“If a C-14 date supports our theories,
we put it in the main text. If it does
not entirely contradict them, we put it
in a footnote. And if it is completely
‘out of date,’ we just drop it.”
Proceedings of the twelfth Nobel Symposium
1969, NS 12
Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology
Organizers: Kai Siegbahn, Torgny Säve-Söderbergh, Ingrid Olsson
August 11-15, University of Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden
Proceedings: Olsson: Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology, 1970, Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm.
One of the startling discoveries you make when you study Science is that the Universe was not only designed, but it was designed to be discovered! One of the ways this can be proven is a consideration of the sun’s corona which is only visible during a solar eclipse. A solar eclipse occurs when the moon passes directly between the earth and the sun. Every aspect of the alignment, sizes and distances of the heavenly bodies involved are so precise, that without these exact ratios, the sun’s corona could never be seen.
For instance, if the moon was just slightly larger, then during a solar eclipse, it would block out the sun entirely, including the corona. If the moon were slightly smaller, then the rest of the sun would overpower the moon and the sun’s light would bleach out the corona, making it impossible to see, etc.
It was only by discovering the sun’s corona, that we began the amazing discovery of Spectroscopy, which of course began to open up the whole universe to us. God intended us to observe, understand and believe that these mysteries were placed in anticipation of our discoveries. And they were.
Stop and think about that!
The heavens declare the glory of God;
the skies proclaim the work of his hands.
Day after day they pour forth speech;
night after night they display knowledge.
There is no speech or language
where their voice is not heard.
Their voice goes out into all the earth,
their words to the ends of the world.
In the heavens he has pitched a tent for the sun,
which is like a bridegroom coming forth from his pavilion,
like a champion rejoicing to run his course.
It rises at one end of the heavens
and makes its circuit to the other;
nothing is hidden from its heat.”
The Nebular Hypothesis is the belief that approximately four billion years ago, the sun had ejected a tail or filament of material that cooled and collected and thus formed the planets. This idea was first put forth by Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772), but later endorsed by Emanuel Kant and Mathematician Pierre Simon Laplace (1749-1827), which gave the hypothesis widespread respectability despite it’s mathematical flaws.
Let’s examine some difficulties:
1.) The sun contains 99.86% of all the mass of the solar system, yet the sun contains only 1.9% of the angular momentum. The planets together contain 98.1%
2.) The outer planets are far larger than the inner ones. Jupiter alone is 5,750 times larger than Mercury and 2,958 times as massive as Mars.
3.) There are three pairs of rapid-spin rates among our planets, each within 3% of each other. (Earth & Mars, Jupiter & Saturn, and Neptune & Uranus)
4.) Earth and Mars have virtually identical spin axis tilts–approximately 23.5 degrrees. Why?
5.) From the angular momentum and the orbital calculations it would seem as if the three pairs of planets were brought here from elsewhere.
Therefore, there is no plausible explanation that would support a solar origin of the planets.
He set the earth on its foundations, so that it should never be moved. Psalm 104:5
When I was in the 5th Grade, Haley’s Comet visited earth. I remember learning that it was an event of a lifetime since it only comes around once every 76 years. I remember thinking, ‘if I don’t catch it now, I’ll have to wait until I’m 86!’
Ever since then, I have been fascinated about comets, their scheduled arrivals and their origins.
As I would later learn, Haley was just one of countless fellow comets that are shooting all throughout our solar system. What I was not prepared for however, was to discover that even comets bring glory to God by demonstrating the truth of the Biblical timeline of thousands, not billions of years.
What do I mean?
As short period comets stream across the solar system, they are constantly losing material as their tails are diminished by relentless blasts of solar wind.
Most of the Astronomers I have studied believe that short terms comets have a lifespan of less than 10,000 years.
Therefore, if the earth and universe are really billions of years old, how is it that we still have comets?
According to the Big Bang Models, comets should have fizzled out over 15 billion years ago.
Why are they still in our solar system?
I hope that you are beginning to see that almost every observable aspect indicates a young earth and universe by any conceivably legitimate metric, just as the Bible lays out.
In my 2nd article ever on Across the fruited Plain, I explained how I categorize the term “evolution” into six basic categories. Five of those categories are completely religious in nature and are not observable, testable or demonstrable within the realm of Science. They require faith in order to believe they occurred.
One of the unobserved and unexplained categories of evolution is Chemical Evolution. In order for the universe to have emerged, after the Cosmic Evolution of Time, Space, and Matter, all coming into existence and doing so at the exact same time, there must have been Chemical Evolution. That means that all of the elements, including Uranium (U), must have evolved from Hydrogen (H).
But is this possible?
The answer is no.
Some protest that Uranium (U) could have in fact evolved from Hydrogen (H) through fusion.
The fact of the matter is however, that those who know their fusion know that you cannot fuse past Iron (Fe).
Therefore, all of the known elements cannot be accounted for from Hydrogen alone.
Once that conundrum is addressed, I would like to know which came first:
Did the stars create the elements or did the elements create the stars?
To my mind and knowledge, no one is intelligibly addressing these questions.
you cannot prove the extinction of anything.
Pictured above is the once believed extinct lobe-finned coelacanthe. When they found them swimming in the Indian Ocean in 1937, scientist’s first reaction was astonishment that they had survived 300 million years! It never once dawned on them to question the theory.
“Any suppression which undermines and destroys that very foundation on which scientific methodology and research was erected, evolutionist or otherwise, cannot and must not be allowed to flourish … It is a confrontation between scientific objectivity and ingrained prejudice – between logic and emotion – between fact and fiction … In the final analysis, objective scientific logic has to prevail – no matter what the final result is – no matter how many time-honoured idols have to be discarded in the process … After all, it is not the duty of science to defend the theory of evolution and stick by it to the bitter end -no matter what illogical and unsupported conclusions it offers … If in the process of impartial scientific logic, they find that creation by outside intelligence is the solution to our quandary, then let’s cut the umbilical chord that tied us down to Darwin for such a long time. It is choking us and holding us back … Every single concept advanced by the theory of evolution (and amended thereafter) is imaginary as it is not supported by the scientifically established probability concepts. Darwin was wrong… The theory of evolution may be the worst mistake made in science.”
(I L Cohen, Darwin Was Wrong – A Study in Probabilities PO Box 231, Greenvale, New York 11548: New Research Publications, Inc. pp 6-8, 209-210, 214-215. I.L.Cohen, Member of the New York Academy of Sciences and Officer of the Archaeological Institute of America).
If you have spent any time in a science classroom, you were no doubt taught that the formal process for the formulation and testing of ideas is known as the Scientific Method. Time spent in science class no doubt also introduced you to Theory of Evolution. From kindergarten, when the first dinosaur book the teacher read said “millions of years ago…”, to high school science when you dissected something, to comparative anatomy in college; we have been immersed in the “theory” of evolution. Please note the use of the word “Theory”, and not “Law” since evolution is not a fact.
The Law of Gravity is a fact.
The Theory of Evolution is not a fact.
However, does the Theory of Evolution pass muster according to the Scientific Method?
In the scientific method, there are 4 different steps you must take to prove your theory. They are:
1. Observation and description of a phenomenon or group of phenomena.
2. Formulation of a hypothesis to explain the phenomena. In physics, the hypothesis often takes the form of a causal mechanism or a mathematical relation.
3. Use of the hypothesis to predict the existence of other phenomena, or to predict quantitatively the results of new observations.
4. Performance of experimental tests of the predictions by several independent experimenters and properly performed experiments.
Evolution Theory has only reached Step #2.
This means that from observations that were made (Step #1), the formulation of a hypotheses was made to explain how we got here. It is at this step that we stall because the hypothesis for the observations does not pass scrutiny. As more is learned by observation, the hypothesis can be refined. We therefore have a continual process of going from Step #1 to Step #2 and back again.
In science, this will usually get you to Step #3 eventually. For evolution though, it has not, and they are not even close. Under normal circumstances, the hypothesis would be discarded as rubbish. However, when it comes to evolution, the personal stakes are way too high. Without the idea that we evolved, we are forced to conclude that we arrived by special creation, from the hands of a Creator, and that means He’s God, and we are not.
What’s the hold up accepting Christ, man?
Nov. 8, 2011: An artist’s rendering of a Tegopelte, a foot-long arthropod that lived 500 million years ago. Researchers suggest that Tegopelte was a fearsome predator or perhaps a quick-moving scavenger, capable of “rapidly skimming across the seafloor” with only a few of its many legs touching the ground at a time. Source: Marianne Collins
Today we will be briefly examining the Tegopelte from Fox News’ “Eyepoppers Science Slide Deck” and how this image and caption falls short of the goal of proving evolution theory.
Nov. 8, 2011: An artist’s rendering of a Tegopelte, a foot-long arthropod that lived 500 million years ago. Researchers suggest that Tegopelte was a fearsome predator or perhaps a quick-moving scavenger, capable of “rapidly skimming across the seafloor” with only a few of its many legs touching the ground at a time.
It has been a while since we touched on worldview timelines so I will refresh us once again with them here.
According to the Theorist:
- Approximately 16 Billion Years ago the Big Bang occurred
- Approximately 4.6 Billion Years ago the earth was formed as a hot molten mass
- Approximately 3.4 Billion Years ago the earth cooled down and organisms began to swirl the formerly pre-biotic soup.
According to the Bible:
- The earth was formed approximately 7,000 years ago based on the genealogical dates from Adam to Abraham
- 4,400 years ago was the Noahic Worldwide Flood
- 2,000 Messiah Jesus died for the sins of the world
Therefore, since the caption gives the date of 500 million years, you immediately know that the writer of the caption is working according to the evolutionist’s timeline and not according to the Young Earth Creationist timeline found in the Bible.
Nov. 8, 2011: An artist’s rendering of a Tegopelte, a foot-long arthropod that lived 500 million years ago.
I. Drawings instead of Discoveries
Again with the drawings. Why not show us a living or fossilized example. Having to “imagine” the way something may have looked is not hard (or even good) science.
II. How Circular Reasoning is Used in Age Assessments
If you ask them how they know the Tegopelte is 500 million years old, they will tell you that they know the age of the Tegopelte by the strata layer in which it was found.
However, ask them how they date the age of the strata layer, and they will tell you by the index fossil found in the layer.
Dating the fossil by the layer and the layer by the fossil is circular reasoning that destroys the foundations of the imaginary geologic column which exists only one place on earth–the textbook!
III. No dating method can accurately date something 500 million years old.
Carbon 14 and other dating methods are shaky at best with aging items that are only thousands of years old, let alone several hundred million.
This makes perfect sense from a Young Earth Creation worldview since nothing is that old.
IV. If you find a fossil in limestone, how do you know if it is 100 million year old Jurassic Limestone or 600 million year Cambrian Limestone?
V. Age Limiting Factors
I have covered in a myriad of articles the fact that the universe and earth have what are called age-limiting factors. What that means is, there are many testable and observable aspects that place age dating or limiting factors on the creation.
For instance, if you found a sunken treasure ship on the ocean floor and wanted to determine when the ship sunk, if the gold coins were stamped “1750”, then you know that the ship had to have sunk after 1750. The ship certainly could not have been sunk prior to 1750 because the coin had not yet been struck.
The same observations can easily be made to prove wrong the theorist’s timeline by the creation all around us.
A. Moon’s Distance to Earth – Proof the earth is less than 1 million years old
B. Erosion Rates – Proof the earth is thousands not billions of years old
C. The Geomagnetic Field – Proof the earth is less than 25,000 years old
D. Population proves thousands of years not billions
E. Red Giants to White Dwarfs in Under 2,000 years
For more in this series: