Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Welcome to Christforums the Protestant Community. You'll need to register in order to post your comments on your favorite topics and subjects. You'll also enjoy sharing media across multiple platforms. We hope you enjoy your fellowship here! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Christforums

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible- believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non- Nicene, non- Biblical heresy. God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now
Sign in to follow this  
Calvarystudy

Young earth evidence

Recommended Posts

YOUNG EARTH EVIDENCE

 

Astronomical Records. Because of the rarity of solar eclipses at any given location, and because astronomers can date every solar eclipse going back thousands of years, when an ancient tablet or manuscript mentions a solar eclipse, we can accurately date that record, and other events associated with it in other countries. Before 2250 BC, we have no records of any solar eclipse being seen by man. “The earliest Chinese date which can be assigned with any probability is 2250 BC, based on an astronomical reference in the Book of History”. (Ralph Linten, The Tree of Culture (1955), p 520).

 

Writing. The oldest writing is a Sumerian pictograph written on clay tablets dated about 3500 BC.

 

Iron Pot in Coal. Professor W. Rusch has reported an iron pot encased in coal dated by evolutionary standards at 300 million years old. (Creation Research Quarterly (March, 1971) p.201). The pictured affidavit reads as follows: Sulphur Springs, Arkansas, November 27, 1948. While I was working in the Municipal Electric Plant in Thomas, Okla. in 1912, I came upon a solid chunk of coal which was too large to use. I broke it with a sledge hammer. This iron pot fell from the center, leaving the impression or mold of the pot in the piece of coal. Jim Stall (an employee of the company) witnessed the breaking of the coal, and saw the pot fall out. I traced the source of the coal, and found that it came from the Wilburton, Oklahoma Mines. Frank J. Kenwood Sworn to before me, in Sulphur Springs, Arkansas this 27th day of November, 1948. Julia L (?)

 

Metal Bowl. An intricately carved metal bowl was blasted out of solid pudding stone. (Scientific American, June 5, 1852).

 

The Nampa Image is a baked clay figure obtained from a well being bored in 1889 at Nampa, Idaho. It was pumped from rocks 300 feet deep under a “Tertiary” lava sheet (12 million years old.) The problem for evolutionists is how can a man made clay figure 12 million years old (supposedly) have been laid down before man evolved 3 million years ago (supposedly)? Source: American Geologist, F.Wright, 23 (1899), p.267.

 

Pollen in Pre-Cambrian Strata. Pollen from Angiosperm and Gymnosperm trees (woody plants supposedly 260 million years old have been found in Pre Cambrian Hakati shale in the Grand Canyon (supposedly 570 million years old). The problem here for evolutionists is conifer pollen existing 300 million years before it appeared on earth. Some spores are stained with red oxide from surrounding rocks, thus proving that the spores are not from present day contamination. Source: Nature, R. Stainforth, 210 (1966) p.292.

 

Turkmenia. Notice this report in the Sydney Morning Herald, 21 Nov. 1983, “A report from the Soviet news agency, Tass, says that about 1500 tracks made by dinosaurs have been found in Turkmenia – but among those prints are those resembling the footprints of a man. According to Professor Amanniyazov, director of Turkmenia’s Institute of Geology: “If further analysis proves that the prints have been left by anthropoids, the history of mankind will be extended to 150 million, not 5 millionyears.”” Why did Professor Amanniyazov assume dinosaur extinction 150 million years ago as absolutely certainty? Why did he not consider the alternative position of dinosaurs living with man recently? The fact that dinosaur and human footprints have been found in the same rock strata proves that man and dinosaurs lived at the same time.

This is a great problem to evolutionists who believe that dinosaurs became extinct 70 million years ago. Evolutionists claim that dinosaurs died out 67 million years before man appeared. These footprints prove that:

a) Man and dinosaur lived at the same time, and b) The evolutionary geological column is completely wrong in its dating of rocks.

The evidence for these tracks being genuine are:

i) The tracks of man and dinosaur are widely distributed from Turkestan to Texas.

ii) The tracks are mostly exposed by bulldozers or erosion.

iii) Two Palaeontologists have pronounced them genuine:

- Dr. Camp of the University of California, and

- Dr. G. Westcott of Ypsilanti, Michigan.

iv) The associated dinosaur tracks are accepted as valid.

v) Some prints have ridges of mud pushed up around them.

vi) Upon sawing through the footprints, the rock particles underneath are more compressed than particles surrounding the prints. Source: “Scientific American”, A.G. Ingalls: “The Carboniferous Mystery” 162 (1940), page 14. See R.L. Wysong “The Creation-Evolution Controversy”, p.373

 

Polystrate Trees. Crossing several rock strata are trees preserved as well at their tops as at their bottoms. These fossil trees bridge an evolutionary imagined time span of millions of years, that would preclude their “in place” growth and fossilisation.

 

Galaxy star clusters (spirals with billions of stars) move so rapidly that they would not stay together if the universe were very old.

 

Large Stars. Some stars are so large that they radiate energy 10,000 to 1 million times more rapidly than our sun. They could not have contained enough hydrogen to radiate this fast for millions of years, because their initial mass would have been too big. These O and B class stars, and P Cygni stars could not continue atomic fusion longer than 50,000 to 300,000 years.

 

Abundant Hydrogen in stars. Hydrogen in stars is continually being converted into Helium. Hydrogen cannot be made from other elements. Fred Hoyle states that, if the universe were as old as Big Bang theorists think, then there would be little hydrogen left, as it would be converted to Helium by now. Spectra from stars reveal abundant hydrogen in stars.This implies a young universe.

 

Solar shrinking. Since 1836, over 100 different observers at the Greenwich Observatory and US Naval Observatory have measured the sun’s diameter to shrink at 0.1% per century or 5 feet per hour. At this rate, 50,000 years ago the sun would have been so large as to boil earth’s oceans, making life on earth impossible. 100,000 years ago our sun would have been twice as large.

 

Comets elliptically orbit the sun and are thought to be as old as the sun. As comets orbit the sun, they lose some of their water and gases from the sun’s heat, gravity and tail formation. The tail consists of material driven away from its head by solar energy. Some comets regularly seen in the 19th Century have broken up and vanished, or plunged into the sun. All comets should self-destruct in a short ime, less than 10,000 years. There should be no comets left. Evolution cannot explain comets in an old solar system. Comets are young objects created in a young solar system.

 

Meteoroids bombarding Saturn’s rings would have destroyed them in less than 10,000 years. (W T Brown, In the Beginning, p 18).

 

Jupiter’s Moons. If they evolved, they should be physically alike, having the same amount of volcanoes and impact craters, but this is not so. Evolution claims that all planets were molten 5 billion years ago and volcanic activity stopped 4 billion years ago as they cooled. The moons Ganymede and Callisto have no volcanoes and many impact craters. Europa has no volcanoes and no impact craters. Io has 7 active volcanoes and no impact craters. Titan has volcanoes.

 

Jupiter, Uranus and Neptune (4) have rings, which could not survive 4 billion years. Jupiter’s intense magnetic field radiation would sweep out its rings. (Bradford Smith, a Voyager Scientist).

 

Venus’ high temperature and little erosion, imply a young age for Venus. If Venus was 4 billion years old, its dense atmosphere should have worn away its craters.

 

Mars has little erosion and some water. Mars has many sharp edged craters and volcanoes, as well as month-long dust storms. Several thousand years of this weather would have seriously eroded these edges and its strong colour differences. Powerful solar UV radiation would have long ago broken down the small amount of water, releasing the oxygen into the atmosphere and hydrogen into space. Evolution predicts no surface water and much atmospheric oxygen, but measurements show the opposite being some surface water and very little atmospheric oxygen.

 

 

Lunar Recession. Due to tidal friction, the moon is moving away from earth at about 4 cm per year (1 ½ inches). At this rate, 5 billion years ago the moon would have been 200,000km. closer.

 

Meteorite Craters only occur on the earth’s surface, never being found in the rock strata. If earth were 5 billion years old, we would find many meteorite craters in the sedimentary rock strata, but we don’t. Thus all meteorites which have struck the earth, have hit it in the last 5000 years.

 

Oil Well Pressure. When oil drillers first penetrate oil wells, oil gushes out because the oil and gas are under great pressure from surrounding rocks. Sedimentary rocks surrounding the oil wells are porous. Studies of these show that the oil would seep out before 100,000 years, but this has not happened. This great oil pressure argues strongly against millions of years age for oil wells, and implies an age for oil of around 10,000 years. Oil, coal and gas were formed during the Great Flood 4,400 years ago (in 2418BC).

 

 

Earth’s Molten Interior. Deep within the earth, the rocks are molten. The earth is slowly cooling from the surface inwards according to Stefan’s Law of Radiation. Lord Kelvin in 1889 calculated that the earth could not be billions of years old because of earth’s known rate of cooling, the existing temperature gradient in the earth, and the assumption that the earth could not have been hotter than “white hot” initially.“Popular Lectures and Addresses”(London: MacMillan, 1889, p.415). If earth were billions of years old, it would have cooled far more than it now has, even if we assume a radioactively generated heating mechanism. (W T Brown, In the Beginning, p 17).

 

Radiohaloes are colour rings around microscopic radioactive minerals in rock crystals. “Squashed” Polonium-210 radiohaloes indicate that Jurassic, Triassic and Eocene formations in the Colorado Plateau were deposited within months of one another, not from 225-255 million years apart, as evolution claims. “Orphan” Polonium-218 radiohaloes, having no evidence of their mother elements,imply either instant creation, or drastic changes in radioactive decay rates

 

Ocean sediment. There is not enough sediment on the sea floors for earth to be 5 billion years old. Rivers add about 28 billion tons of sediment to the oceans each year. If this had occurred for 1 billion years, the continents would have eroded away many times. There would be a layer of sediment on the ocean floor at least 60 miles thick. However, the average depth of sediment on the ocean floor is about 800 metres, and the continents have not eroded once yet. The Tasman Sea off Australia is not part of a subduction zone of ocean floor being pushed deep into the earth. Subduction zones could not dispose of 10% of incoming sediment. Hence, sea floors seem young.

 

Tree Rings. The oldest living things are Bristlecone pines growing in Eastern Nevada, aged about 4,600 years old (sometimes producing 2 growth rings per year, so their age would be less), and Sequoia Gigantea in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, which are never older than about 4,000 years. These giant redwoods have no known enemies, and never have any dead trees among them. Unless man cuts them down, they never seem to die. 17 Bristlecone pines are dated about 4,000 years old. Since the Flood occurred about 2,418 BC, this implies that:

a) all the pre-Flood Sequoias and Bristlecones were wiped out by the Flood, and b) there is no record of any living tree older than the Flood.

 

Man’s Recorded History.If man has lived on earth for 1 million years, why do we only find human records going back to about 3500 BC? This cuneiform tablet is the oldest human writing from Sumeria. When human records first appear, they show man to be highly developed with a sophisticated civilisation. This agrees better with a creation date of 4074 BC than with evolution’s 1 million year history of man. Why did man do nothing for 1 million years? Because he has only been here for 6,000 years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abundant Hydrogen in stars. Hydrogen in stars is continually being converted into Helium. Hydrogen cannot be made from other elements. Fred Hoyle states that, if the universe were as old as Big Bang theorists think, then there would be little hydrogen left, as it would be converted to Helium by now. Spectra from stars reveal abundant hydrogen in stars.This implies a young universe.

 

Fred Hoyle believed in the Steady State Theory until his dying day - i.e. he thought the universe had always been here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Fred Hoyle believed in the Steady State Theory until his dying day - i.e. he thought the universe had always been here.

 

And?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And so you can't quote his ideas in support of YEC, when they directly contradict it.

 

ok

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Radiometric dating: A Christian Perspective

Worth the read, but perhaps not if you're a diehard young earth person.

 

Dr Wiens is a geophysicist at Los Alamos Labs and the principle scientist for studying rocks on Mars using " ChemCam." Dr Wiens is also a Godly man who exhibits humility. I appreciate his perspective.

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

And so you can't quote his ideas in support of YEC, when they directly contradict it.

 

When Jesus turned water into wine, scripture says it was properly aged, or so it seemed on analysis.

So we can't expect the Cosmos to look young either.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When Jesus turned water into wine, scripture says it was properly aged, or so it seemed on analysis.

Well, I don't know about that. Here's what the scripture says:

 

"Jesus said to the servants, 'Fill the jars with water.' And they filled them up to the brim. And he said to them, 'Now draw some out and take it to the master of the feast.' So they took it. When the master of the feast tasted the water now become wine, and did not know where it came from (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), the master of the feast called the bridegroom and said to him, 'Everyone serves the good wine first, and when people have drunk freely, then the poor wine. But you have kept the good wine until now'" (Jn 2:7–10).

 

The wine was good wine, that's all we are told. Had it been possible to do analysis on it, with modern methods, I don't know what they would have found.

 

Regarding the age of the cosmos, I know there are some that hold a young earth view who say God has created the universe with the "appearance of age." This view creates difficulties for me, since it is not clear to me that making a young universe appear old wouldn't be dishonest in some way. I am inclined to think that if all our best measurement methods are indicating a universe of about 14 billion years, then we are probably looking at a truly ancient cosmos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Eric/The Librarian, here's a new (it was released in 2016) and very well-done documentary that I'm sure you two will find interesting: Is Genesis History?

Thanks, @David Lee, you're correct, that is a good film. I saw it this summer at a church near where I live, and I really enjoyed it. I do understand Genesis to be history, including the creation account. Although my own view is what I think they call "progressive creationism" where the creation days are understood to be long periods of time. I believe each plant and creature were individually created by God, and not the result of an evolutionary process. So, I hold to a historical Adam and Eve, who were our first parents. But, for me the issue of the age of the earth is similar to questions of eschatology. I try to hold my beliefs loosely in case they have to be "adjusted" at some point in the future!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Regarding the age of the cosmos, I know there are some that hold a young earth view who say God has created the universe with the "appearance of age." This view creates difficulties for me, since it is not clear to me that making a young universe appear old wouldn't be dishonest in some way. I am inclined to think that if all our best measurement methods are indicating a universe of about 14 billion years, then we are probably looking at a truly ancient cosmos.

So the water turned to wine is a more honest transformation? Healing the sick is honest? You don't see any deception there?

Raising the dead....that's not really fair, is it? Not many get to be raised....that doesn't seem fair to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the water turned to wine is a more honest transformation? Healing the sick is honest? You don't see any deception there?

Raising the dead....that's not really fair, is it? Not many get to be raised....that doesn't seem fair to me.

 

 

How is Christ turning water to wine, and healing the sick dishonest unless Scripture is dishonest? And Christ generosity can't be questioned if it's fair, because it's generosity. Miracles such as healing were for the purpose of validating who Christ said he was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So the water turned to wine is a more honest transformation?

I guess I don't think there is any implied age to the wine Jesus made. Sure, when we make wine the natural way, it takes time, but not with Jesus.

 

Healing the sick is honest? You don't see any deception there?

No.

 

Raising the dead....that's not really fair, is it? Not many get to be raised....that doesn't seem fair to me.

Not sure where you got this. This has nothing to do with anything I said.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

How is Christ turning water to wine, and healing the sick dishonest unless Scripture is dishonest? And Christ generosity can't be questioned if it's fair, because it's generosity. Miracles such as healing were for the purpose of validating who Christ said he was.

 

So those miracles seemed to have taken place, not in real time, but in "God Space" and then produced for us.

Possibly the same as our Cosmos.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I don't think there is any implied age to the wine Jesus made. Sure, when we make wine the natural way, it takes time, but not with Jesus.

 

 

No.

 

 

Not sure where you got this. This has nothing to do with anything I said.

 

You said producing a fully aged earth during creation week would be dishonest.

No more dishonest than any other miracle that you DO accept.

Besides, climbing a "young" mountain would be dangerous and crumbly.

Eating food from newly planted trees is not an option.

Wound not Adam would have problems walking if created young?

And he was only a few days old and given a wife. Acward if she was under age.

 

My point being that Creation was not 7 days old at the end of creation week even by biblical accounts.

Scripture says the hills are "ancient" and "Everlasting". That's not young.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do understand Genesis to be history, including the creation account.

 

I believe the creation account is regarding the Garden where man has been removed from. Not what we see around us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I believe the creation account is regarding the Garden where man has been removed from. Not what we see around us.

 

The creation account tells us that God created the earth and everything that exists in it. The "evidence" that the earth is billions of years old is based on the assumption that everything was formed by the same natural processes that we see going on today. There is a lot of evidence for a young earth that is unknown or ignored.

 

https://clydeherrin.wordpress.com/2016/03/13/the-missing-navels/

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

So those miracles seemed to have taken place, not in real time, but in "God Space" and then produced for us.

Possibly the same as our Cosmos.

 

We would have to guess that time moving faster than in God space was the cause of the miracles, but we run into some problems there. The blind don't gain eyesight overtime nor do the dead rise because after a certain amount of time passed.

 

Now with the creation account.

Adam could have been created an infant, we don't know how many years passed since his creation and the forming of Eve, but I don't think thats what happened.

Adam was created a man capable of impregnating a woman, so to that extent we can say that God made creation to look older than it is. But what if we were to look at Adam scientifically to learn his exact age, we would have little to go on expecpt that he had the body of a man. He would have no age spots, no wrinkles, no other signs of age.

 

 

​​​​​

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "evidence" that the earth is billions of years old is based on the assumption that everything was formed by the same natural processes that we see going on today.

I think there is another viewpoint, that is that the universe is very old, but that it's development into what we see today was a result of both natural processes (I don't mean evolution) and the constant intervention of God. One example that comes to mind is the impact event that 1) transformed our atmosphere from a heavy one like Venus has into a lighter one, and 2) formed the moon, which is a one-of-a-kind satellite, absolutely essential for life as we know it. Another is the arrival on the scene at just the right time of organisms which were instrumental in providing lots of free oxygen. Neither of these events could be thought of as lucky accidents. Only the hand of God could have brought them about in just the right way at just the right time.

 

http://reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2014/03/03/increasing-lunar-coincidences-lead-to-philosophical-disquiet

http://reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/tnrtb/2015/06/18/goe-or-die-earth-s-habitability-no-sure-thing

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We would have to guess that time moving faster than in God space was the cause of the miracles, but we run into some problems there. The blind don't gain eyesight overtime nor do the dead rise because after a certain amount of time passed.

 

Now with the creation account.

Adam could have been created an infant, we don't know how many years passed since his creation and the forming of Eve, but I don't think thats what happened.

Adam was created a man capable of impregnating a woman, so to that extent we can say that God made creation to look older than it is. But what if we were to look at Adam scientifically to learn his exact age, we would have little to go on expecpt that he had the body of a man. He would have no age spots, no wrinkles, no other signs of age.

 

 

​​​​​

 

You are guessing about his skin condition. What we KNOW is that Adam walked with God and received a wife. We then conclude she was not under-age or was he as he named all the animals and made mankind changing decisions that we live with.

Adam was to till the soil. If you know about "soil" it is organic matter that has been decaying for months or years.

 

So there is nothing "young" about the earth in scripture...anywhere. Not even in the creation account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You are guessing about his skin condition. What we KNOW is that Adam walked with God and received a wife. We then conclude she was not under-age or was he as he named all the animals and made mankind changing decisions that we live with.

Adam was to till the soil. If you know about "soil" it is organic matter that has been decaying for months or years.

 

So there is nothing "young" about the earth in scripture...anywhere. Not even in the creation account.

 

In order to determine how old something looks we need to consider two things: it appearance and how it came into existence. Soil that exists today may be old because of how it originated; soil that was created directly by God would not be old regardless of its appearance.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe that the soil needs to be that "old" actually. For example, after Mt St. Helens erupted back in the 80's, there was great concern about the volcanic ash, that it would be detrimental to the nearby farmlands where the majority of the ash fell. However, there was no reason for such concern because, as a group of earth scientists quickly pointed out to them, volcanic ash works like a time-release capsule of sorts, rich in nutrients.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You are guessing about his skin condition. What we KNOW is that Adam walked with God and received a wife. We then conclude she was not under-age or was he as he named all the animals and made mankind changing decisions that we live with.

Adam was to till the soil. If you know about "soil" it is organic matter that has been decaying for months or years.

 

So there is nothing "young" about the earth in scripture...anywhere. Not even in the creation account.

 

You missed my point. Adams skin condition would be scientific evidence of how long he was alive.

 

​​​​​​Now if the only way for there to be soil was by decomposing plants and dead things then there couldnt have been plants on the earth until after many other organisms died. And we see that plant were created before animals in Gen. 1:11-13 on the third day. It wasn't till the fifth day that God created living things, Gen. 1:20-23.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

In order to determine how old something looks we need to consider two things: it appearance and how it came into existence. Soil that exists today may be old because of how it originated; soil that was created directly by God would not be old regardless of its appearance.

 

Soil is decaying organic matter. Hydroponics is organic compounds in water.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You missed my point. Adams skin condition would be scientific evidence of how long he was alive.

 

His skin was on an adult frame, so would indicate adult age. He was given a wife, indicating adult age.

He walked and talked, indicating adult age. If you're thinking Fetus skin, I doubt your sources.

The scriptures all point to a grown adult.

"Scientific evidence" is what gets written down after an event.

Like scriptures.No scriptures indicate fetus skin.

Edited by The Librarian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×