock• Age based on the amount of 40Ar found in the rock

The Problem

• Potassium-Argon gave a range of 270,000 to3,500,000,000 years old for the samples.

• Where did the “extra” 40Ar come from?• Dr. Snelling investigated various possibilities

and eliminated all except one.• The excess 40Ar appears to have been in the

earth’s mantle since creation.

Dr. SNELLING Concludes

1 “this is clearly consistent with a youngearth, where the very short time-scalesince the creation of the earth has beeninsufficient for all of the primordial argonto be released yet from the Earth’s deepinterior.”

2 “when samples of crustal rocks areanalyzed for [Potassium-Argon] ‘dating’,the investigators can never really be surethat whatever 40Ar is in the sample isfrom in situ radioactive decay… orwhether some or all of it is from theexcess 40Ar” in the mantle.

Dr. SNELLING Concludes

Grand Canyon Experiments

• Dr. Steve Austin sampled lava from two

different levels

• Samples dated by various methods

• Results highlight problems with radiometric

dating

Grand Canyon Results• Date range ofbottom within daterange of top

•Rb-Sr model agesshow top olderthan bottom

•K-Ar model agesshow top youngerthan bottom

•How old are theselava flows??

Source: “The Young Earth” by John Morris

Scientific Validity of RadiometricDating

• Are radiometric dating methodsscientifically valid?

NO• Unreliable• Inconsistent

Uniformitarian Responses*

• CDBM- Credit Dating Method, Blame Nature– Dating method not wrong, nature messed up the sample– Protects dating method from falsification or criticism

• ATM- Appeal to Marginalization– Bad results are rare so not important– Documentation shows that bad results are more common than we

are led to believe• ATT- Appeal to Technicality

– The specimen or test procedure were somehow flawed– Radiometric dates can be accepted or rejected at will depending on

whether they match the preconceived “known” date* “The Mythology of Modern Dating Methods”, by John Woodmorappe, pp 2-3

Evidences for a Young Earth

• Amount of helium in atmosphere 1

• Electromagnetic field decay 1

• Niagara falls 1

• Radio halos 1

• Evidences from the eruption of Mt. St. Helens 1

1 “The Young Earth”, by John Morris

2 “Ice Cores and the Age of the Earth”, by Larry Vardiman

Age of the Earths Atmosphere-Helium

Study by Dr. Larry Vardiman•Sources of Helium

•Radioactive decay•Cosmic bombardment•Solar winds•Mantel

•Helium escapes to outer space•Atmosphere cannot be billionsof years old•Primordial helium wouldreduce age considerably

Electromagnetic Field Decay

•Electromagnetic field is decayingexponentially

•As much as 20,000 years ago thefield would have been to strong foranything to live

•By 10,000 A.D., the field will betoo weak for anything to live

•The field “just happens to be” theright strength to support life

Niagara Falls

•Falls eroding at a rate of4-5 feet each year

•Falls are 37,000 feetfrom Lake Ontario

•Falls cannot be muchmore than 9,000 years old

•Can be much less if aglobal flood is included

Radio Halos

•By-products of radioactive decay

•Some daughter elements do notexist more than micro-seconds innature

•These daughter halos can be foundwithout parent halos

•Granite with daughter but notparent halos can only have beeninstantaneously created

Mt. St. Helens Eruption

• The eruption of Mt. St.Helens shows how geologicfeatures can be shaped bycatastrophes

• Geologic strata formed by 3different eruptions

• Hurricane force winds veryfinely sorted ash by size

Mt. St. Helens Eruption

• A 1/40th scale model of theGrand Canyon formed in oneday

• The formation of petrifiedforests by catastrophes wasdemonstrated

• The Floating Log Mat Modelfor coal was supported

Biblical Evidence of the Age ofthe Earth

• Genealogies given Genesis 5, 9, 11, and 32• Can be used to draw time line from creation to

Abraham• Recorded history since Abraham• Time line shows creation just over 6,000 years ago• Some claim gaps in the time line, but gaps would

only account for a few more thousand years• Time line probably provided to counter old earth

claims

Biblical Time Line

Biblical Time Line (Continued)

How Old Is The Earth?

• No one knows how old the earth is• Biblical genealogies indicate creation was about

6000 years ago• Dating techniques are unreliable and inconsistent• There is more data to support a young earth over

an old earth• As a scientist, I believe the earth is about 6000

years old

Conclusion

It’s a young earth after all,It’s a young earth after all,It’s a young earth after all,It’s a young, young, earth.

It’s a universe that God made mature,It’s an earth that was changed by the flood I’m sure,It’s an earth that we share, and it’s time we’re aware,It’s a young earth after all.

Conclusion

It’s a young earth after all,It’s a young earth after all,It’s a young earth after all,It’s a young, young, earth.

Many scientists say the earth is old,Just because it fits in their mental mold.They say millions of years,And the truth they won’t hear.It’s a young earth after all.

Conclusion

It’s a young earth after all,It’s a young earth after all,It’s a young earth after all,It’s a young, young, earth.

Every dating technique has its many flaws,So they choose the one that will fit their cause.But the scripture is true,And the math you can do.It’s a young earth after all.

Conclusion

It’s a young earth after all,

It’s a young earth after all,

It’s a young earth after all,

It’s a young, young, earth.