Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
If you would like a word Doc. please contact me (The word document
will be properly spaced for printing.
Join on Face-book!
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Pueblo-CO/Answers-On-
Creation/133751156669582?ref=ts#!/pages/Pueblo-CO/Answers-On-
Creation/133751156669582?ref=ts
--------------------------
Contact: Answersoncreation@gmail.com
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Introduction)
There are a few things you should know about this source book before you use it: First
off, just how it’s structured and why I did it that way. The source book has hundreds of
quotes from very qualified people on the subject of creation-evolution. Along with all of
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
these quotes you will find comments (explaining the topic in real easier language) by me.
Everything I write once we get into the quotes and evidence will be in “italics” and will
be (enclosed like this). I will begin by explaining the theory of evolution and the Big
Bang theory that this book was meant to challenge so you know what we’re fighting
against. Then I will give you evidence and sources to use to debate the topic. Always
keep in mind, though, that this book will not teach you everything about the debate.
Some of the quotes won’t even make sense unless you actually know about the subjects
that are discussed. For example, if a quote says “The cosmic microwave background
radiation (CMBR) is only supplied by one source” you might not know what I am talking
about and you will need to study a little bit on the CMBR elsewhere. But once you have
studied and know more about the topic, I will have the now understandable quotes in this
book, ready for your use.
Now I am going to sum up what exactly this book was meant to fight against. To start is,
the Big Bang theory (Origin of the universe) saying that somewhere around 15 billion
years ago everything in the universe was compacted into an infinite region, smaller than a
period on this page, that then exploded into the universe and galaxies and stars we see
today. The theory then moves on to say that about 4.5 billions years ago earth formed
(planetary evolution) and earth was hot molten for hundreds of millions of years. It then
cooled down and life came into existence, somehow, and started evolving into all the
different life forms that we see today (biological evolution).
of Dr. Kent Hovind’s seminar series. I was determined to walk out of the room after the
required 30 minutes, but ended up watching the entire 15 hour series in 2 days – with a
break for food and sleep. I began to sense God calling me into this ministry to speak and
eventually debate on this topic for which He gave me such a passion for.
To prepare for speaking and debating on the topic I became part of a national speech and
debate league for two years of high-school and went to many competitions including the
national qualifier both years. Once speech and debate was over I started spending more
time learning and studying and researching on the subject of creation versus evolution.
This research is a result of my own study, put into a source book, for anyone to use.
Just so we are clear on where I stand on this topic, I believe the Bible is the inspired,
infallible, inerrant Word of the living God. I believe it from Genesis to Revelations -
sometimes even past there into the concordance, depending on the Bible version. I
believe that “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth”. I believe God did it
in six literal days about 6000 years ago. I believe when God created the world it was
perfect and there was no death or suffering until man sinned. I believe in a world wide
flood that occurred somewhere in the neighborhood of 4400 years ago. I believe that
about 2000 years ago God sent His only Son who was born of a virgin, died, and rose
again for the sins of the world.
1. Antimatter and matter proves the big bang theory false (Evidence)
2. Monopoles prove the big bang theory false (Evidence)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
1. Rapid formations can happen and support the Biblical flood (Evidence)
2. Clastic Pipes don’t prove millions of years (Evidence)
3. Coal-Oil-Opals can form quickly and are not proof of an old age (Evidence)
4. Ephemeral markings are missing and support creation (Evidence)
5. Erosion lines are missing in earth geology (Evidence)
6. Petrifaction of wood can happen quickly (Evidence)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Here we will be looking at the topic of the big bang. We will look at some
claims made and reply to them and then look at some problems with the big
bang theory.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
1. Antimatter and matter proves the big bang theory false (Evidence)
2. Monopoles prove the big bang theory false (Evidence)
3. Cosmic microwave background radiation (Evidence)
4. Unequal distribution of matter proves the big bang false (Evidence)
5. Galaxies prove against the big bang (Evidence)
6. Polonium Halos prove against the big bang (Evidence)
7. Inflation problem proves the big bang false (Evidence)
8. Lack of temperature drop off proves a non-expanding universe (Evidence)
9. No proof of dark matter (Rebuttal/Evidence)
10. Population III stars proves the big bang to be false (Evidence)
11. Red shirt does not prove the universe to be billions of years old (Evidence)
12. Singularity theory for the big bang does not prove it possible (Evidence)
13. Speed of light is slowing down/Starlight would not take billions of years (Evidence)
14. God “Stretched out the heavens” at the beginning of the creation (Evidence)
15. Thermal Dynamics prove the big bang theory to be false (Evidence)
16. The physical property of time helps the creationists (Evidence)
17. Universe age problems prove against the big bang (Evidence)
18. The universe had to have a cause (Evidence)
19. The universe is finite (Evidence)
20. Our universe and planet and solar system are very unique (Evidence)
21. Random chance can not account for this universe (Evidence)
22. Horizon problem (Light traveling problem for the big bang) (Evidence)
23. Solar Angular momentum should be different /w big bang (Evidence)
24. Gas planets (and variations) should not have formed like they did (Evidence)
25. Alternative big bang models have problems (Evidence)
26. The amount of stars can not be explained by the big bang (Evidence)
27. Backward orbiting planets can’t be explained by the nebular hypothesis (Evidence)
28. WMAP information (Evidence)
29. Russell Humphrey’s cosmologist model (Evidence)
30. Other problems with the big bang (Evidence)
1. Antimatter and matter proves the big bang theory false (Evidence)
Another challenge to the big bang is the “baryon number problem.” The big bang
supposes that matter (hydrogen and helium gas) was created from energy as the universe
expanded. However, experimental physics tells us that whenever matter is created from
energy, such a reaction also produces antimatter. Antimatter has similar properties to
matter, except the charges of the particles are reversed. (So, whereas a proton has a
positive charge, an antiproton has a negative charge). In any reaction where energy is
transformed into matter, it produces an exactly equal amount of antimatter; there are no
known exceptions. The big bang (which has no matter to begin with—only energy)
should have produced precisely equal amounts of matter and antimatter. Thus, if the big
bang were true, there should be an exactly equal amount of matter and antimatter in the
universe today. But there is not. The visible universe is comprised almost entirely of
matter—with only trace amounts of antimatter. This devastating problem for the big bang
actually is a powerful confirmation of biblical creation; it is a design feature…When
matter and antimatter come together, they violently destroy each other. If the universe
had equal amounts of matter and antimatter (as the big bang requires), life
would not be possible.
Tom Van Flandern, (Ph.D Astronomy) B.S. in Mathematics, June 1962, from
Xavier University, Cincinnati, OH. Attended on General Motors scholarship, 1958-1962.
Graduate work in astronomy for one year at Georgetown University, Washington,
DC 1962-1963, on a teaching fellowship. Ph.D. in Astronomy from Yale University,
New Haven, CT, June 1969
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/cosmology/top-30-problems-big-bang-theory.htm
The Big Bang predicts that equal amounts of matter and antimatter were
created in the initial explosion. Matter dominates the present universe
apparently because of some form of asymmetry, such as CP violation
asymmetry, that caused most anti-matter to annihilate with matter, but left
much matter. Experiments are searching for evidence of this asymmetry, so
far without success.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
According to the ‘big bang’ theory for the origin of the universe, equal
amounts of matter and antimatter should have formed… The problem is that,
so far, no antimatter domains have been detected in space within 20
megaparsecs of the Earth.
Samuel Ting, one of the leading advocates in the search for antimatter in
space, laments: ‘At the beginning, equal amounts of matter and antimatter
were created [in the “big bang”]. Now there seems to be only matter. There
have been theoretical speculations about the disappearance of antimatter, but
no experimental support.’3
, physical laws indicate that equal amounts of matter and antimatter would
have been created in the proposed ‘big bang.’ Therefore missing antimatter
in the universe should challenge the ‘big bang’
Some versions of the Big Bang theory require an equal production of matter
and antimatter. However, only small traces of antimatter (positrons,
antiprotons) are found in space.
(If the big bang occurred we should have equal amounts of matter and
antimatter, and if we had equal amounts there would be a huge problem.
This is proof the big bang did not happen.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Most people know something about magnets, like the kind found in a
compass. These magnets have two “poles”—a north pole and a south pole.
Poles that are alike repel each other, and opposites attract. A “monopole” is
a hypothetical massive particle that is just like a magnet but with only one
pole. So a monopole would have either a “north” pole or a “south” pole, but
not both. Particle physicists claim that the high temperature conditions of the
big bang should have created magnetic monopoles. Since monopoles are
predicted to be stable, they should have lasted to this day. Yet, despite
considerable searching, monopoles have not been found. Where are the
monopoles? The fact that we don’t find any monopoles strongly suggests
that the universe never was that hot. This indicates that there never was a big
bang. But the lack of monopoles is perfectly consistent with the Bible’s
account of creation because the universe did not start at extremely high
temperatures.
(A lack of monopoles obviously shows that the big bang model is not
scientific. We should have these monopoles throughout our galaxy but we
do not. This is proof that the big bang did not happen.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(First things first is the CMBR temperature was predicted a while ago)
This nice story is undermined by the fact that later in the 1950s, Gamow and
his students made a number of estimates of the background temperature
ranging from 3 to 50 K.
(The predictions the big bang model made about the cosmic microwave
background radiation were of very wide range.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr Carl Wieland
http://creation.com/secular-scientists-blast-the-big-bang
But the big bang theory can’t survive without these fudge factors. Without
the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth,
isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed, because there would
be no way for parts of the universe that are now more than a few degrees
away in the sky to come to the same temperature and thus emit the same
amount of microwave radiation. … Inflation requires a density 20 times
larger than that implied by big bang nucleosynthesis, the theory’s
explanation of the origin of the light elements.
(The big bang did not accurately predict the cosmic microwave background
radiation like many big bang believers want you to think)
Dr. Danny Faulkner (Ph.D Astronomy) B.S (Math) M.S (Physics) M.S Ph.D
(Astronomy) http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/30/30_1/StellarPop.html
The purpose of the COBE satellite has been to look for these
inhomogeneities as temperature variations in the background radiation.
However, the very subtle and questionable variations recently announced
from COBE measurements are far less than had been predicted.
There are many possible interpretations of the blotches seen in the CMB
two-dimensional temperature maps besides the desired belief that they are
some ‘clumpiness’ due to the quantum nature of the radiation shortly after
the big bang.
(There is more than just the big bangs explanation of the cosmic microwave
background. And the other explanations don’t agree with the big bang)
Dr. Werner Gitt (Ph.D Engineering) Dr. Gitt is director and professor at the
German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology
http://creation.com/what-about-the-big-bang#star
If the universe came from a big bang, then matter should be evenly
distributed. However, the universe contains an extremely uneven distribution
of mass. This means that matter is concentrated into zones and planes around
relatively empty regions. Two astronomers, Geller and Huchra, embarked on
a measuring program expecting to find evidence to support the big bang
model. By compiling large star maps, they hoped to demonstrate that matter
is uniformly distributed throughout the cosmos (when a large enough scale is
considered). The more progress they made with their cartographic overview
of space, the clearer it became that distant galaxies are clustered like cosmic
continents beyond nearly empty reaches of space. The big bang model was
strongly shaken by this discovery.
(According to the Big bang theory, matter and anti-matter should be equally
distributed throughout the universe and it is not.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Mass is missing
Many scientists assume that the universe will eventually stop expanding and
begin to collapse inward. Then it will again explode, and repeat its
oscillating type of perpetual motion. This idea is an effort to avoid an origin
and destiny for the universe. For oscillation to occur, the universe must have
a certain density or distribution of mass. So far, measurements of the mass
density are a hundred times smaller than expected. The universe does not
appear to be oscillating. The necessary mass is "missing."
(Mass in the universe is missing. This does not work with the big bang
model)
Talk Origins
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html
Going back to our original discussion of BBT, one of the key assumptions
made in deriving BBT from GR was that the universe is, at some scale,
homogeneous. At small scales where we encounter planets, stars and
galaxies, this assumption is obviously not true. As such, we would not
expect that the equations governing BBT would be a very good description
of how these systems behave. However, as one increases the scale of interest
to truly huge scales -- hundreds of millions of light-years -- this becomes a
better and better approximation of reality.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Danny Faulkner (Ph.D Astronomy) B.S (Math) M.S (Physics) M.S Ph.D
(Astronomy) http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/30/30_1/StellarPop.html
The cosmology popular today supposes that early in the universe large
clouds of gas began to form. These clouds were millions of light years
across and slowly condensed to form galaxies. It is recognized that a
perfectly smooth Big Bang cannot give rise to these structures
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Even more astounding is the discovery that the galaxies are clustered
together. In naturalistic models, this kind of ordering--of gas into stars, stars
into galaxies, and galaxies into clusters--would have taken eons to have
formed by gravity. It's no wonder, then, that these clusters present such a
mystery.
No natural way has been found to explain the formation of planets, stars, and
galaxies. An explosion should produce, at best, an outward spray of gas and
radiation. This gas should continue expanding, not form intricate planets,
stars, and entire galaxies.
(It’s plain and simple, the big bang can not explain the formation of galaxies
– Galaxies simply should not exist if the big bang model were true. Believers
of the big bang will admit this themselves, yet they still choose to believe in
the big bang.)
Dr. Robert V. Gentry (is a nuclear physicist who worked 13 years for the Oakridge
National Laboratory as a guest scientist. During the time he worked there, he was
recognized as the world's leading authority on polonium halos. It is interesting to note
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
that when he began his research, he was an evolutionist and believe in the big bang.
Today, Dr. Gentry is a fully convinced young earth creation scientist. )
www.halos.comorionfdn.org
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:891
(Radio-halos have a very short half life, yet we are still finding them in rocks
everywhere proving that the rock had to form quickly)
Two very important conclusions were drawn from this research 1) The
Polonium 218 was primordial, that is to say, this radioactive element was in
the original granite. 2) Because the halos can only be formed in the crystals
of the granite, and the Polonium 218 half-life is only 3 minutes, the granite
had to be cool and crystallized originally. The Polonium 218 would have
been gone before molten granite could have cooled. It would take a very
long time for a molten earth to cool.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:893
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:
The implications are that not only did the transport of polonium isotopes
have to be rapid, or else the polonium radiohalos would not have likewise
formed rapidly before the polonium isotopes decayed away, but that the
uranium decay in the zircons had to be grossly accelerated to rapidly supply
the needed polonium isotopes, and geological processes such as the
formation of granites and metamorphic rocks had to also occur extremely
rapidly
(The evidence strongly supports that granite (and other rocks) could not
form over a long period of time like the big bang requires it to. This is proof
it formed quickly and is proof that the big bang model of how many planets
got here is false.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Robert Gentry has a amazing story that I wanted to add at this point. I
think you will enjoy it and this will show you just how much some people do
not want to be wrong)
Like so many other scientists who dared to speak the truth about the myriad
of scientific problems with evolutionism, Dr. Gentry was persecuted for his
beliefs several years ago by a scientific community determined to suppress
any opposition to their religion of evolution. He is one of three scientists
featured in a video titled The Case for Creation. Dr. Gentry is cited as one of
three examples of scientists who've been the victims of this kind of
bigotry. In September of 2002, Dr. Gentry filed a lawsuit against the
National Science Foundation, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Cornell
University and others because of alleged censorship of his ten scientific
papers that he believes falsifies the Big Bang theory
Explanation of inflation
Inflation holds that 10-36 seconds after the Big Bang was ignited, the
expansion rate of the universe increased by a thousand billion billion billion-
fold. It was supposedly an explosive event that followed immediately after
the larger explosive event. This hypothesis, however, fails to address critical
deficiencies in the overall Big Bang model.
Inflation theory, that was invented for the purpose, is said to provide simple
solutions to some of the problems of pre-inflation Big Bang Theory.
Inflation theorists have alleged that the inflationary expansion of the early
Big Bang universe, involving speeds orders of magnitude greater than that of
light, did not involve the travel of mass or energy, and thus did not violate
the theory of relativity in solving the singularity problem. But how inflation,
as opposed to ordinary expansion, can in some manner displace all the mass
or energy of the universe without physically moving it, defies common
understanding.
Since the Big Bang story of the origin of the universe has been refuted by a
host of external observations and internal contradictions,1 secular science
has been forced to postulate additional, exceedingly improbable events to
keep it afloat. One of these is “inflation,” which attempts to explain the
apparent uniformity of the universe.2 But new observations by the
Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe are forcing cosmologists to revamp
inflation, at the cost of inventing yet another miraculous event to prop it up.
The universe had to expand at a certain rate to prevent self-collapse, but this
rate is many times the speed of light. Contrarily, the nascent universe must
have expanded slower than the speed of light in order for that light to have
had enough time to bathe every “corner,” for only in this way could the
temperature be so consistent throughout today’s universe. But this means the
universe must have expanded faster than it physically could have, rendering
inflation flat. Two additional problems with inflation include “(a) how to get
it started, and (b) how to stop it.”
The falloff of the power spectrum at small scales can be used to determine
the temperature of the intergalactic medium. It is typically inferred to be
20,000°K, but there is no evidence of evolution with redshift. Yet in the Big
Bang, that temperature ought to adiabatically decrease as space expands
everywhere. This is another indicator that the universe is not really
expanding.
(One of the biggest debates when it comes to the astronomy section of this
debate is weather the universe is expanding or not. The problem is; if it is
expanding then the over temperature should be dropping off as it is
expanded over a greater distance. Yet we see no such drop off in
temperature. This is a very strong indicator that the universe is not
expanding right now.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(This also follows the same lines and supports the fact that the universe is
not expanding right now and is a static universe - which means not
expanding.)
Some have thought that the "missing mass" is located in intergalactic space.
To be detected, the matter would have to emit some form of electromagnetic
radiation such as x-rays, visible light, or radio waves. The background x-
radiation that is incident on the earth's atmosphere can be explained by other
means than the presence of a diffuse intergalactic material permeating space
and emitting x-rays. If cold matter exists between the galaxies, radio waves
might be emitted and the radio astronomer could detect this. However, this
has not been observed, and if small quantities of cold matter did escape
detection they would be far too small in an amount to keep the clusters
together.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Tom Van Flandern, (Ph.D Astronomy)( B.S. in Mathematics, June 1962, from
Xavier University, Cincinnati, OH. Attended on General Motors scholarship, 1958-
1962. Graduate work in astronomy for one year at Georgetown University,
Washington, DC 1962-1963, on a teaching fellowship. Ph.D. in Astronomy from Yale
University, New Haven, CT, June 1969)
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/cosmology/top-30-problems-big-bang-theory.htm
Tom Van Flandern, (Ph.D Astronomy)( B.S. in Mathematics, June 1962, from
Xavier University, Cincinnati, OH. Attended on General Motors scholarship, 1958-
1962. Graduate work in astronomy for one year at Georgetown University,
Washington, DC 1962-1963, on a teaching fellowship. Ph.D. in Astronomy from Yale
University, New Haven, CT, June 1969)
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/cosmology/top-30-problems-big-bang-theory.htm
The Big Bang requires sprinkling galaxies, clusters, superclusters, and the
universe with ever-increasing amounts of this invisible, not-yet-detected
“dark matter” to keep the theory viable. Overall, over 90% of the universe
must be made of something we have never detected.
Let’s be clear here: “dark matter” is not an explanation for what we see; it’s
an admission that no one has an explanation. Perhaps a more accurate
headline would have been, ‘Scientists have proved that they haven’t got a
clue what the universe is made of’, rather than, ‘Dark matter
revealed’.6 Because it isn’t revealed. But if you give a name to an admission
of gross ignorance—‘dark matter’, ‘dark energy’—then you may eventually
believe you have explained something!
It was hoped that this dark matter would be mostly in the form of small stars
called red dwarfs. New Hubble Space Telescope measurements now indicate
there are hardly any of these red dwarf stars. So cosmologists must rely
more on some type of exotic matter, which has so far been undetected
(The theory of dark matter was invented by some people because they knew
they had a problem. There are millions of light years of absolutely nothing
in space. If we came from one single point, then matter should be equally
distributed at least on some scale, but we have all these empty voids in
space… So the big bang believers came up with dark matter to try to “fill
up” this space that is so empty.)
The obvious conclusion seems to be that the "missing mass" is not really
missing since probably it wasn't there to start with. The Universe could be
quite young, and other lines of evidence strongly indicate this. The break-up
time for these clusters (the time for dispersion of the galaxies so that there
are no clusters) is far, far less than the alleged evolutionary age of the
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Universe. This means that the clusters, since they have not been destroyed,
are young, as well as the galaxies that form them.
(Again dark matter does not exist and the breaking up of clusters proves that
they are young like the Bible would suggest.)
10. Population III stars proves the big bang to be false (Evidence)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The big bang model by itself can account for the existence of only the three
lightest elements (hydrogen, helium, and trace amounts of lithium). This
leaves nearly 90 of the other naturally occurring elements to be explained.
Since the conditions in the supposed big bang are not right to form these
heavier elements (as big bang supporters readily concede), secular
astronomers believe that stars have produced the remaining elements by
nuclear fusion in their cores. This is thought to occur in the final stages of
massive stars, as the stars explode (supernovae). These explosions then
distribute the heavier elements into space. Second- and third-generation stars
are thus “contaminated” with small amounts of these heavier elements. If
this story were true, then the first stars would be comprised of only the three
lightest elements (since these would have been the only elements in
existence initially). Some such stars1 should still be around today since their
lifespans are computed to exceed the time that has elapsed since the big
bang. Such stars would be called “population III” stars.2 Amazingly (to those
who believe in the big bang), population III stars have not been found
anywhere. All known stars have at least trace amounts of heavy elements in
them. It is amazing to think that our galaxy alone is estimated to have over
100 billion stars in it. Yet not one star has been discovered that is comprised
of only the three lightest elements.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Since heavy metals are formed by Supernovas, thus early stars (first
generation in the Big Bang) should not show metal content - yet they do.
Tom Van Flandern, (Ph.D Astronomy)( B.S. in Mathematics, June 1962, from
Xavier University, Cincinnati, OH. Attended on General Motors scholarship, 1958-1962.
Graduate work in astronomy for one year at Georgetown University, Washington,
DC 1962-1963, on a teaching fellowship. Ph.D. in Astronomy from Yale University,
New Haven, CT, June 1969)
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/cosmology/top-30-problems-big-bang-theory.htm
The Big Bang requires that stars, quasars and galaxies in the early universe
be “primitive”, meaning mostly metal-free, because it requires many
generations of supernovae to build up metal content in stars. But the latest
evidence suggests lots of metal in the “earliest” quasars and galaxies.
Dr. Danny Faulkner (Ph.D Astronomy) B.S (Math) M.S (Physics) M.S Ph.D
(Astronomy) http://www.creationresearch.org/crsq/articles/30/30_1/StellarPop.html
Since current cosmological theories demand that the universe began with a
composition entirely of hydrogen and helium, it is believed that the very first
generation of stars should have had no metals. Such a primordial generation
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
has been dubbed population III, and a vigorous but unsuccessful search for
these stars has been conducted.
(The fact that we do not have these population III stars proves against what
the big bang model teaches. We should have these “primitive” stars still
around in some areas yet we do not find any of them. This is obvious proof
that the big bang model is inaccurate and did not happen the way secular
scientists want us to believe it did.)
11. Red shift does not prove the universe to be billions of years old (Evidence)
Here are three different ways you can interpret red-shift outside of how the
big bang believers interpret it.
As light leaves a star, the star's gravity may slightly lengthen the wavelength
of the light. A gravitational red-shift could also result from starlight passing
near a massive object in space, such as a galaxy. As the light escapes from a
strong gravity field, it loses energy, similar to what happens to a person
struggling to the top of a mountain.
It is possible that light waves exchange energy during their movement across
space and lose some energy in the process. A loss of light energy is
equivalent to a "reddening" of its light.
(These are just three different ways you could explain red-shift differently
than what the big bang teaches. Don’t let them convince you there is only
one interpretation and it supports the big bang.)
Tom Van Flandern, (Ph.D Astronomy)( B.S. in Mathematics, June 1962, from
Xavier University, Cincinnati, OH. Attended on General Motors scholarship, 1958-
1962. Graduate work in astronomy for one year at Georgetown University,
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(QSOs prove that high red-shifts and low red-shifts are probably at
comparable distances and that red-shift does not prove a distance like some
big bang believers have been claiming. Anyone wanting to get into a debate
on the topic of the big bang needs to read up about red-shift from a
creationist’s stand point, about the Doppler affect and about QSOs. This is
a very popular topic in this debate.)
12. Singularity theory for the big bang does not prove it possible (Evidence)
The oldest and perhaps best known problem of Big Bang Theory is that of
the singularity. At the first instant of the Big Bang universe, in which its
density and temperature were infinitely high, is what is known to
mathematicians as a singularity. That situation is considered to be a
breakdown of theory. That is, it cannot be assumed that the laws of physics
as we know them can apply to that event, thus presenting serious questions
about it. In addition, the postulated creation of the entire mass and energy of
the universe out of nothing in the first instant of time, seems to represent an
extreme violation of the law of conservation of mass/energy.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Some want to claim that the big bang came from a singularity point and
when you are in a singularity situation the laws of the universe do not apply.
This is not scientific. This is where we leave the realm of science and enter
religion. They are welcome to believe in a singularity but it can not be
proven whatsoever.)
13. Speed of light is slowing down/Star light I would not take billions of years
(Evidence)
(Note: This is a VERY disputed topic and we do not know anything for sure on the topic.
But this is what has been presented.)
The threat to the idea of an invariable speed of light comes from measurements of
another parameter called the fine structure constant, or alpha, which dictates the
strength of the electromagnetic force. The speed of light is inversely proportional to
alpha, and though alpha also depends on two other constants (see graphic), many
physicists tend to interpret a change in alpha as a change in the speed of light.
It is usually assumed that the speed of light is constant with time. At today’s
rate, it takes light (in a vacuum) about one year to cover a distance of 6
trillion miles. But has this always been so? If we incorrectly assume that the
rate has always been today’s rate, we would end up estimating an age that is
much older than the true age. But some people have proposed that light was
much quicker in the past. If so, light could traverse the universe in only a
fraction of the time it would take today.
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://creation.com/is-there-any-evidence-for-a-change-in-c
Astrophysicists have claimed that this means the speed of light (c) may have
been higher in the early universe.
Distant stars and galaxies might be millions of light-years away, but that
doesn’t mean that it took the light millions of years, by our standards, to get
here. A light-year is a measurement of distance, not time. [It is the distance
that light would travel in a year through a vacuum at its current speed of
300,000 km/sec (186,000 miles per second), i.e. 9,461,000,000,000 km
(5,878,000,000,000 miles).] In other words, it’s just an expression used to
tell us how far away something is—not how long it took the light to get here.
Dr Carl Wieland
http://creation.com/speed-of-light-slowing-down-after-all
It now turns out that the fine-structure constant is in fact slightly different in
light from distant stars compared to nearby ones. In fact, this is the very
reason that physicists of the stature of Davies are now prepared to challenge
the assumption that light speed has always been constant.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Very early in the life of the universe, the Zero Point Energy started as almost
nothing and then built up extraordinarily quickly. Think of how fast a
balloon travels when you blow it up and then release it. Or how fast a rubber
band flies if you stretch it and then release it. The buildup of the Zero Point
Energy followed that same mathematical curve -- very, very fast at first and
then much more slowly as most of the potential energy expended itself as
kinetic energy. Thus, the speed of light at the beginning was also
extraordinarily fast. There were very few virtual particles to impede its
progress. But as the ZPE built up quickly, so did the number of virtual
particles in any given space at any given time, and the speed of light
necessarily slowed as a result.
The speed of light has been measured 163 times by 16 different methods
over the past 300 years. However, Australian physicist Barry Setterfield and
mathematician Trevor Norman, reexamining the known experimental
measurements to date, have suggested a highly controversial discovery: the
speed of light appears to have been slowing down!
1657: Roemer 307,600. +/- 5400 km/sec 1875: Harvard 299,921. +/- 13
km/sec 1983: NBS (laser method): 299,792.4358 +/- 0.0003 km/sec
The speed of light is now measured as 299,792.4358 kilometers per
second.6 (This is approximately 186,000 miles/second; or one foot per
nanosecond.)
The Canadian mathematician, Alan Montgomery, has reported a computer
analysis supporting the Setterfield/Norman results. His model indicates that
the decay of velocity of light closely follows a cosecant-squared curve, and
has been asymptotic since 1958. If he is correct, the speed of light was 10-
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
30% faster in the time of Christ; twice as fast in the days of Solomon; four
times as fast in the days of Abraham, and perhaps more than 10 million
times faster prior to 3000 B.C.
Dr. Chuck Missler, (Ph.D in Biblical study (naval academy graduate and former
Branch Chief of the Dept. of Guided Missiles, had a remarkable 30-year executive
career.)
http://www.khouse.org/articles/1999/225/
Evidence suggesting that the velocity of light, c, has been slowing down
throughout history was first reported by Barry Setterfield and Trevor
Norman for some years.2 Now two physicists-Dr. Joao Magueijo, a Royal
Society research fellow at Imperial College, London, and Dr. Andreas
Albrecht, of the University of California at Davis-are proposing that,
immediately after the universe was born, the speed of light may have been
far faster than its present-day value of 186,000 miles per second.3 They now
believe that it has been slowing down ever since.
Dr. Chuck Missler, (Ph.D in Biblical study (naval academy graduate and former
Branch Chief of the Dept. of Guided Missiles, had a remarkable 30-year executive
career.)
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2003/492/
Not only have recent scientific articles highlighted the discoveries that the
speed of light has changed over the centuries (something that Barry
Setterfield has been declaring for decades) the very nature of light has ripped
open the entire world of quantum physics that has shattered our concepts of
reality itself.
Dr Carl Wieland
http://creation.com/speed-of-light-slowing-down-after-all
(Due to the fact that they use atomic means to measure light now days, it is
not trustworthy when trying to see if it has changed)
(Light has many things now days that it runs into that can slow it down, and
if we go back in history and have less of these things slowing light down we
could have a quicker speed of light.)
Dr Carl Wieland
http://creation.com/speed-of-light-slowing-down-after-all
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Critics of CDK said that accepting it would mean one would have to discard
Einstein, despite all the evidence for his theory. Setterfield said (and it seems
to me correctly) that all that special relativity claims in this matter is that c is
constant at any point in time with respect to the observer, it does not involve
any magic, canonical value for c. In other words, the actual value of c could
change with time, so long as that change was consistent throughout the
entire universe.
(Some people will tell you that if light was slowing down it would undermine
Einstein’s theory of relativity, but this is simply not true. If light was slowing
down across the board (light as a whole) Einstein’s theory would still hold
to be true. However if light in individual places was slowing down this
argument would be valid, but that is not the case.)
14. God “Stretched out the heavens” at the beginning of the creation (Evidence)
Isaiah 42:5
Isaiah 45:12
I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands,
have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.
Jeremiah 10:12
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
He hath made the earth by his power, he hath established the world by his
wisdom, and hath stretched outthe heavens by his discretion.
Isaiah 51:13
And forgettest the LORD thy maker, that hath stretched forth the heavens,
and laid the foundations of the earth; and hast feared continually every day
because of the fury of the oppressor, as if he were ready to destroy? and
where is the fury of the oppressor?
(The Bible says that originally God stretched out the heavens. This could
explain many things like red-shirt. I believe God stretched out the heavens
at the beginning of creation into the universe we see today. I think He
stretched out light too, or light was able to reach all places at first because
they were not so far apart)
15. Thermal Dynamics prove the big bang theory to be false (Evidence)
Tom Van Flandern, (Ph.D Astronomy)( B.S. in Mathematics, June 1962, from
Xavier University, Cincinnati, OH. Attended on General Motors scholarship, 1958-
1962. Graduate work in astronomy for one year at Georgetown University,
Washington, DC 1962-1963, on a teaching fellowship. Ph.D. in Astronomy from Yale
University, New Haven, CT, June 1969)
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/cosmology/top-30-problems-big-bang-theory.htm
The Big Bang violates the first law of thermodynamics, that energy
cannot be either created or destroyed, by requiring that new space
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(The big bang violates the basic laws of this universe, it’s as simple as that.
Energy can not be created or destroyed)
No matter how complex or exotic an origin model may be, if it violates the
second law it must be ruled out as a credible “scientific” origin model.
Talk Origins
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html
Given that the entropy of the universe has only increased, how did it get
such a low entropy when it came into being? At the current time, this is still
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(At the beginning of the universe there would have had to have been very
low entropy. Big bang believers don’t know how this is possible. Entropy
proves the big bang theory to be false)
16. Time dilation can solve light travel time problem (Evidence) (pg 28)
Many people assume that time flows at the same rate in all conditions. At
first, this seems like a very reasonable assumption. But, in face, this
assumption is false. And there are a few different ways in which the nonrigid
nature of time could allow for distant starlight to reach earth within the
biblical timescale.
Since time can flow at different rates from different points of view, events
that would take a long time as measured by one person will take very little
time as measured by another person. This also applies to distant starlight.
Light would take billions of years to reach earth (as measured by clocks in
deep space) but reach earth in only thousands of years as measured by clocks
on earth.
Since God created the stars on Day 4, their light would leave the star on Day
4 and reach earth on Day 4 cosmic local time. Light from all galaxies would
reach earth on Day 4 if we measure it according to cosmic local time.
Someone might object that the light itself would experience billions of
years…. However, according to Einstein’s relativity, light does not
experience the passage of time, so the trip would be instantaneous.
In this gravitational well, we would not “feel” any extra gravity, nonetheless
time would flow more slowly on earth (or anywhere in our solar system)
than in other paces of the universe…. If the universe is expanding as most
astronomers believe, then physics demand that such effect would have been
stronger when the universe was smaller.
Albert Einstein discovered that the rate at which time passes is affected by
motion and by gravity. For example, when an object moves very fast, close
to the speed of light, its time is slowed down. This is called “time-dilation.”
So, if we were able to accelerate a clock to nearly the speed of light, that
clock would tick very slowly. If we could somehow reach the speed of light,
the clock would stop completely. This isn’t a problem with the clock; the
effect would happen regardless of the clock’s particular construction because
it is time itself that is slowed. Likewise, gravity slows the passage of time. A
clock at sea level would tick slower than one on a mountain, since the clock
at sea level is closer to the source of gravity.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Chuck Missler, (Ph.D in Biblical study, Naval Academy graduate and former
Branch Chief of the Dept. of Guided Missiles had a remarkable 30-year executive
career.)
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2003/492/
One of the many advantages that 20th century science has given us is that,
thanks to Dr. Albert Einstein's brilliant discoveries, we now know that time
is a physical property and is subject to mass, acceleration, and gravity.
(There are many studies that have been done to establish that time is a
physical property. First off, they have used two atomic clocks in two
different parts of the world Boulder, Colorado, at The National Institute of
Standards and Technology, and in Greenwich England. They tested time and
found that there is a difference depending on mass, acceleration and gravity
Measurements obtained showed that time was 5 microseconds per year
faster in Boulder due to the elevation difference between Greenwich and
Boulder.
So a few things to keep in mind: Time changes with mass, acceleration and
gravity. Einstein was the first one to figure this out.
17. Universe age problems proves against the big bang (Evidence)
Tom Van Flandern, (Ph.D Astronomy) B.S. in Mathematics, June 1962, from
Xavier University, Cincinnati, OH. Attended on General Motors scholarship, 1958-
1962. Graduate work in astronomy for one year at Georgetown University,
Washington, DC 1962-1963, on a teaching fellowship. Ph.D. in Astronomy from Yale
University, New Haven, CT, June 1969
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/cosmology/top-30-problems-big-bang-theory.htm
Even though the data have been stretched in the direction toward resolving
this since the “top ten” list first appeared, the error bars on the Hubble age of
the universe (12±2 Gyr) still do not quite overlap the error bars on the oldest
globular clusters (16±2 Gyr). Astronomers have studied this for the past
decade, but resist the “observational error” explanation because that would
almost certainly push the Hubble age older (as Sandage has been arguing for
years), which creates several new problems for the Big Bang. In other
words, the cure is worse than the illness for the theory. In fact, a new,
relatively bias-free observational technique has gone the opposite way,
lowering the Hubble age estimate to 10 Gyr, making the discrepancy worse
again
Tully has shown that Superclusters are a few hundred million light-years
across. Given galaxies generally move at less than a thousand kilometers per
second, thus the universe cannot have begun twenty billion years ago.
Likewise, recently discovered large-scale voids would require around 70
billion years to form, five times as long as the age of the universe in the Big
Bang theory.
Lerner calculated that the Big Bang universe has not had enough time to
form superclusters. Wright calculates that all the voids could be vacated and
superclusters formed in less than 11-14 billion years (barely). But that
assumes that almost all matter has initial speeds headed directly out of voids
and toward matter concentrations. Lerner, on the other hand, assumed that
the speeds had to be built up by gravitational attraction, which takes many
times longer. Lerner’s point is more reasonable because doing it Wright’s
way requires fine-tuning of initial conditions.
the initial directions of motion are special, e.g., directed away from the
centers of voids. To get around this problem, one must propose that galaxy
speeds were initially much higher and have slowed due to some sort of
“viscosity” of space. To form these structures by building up the needed
motions through gravitational acceleration alone would take in excess of 100
billion years.
(These are all a little different but they all are talking about how the
universe is not old enough to support a big bang, even according to some
big bang believers. These are just nails in the coffin that the big bang could
not have happened.)
We believe that the scientific evidence substantiates the claim that the
universe had a beginning. And again, if it did have a beginning, then it must
have had a cause.
Was there a beginning to the universe? Are the laws we discover in nature,
which give order and structure to the universe, grounded in the mind of a
Designer, or do they exist on their own? There are only two alternatives to
investigate: Either the universe had no beginning and is therefore uncaused,
or the universe had a beginning and consequently needs a cause. The
principle of causality states that everything that has a beginning must have a
cause
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(The basic laws of logic say that everything that had a beginning (like the
universe) has to have a cause. This is strong evidence from logic that “In the
beginning God created the heavens and the earth.)
When we consider the consequences of a universe that obeys the second law,
there is only one logical conclusion: The universe will eventually run out of
usable energy. Sine there is no place for the universe to obtain more fuel, we
live in a finite universe
(The laws of physics indicate that we live in a finite universe, our universe
had a beginning and it will have an end.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
20. Our universe and planet and solar system are very unique
Our precise circular orbit at 93 million miles from the Sun providers a
perfectly balanced temperature throughout the entire year.
Every one of the other planets in our solar system circles the Sun in an
elliptical orbit, not in the vitually perfect curcular orbit of 93 million miles
that the earth does, our solar system’s sole exception.
The earth is 93 million miles distant from the Sun. This distance is precisely
what is needed to allow biological life to exist on Earth.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(People who do not believe in the Bible and don’t believe in God even admit
that the earth was obviously created for life)
If planets look like they were placed in certain orbits on purpose, perhaps
they actually were. How much more faith is required to believe that
“billiards” is a better explanation for fine-tuned cosmological features than
an actual Person who did the tuning?
(Many some people need to consider that if our planet looks like it was
placed in a certain area (only possible place for life) that maybe it was.)
(Not only is our solar system very special and obviously created for life to
exist, but the universe itself is so precisely designed for life to exist that there
had to be a creator.) (Disclaimer: I disagree with Hugh Ross on many
things, but he is right that the universe had to have a creator)
The laws of logic demand that every known effect must result from a
previous cause. The ancient Romans created a maxim that included the
natural conclusion of logic, Ex nihilo nihil fit: “Nothing comes from
nothing”
(The basic laws of logic say that nothing comes from nothing. There has to
be an original cause for the big bang to be plausible)
22. Horizon problem (Light traveling problem for the big bang)
Many time when talking and dealing on the subject of Creation Vs Evolution
believers in the big bang will use star light as a evidence that the universe
has to be billions of years old and this was a problem for creationists at first
(although its sense been taken care of) But just incase they still push it here
is some evidence on the big bang and how it has a problem similar for itself
(Just to even the playing field)
The big bang has a light travel-time problem of its own. In the big bang
model, light is required to travel a distance much greater than should be
possible within the big bang’s own timeframe of about 14 billion years. This
serious difficulty for the big bang is called the “horizon problem”.
David F. Coppedge (works in the Cassini program at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. )
http://www.icr.org/articles/view/3343/256/
(The big bang itself has a light travel problem, so when they bring this
argument up you can turn around and put them in the same position.)
Dr Carl Wieland
http://creation.com/speed-of-light-slowing-down-after-all
The interview also quoted a 1999 New Scientist cover story two years ago,
which also proposed the ‘heresy’ of c-decay.9 (More recent New
Scientist articles have reported on how it seems to be acceptable to propose
c-decay to try to solve another well-known difficulty of the big bang theory,
called the horizon problem. That is, the cosmic microwave radiation
indicates that space is the same temperature everywhere, indicating a
common influence. But no connection between distant regions would be
possible, even in the assumed time since the alleged ‘big bang’, because of
the ‘horizon’ of the finite speed of light. As an ad hoc solution to this
problem, Alan Guth proposed that the universe once underwent a period of
very rapid growth, called ‘inflation’. But now it seems that even this has its
own horizon problem. So now some physicists have proposed that the speed
of light was much faster in the past, which would allow the ‘horizon’ to be
much further away and thus accommodate the universe's thermal
equilibrium.10 Note that these other proposals even have c much faster than
in the Setterfield concept.)
(Many people who believe in the big bang are now saying that light was
probably very fast at the beginning of the universe – even though they
completely denied it when creationists brought it up as a possibility. But
now that they need it for themselves they are starting to agree that light used
to be faster)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The inflation model allows points A and B to exchange energy (during the
first normal expansion) and to then be pushed apart during the inflation
phase to the enormous distances at which they are located today. But the
inflation model amounts to nothing more than storytelling with no
supporting evidence at all. It is merely speculation designed to align the big
bang to conflicting observations.
(And don’t let them tell you that inflation solves the problem, because it does
not. Inflation is no more than “storytelling with no supporting evidence”)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Our sun spins very slowly, while the planets move very rapidly around the
sun. In fact, although the sun has over 99 percent of the mass of the solar
system, it has only 2 percent of the angular momentum. This pattern is
directly opposite to the pattern predicted by the nebular hypothesis.
Evolutionists have tried to solve this problem, but a well-known solar
system scientist, Dr. Stuart Ross Taylor, has said in a recent book, “The
ultimate origin of the solar system’s angular momentum remains obscure.”
(If the big bang and the nebular hypothesis were true there would have to be
a different distribution of solar angular momentum than what we observe.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
24. Gas planets (and variations) should not have formed like they did
Another problem with the nebular hypothesis is the formation of the gaseous
planets. According to this theory, as the gas pulled together into the planets,
the young sun would have passed through what is called the T-Tauri phase.
In this phase, the sun would have given off intense solar wind, far more
intense than at present. This solar wind would have driven excess gas and
dust out of the still-forming solar system and thus there would no longer
have been enough of the light gases left to form Jupiter and the other three
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
giant gas planets. This would leave these four gas planets. This would leave
these four gas planets smaller than we find them today.
(If the big bang and nebular hypothesis were true, we could not have these
different gas planets that we have in our solar system.)
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
(The primitive atom hypothesis is not scientific and does not work. It is
better to use scientific observational evidence than hypothetical constants.)
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
Steady State Hypothesis: the originators of this scheme have suggested that
new matter appears out of nowhere to replace what has been lost in any
given region of space.
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The Steady State theory is also in disagreement with the second law of
Thermodynamics according to which such perpetual motion machines are
not possible in the real world.
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
In 1965 Hoyle himself has admitted that the following evidences weigh
against the Steady State theory:
Radio astronomy counts by Martin Ryle and his associates indicate that the
density of radio sources was greater in the past.
Red-shift measurements from QSOs (quasars) indicate that the universe has
expanded from a state of higher density.
A background cosmic black-body radiation has been discovered which
cannot be accounted for in the present state of the Universe.
(The steady state hypothesis has many problems and is not a good scientific
theory. It violates many laws of the universe and is not scientific.)
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
Professor Alfven concedes that there are serious difficulties concerning the
mechanism of galaxy formation. He is uncommitted as to whether the
process began during the contraction of the metagalaxy, or during the
hypothetical 10 billion years since the beginning of the expansion. The
detailed development within each galaxy at still later stages, he says, poses
an even more formidable problem.
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
A major problem with this theory is that of explaining how koinomatter and
antimatter became stably separated. Alfven has offered the suggestion that
thin buffer zones of ambiplasma might separate growing regions of
koinomatter and antimatter. Such, however is a difficult feat to accomplish
and could well be analogous to the statistical improbability of spontaneously
separating lukewarm water into regions of hot and cold water. Alfven
confesses that there are several problems here.
(The Ambiplasma hypothesis can not explain the formation of galaxies (just
like the big bang) and also can not account for how antimatter and matter
became stably separate.)
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash
University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
(No theory of how the universe explains how the original elements got here,
except for a belief in a creator.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
All evolutionary cosmological models assume that this matter obeys certain
physical laws with no explanation of why or where the laws come from
(No theory of the universe explains how we got the different laws that
government the universe.)
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
(All the models of the universe and how it got here try to make everything so
simple when it is not. The universe is complex and could not have naturally
evolved, no matter how long you give it.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
all evolutionary theories on the origin of the planets, the stars, the galaxies or
the whole Universe that I have studied, at one or several points defy the
Laws of Physics. My own studies have shown that the usual theory of
gaseous nebula condensing to form the magnificent astronomical objects we
see today of planets, stars and galaxies doesn’t even work if the Universe
were a billion billion years old. It is far more likely for a celestial system to
break up into its constituent parts than for the reverse to occur.
(All the different models in one way or another violate laws of the universe,
which make them unscientific)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
26. The amount of stars can not be explained by the big bang
Astronomers have guessed that there are possibly as many as ten thousand
billion trillion stars out there in the observable universe, of which perhaps
five thousand can be seen without a telescope.
The “stars from gas collapse” theory in general cannot adequately account
for the breadth of stars in the cosmos. Given the observation that there are
still so many of them observable even though they are fizzling out with age,
they must have been formed in great numbers somewhere, somehow, and
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(The rate at which stars could be produced can not account for all the stars
that we see in the universe - there are just too many.)
Not only is the likelihood of this happening remarkably slim, but it conflicts
with the anti-supernaturalistic, but popular, conception of planetary origins
known as the “nebular hypothesis.” This proposes that planets formed
spontaneously from spinning dust rings, which clumped and condensed near
to newly formed stars. The resulting planets ought to therefore continue
orbiting in the same direction as that of the rotating dust and debris around
the stars.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The nebular hypothesis would also predict that all the planets orbit the sun in
the same direction, but this is also not the case. Neptune’s moon Triton and
about half of the comets have a retrograde orbit, while Venus has a
retrograde axial rotation.
(According to the big bang all planets in our solar system should be rotating
the same way, yet they are not)
The Wide Area Search for Planets (WASP) project has discovered a planet
that orbits backward, against the rotational direction of its star.
Methodological naturalists think collisions or near-collisions are the causes
of unusual cosmic phenomena like this. But this reverse-orbit observation
adds to a growing list of astronomical features that should not exist if
collisions and other random physical processes are all that could have caused
them.
(Another planet is found rotating backwards, showing that the big bang and
nebular hypothesis cannot be correct)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Assuming for a moment that the nebular hypothesis is true, how exactly
could a mere near-collision have reversed WASP-17’s direction? At
approximately 159 earth masses, the planet would have required a
tremendous outside force to slow its orbit and then reverse it, all without
tearing the planet apart or bumping it from the vicinity of its neighboring
star. Such a feat would have required septillions of Newtons of force,
applied carefully enough to keep the planet from being destroyed. The
chances of a flyby mass of some kind having performed this powerful, yet
precise, operation are vanishingly small.
(A collision could not turn around a planets orbit and make it go in the
opposite direction. This does not accurately explain the big bangs problem.)
echoes of the big bang. But… ‘Either it (the microwave background) isn’t
coming from behind the clusters, which means the Big Bang is blown away,
or … there is something else going on,’ said Lieu.
(There is a possibility that the WMAP findings actually prove the big bang
wrong – We cannot be sure on this yet but it is a possibility)
MAP problems
The WMAP team must overcome virtually every hurdle known to imaging:
foreground contamination and powerful dynamic range issues, low signal to
noise, poor contrast, limited sample knowledge, lack of reproducibility, and
associated resolution issues. It is clear that the generation of a given
anisotropy map depends strictly on the arbitrary weighting of component
images. The WMAP team attempts to establish a “most likely” anisotropy
map using mathematical tools, but they have no means of verifying the
validity of the solution. Another team could easily produce its own map and,
though it may be entirely different, it would be equally valid.
WMAP was only equipped with a differential radiometer, which could only
measure the differences in the signals coming from any two parts of the sky.
So the data can never specify the equivalent temperature of any particular
region of the cosmos.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
When the ‘deep’ was created, it was a black hole. Under gravity, it collapsed
and the temperature, pressure and density increased to the stage where
thermonuclear reactions occurred and nucleosynthesis took place.
Intense light was everywhere inside the black hole. The collapse is
considered to have lasted one day—and then, in a creative act of God, the
black hole was converted into a white hole. The result was a rapid,
inflationary expansion of space. This is when the waters above the expanse,
the expanse and the waters below the expanse were differentiated. With
expansion came cooling—and at about 3000 Kelvin, atoms would have been
formed and the expanse would become transparent. Thermal radiation in the
expanding expanse would be very uniform and the temperature would
continue to drop. At the end of expansion, the temperature reached 2.76
kelvin (which we observe today). At some time during the expansion, the
shrinking event horizon would approach the centre of the white hole—the
Earth. Whilst this is suggested to have occurred on the morning of the 4th
Day (Earth time), the time dilation effects of relativity theory permit
‘billions of years worth of physical processes [to take] place in the distant
cosmos’. Stars and galaxies formed, and time elapsed so that light was able
to travel to every corner of the universe. Hence, Adam and Eve, on the 6th
Day (Earth time) were able to look into the expanse and see the splendour of
the heavens. The model thus claims to explain all three of the cosmological
phenomena mentioned earlier: light from distant galaxies, galactic red shifts
and the cosmic microwave background. It suggests that time elapsed at
different rates on Earth and in the expanse (6 Days Earth time and billions of
years cosmological time, possible because the Earth is at the centre of the
universe).
(The big bang can not explain where the energy originally to cause the big
bang itself came from.)
What ignited the Big Bang? The mass concentration proposed in this theory
would remain forever as a universal black hole. Gravity would prevent it
from expanding outward.
(The big bang had nothing to “ignite” it – and also if the big bang were true
then it should have not been able to expand outwards like it did.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Why is earth the only place we have found life? Should it not have evolved
in other places? And if it did evolve anywhere we would be able to pick up
signals – so where are they?)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
In this next section we will be looking at some of those “Proofs” that some
use to claim that the earth is old and the Bible is wrong. This will be a list
of “Evidence” for you to back up claims with credentialed experts.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 1 – Page:299
It needs to be emphasized that the rock layers making up the pages of this “book of earth
history” are not all found exposed to view at any one spot on the earth’s surface.
(First things first, the geologic column is not in any one place on the planet
earth. It only occurs in the text books.)
In many mountainous areas, strata thousands of feet thick are bent and
folded into hairpin shapes. The conventional geologic time scale says these
formations were deeply buried and solidified for hundreds of millions of
years before they were bent. Yet the folding occurred without cracking, with
radii so small that the entire formation had to be still wet and unsolidified
when the bending occurred.
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Thick, tightly bent strata without sign of melting or fracturing. E.g. the Kaibab upwarp in
Grand Canyon indicates rapid folding before the sediments had time to solidify (the sand
grains were not elongated under stress as would be expected if the rock had hardened).
This wipes out hundreds of millions of years of time and is consistent with extremely
rapid formation during the biblical Flood.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v4/n2/folded-not-fractured
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v4/n2/folded-not-fractured
In the walls of the Grand Canyon, we can see that the whole horizontal
sedimentary strata sequence was folded without fracturing, supposedly 440
million years after the Tapeats Sandstone and Muav Limestone were
deposited, and 200 million years after the Kaibab Limestone was deposited.
The only way to explain how these sandstone and limestone beds could be
folded, as though still pliable, is to conclude they were deposited during the
Genesis Flood, just months before they were folded.
(This stratum is found all over the world showing that the thousands of feet
of strata had to be deposited at the same time when it was wet. This is
obviously not a problem for Bible believing creationists who understand that
there was a flood.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v4/n2/folded-not-fractured
million years ago.5Lastly, the Kaibab Plateau was uplifted (about 60 million
years ago), causing the folding.6 That’s a time span of about 440 million
years between the first deposit and the folding. How could the Tapeats
Sandstone and Muav Limestone still be soft and pliable, as though they had
just been deposited? Wouldn’t they fracture and shatter if folded 440 million
years after deposition?
(No old earth process could have these layers still soft and bendable in the
timeframe they say they formed.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v4/n2/folded-not-fractured
The conventional explanation is that under the pressure and heat of burial,
the hardened sandstone and limestone layers were bent so slowly they
behaved as though they were plastic and thus did not break.7 However,
pressure and heat would have caused detectable changes in the minerals of
these rocks, tell-tale signs of metamorphism.8 But such metamorphic
minerals or recrystallization due to such plastic behavior9 is not observed in
these rocks.
(Layers were not plastic like when the bending occurred. The bending can
not happen like it did if these layers took a long time to form)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v4/n2/folded-not-fractured
How could a series of sedimentary layers fold without fracturing? The only
way is for all the sedimentary layers to be laid down in rapid succession and
then be folded while still soft and pliable.
The fossil wood in the top three metres of the Marlstone Rock Bed near
Banbury, England, has been 14C ‘dated’ at 23,000–23,500 years BP.
However, based on evolutionary and uniformitarian assumptions, the
ammonite and belemnite index fossils in this rock ‘date’ it at about 189
million years.
(Detectable C-14 has been one of the biggest enemies for geologic column
believers because carbon 14 (C-14) can not survive in the natural
environment for more than 250,000 years. After that amount of time it
becomes undetectable, yet we are finding large quantities.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
With their short 5,700-year half-life, no carbon 14 atoms should exist in any
carbon older than 250,000 years. Yet it has proven impossible to find any
natural source of carbon below Pleistocene (Ice Age) strata that does not
contain significant amounts of carbon 14, even though such strata are
supposed to be millions or billions of years old. Conventional carbon 14
laboratories have been aware of this anomaly since the early 1980s, have
striven to eliminate it, and are unable to account for it.
(Apply everything from above; it’s impossible to find objects deep in the
geological column that do not have detectable C-14, indicating that it has an
absolute maximum age of 250,000 years.)
DNA experts insist that DNA cannot exist in natural environments longer
than 10,000 years, yet intact strands of DNA appear to have been recovered
from fossils allegedly much older: Neanderthal bones, insects in amber, and
even from dinosaur fossils.18 Bacteria allegedly 250 million years old
apparently have been revived with no DNA damage.19 Soft tissue and blood
cells from a dinosaur have astonished experts
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(DNA can only survive for 10,000 years in the natural environment before it
is gone, but we are still finding DNA in the fossils that some geologists are
claiming to be hundreds of millions of years old. Conclusion: They are not
that old. They were all buried in the flood 4400 years ago like the Bible
says.)
Phillip O'Donnell
http://www.livingdinos.com/
If dinosaurs are still living today, then that would even further prove the
Geologic Column to be false.
(Below is a list of some Dinosaurs that are believed to still be living today,
most of this will NEVER be taught in schools or be seen in any secular
science journals.)
Feature Article from Creation Magazine Vol. 15, No. 4, pages 12-15
http://www.present-truth.org/3-Nature/dinosaurs_2.htm
From China there were claims that more than 1,000 people had seen a
dinosaur-like monster in two sightings around Sayram Lake in Xinjiang.
Feature Article from Creation Magazine Vol. 15, No. 4, pages 12-15
http://www.present-truth.org/3-Nature/dinosaurs_2.htm
Feature Article from Creation Magazine Vol. 15, No. 4, pages 12-15
http://www.present-truth.org/3-Nature/dinosaurs_2.htm
Yet fresh, unfossilized dinosaur bones have been found. In 1987, a young
Inuit, working with scientists from Memorial University, Newfoundland, on
Bylot Island, found a bone which was identified as part of a lower jaw of a
duckbill dinosaur.
Feature Article from Creation Magazine Vol. 15, No. 4, pages 12-15
http://www.present-truth.org/3-Nature/dinosaurs_2.htm
In 1981, scientists identified dinosaur bones which had been found in Alaska
20 years earlier. The bones had been so fresh that the geologist who had
found them thought at first they must have been bison bones. They have now
been identified as belonging to horned dinosaurs, duckbill dinosaurs, and
small carnivorous dinosaurs.
(There was actually a book written by the people who found the bones in
Alaska called “The Great Dinosaur Adventure” you can read about the
whole trip and what they found. There is much evidence that there could
still be dinosaurs living today, which would disprove the geologic column.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Phillip O'Donnell
http://www.livingdinos.com/
Evolutionary scientists had claimed that the fish called Coelacanth had
evolved legs and went on land some 70 million years ago and was thus non-
existent today. However, in 1938, it was found they were dead wrong. A
Coelacanth was discovered alive and well in the South African Coast by
fishermen. It was recently discovered that if the fish is brought near the
surface of the water, it will soon die. If someone had gone there and seen the
Coelacanth, but not taken any photographs, the scientists would say they
were just false findings. Later, scientists found out that fishermen had been
catching those fish for years!
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
If evolution were true, the fossil record should support it, but it best supports
the creation theory. For example, squashed trilobite fossils have been found
in human footprint fossils even though evolutionists say trilobites were
extinct 230 million years before man came into existence, Furthermore, the
fins of fish which supposedly evolved into the amphibians' legs are only
embedded in the fish's flesh tissue, not in its skeletal structure, so they could
not have become the animal's legs
Feature Article from Creation Magazine Vol. 15, No. 4, pages 12-15
http://www.present-truth.org/3-Nature/dinosaurs_2.htm
Mackal says that a giant turtle and a monkey-eating bird have been
identified with some certainty as living in the Likouala swamps. An
unknown species of large crocodile also seems to inhabit the area. This is
where less open-minded scientists switch off. But Mackal has support from
other scientists and researchers who say they have seen evidence of Mokele-
mbembe on their expeditions.
"Off the coast of southern Africa, in the winter of 1938, a fishing boat called The Nerine
dragged from the Indian Ocean near the Chalumna River a fish thought to be extinct for
70 million years. The fish was a coelacanth, an animal that thrived concurrently with
dinosaurs..."
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Fossils that are found in the geologic column are also found living today,
showing that they did not go extinct millions of years ago.
(Conclusion: The geologic column is a hoax. It does not prove anything for
the evolutionists. If anything it proves that there was a flood like the Bible
says.)
Explanation: We won’t go into all the specific sciences here but I will just
give a general explanation. The way radiometric dating works is you have
an element that decays into another element. You then have a half-life
telling you the rate of decay. When the half-life of each is determined, you
compare between the two to determine age. This is a very general
explanation with many general assumptions and flaws which is problematic
in the field of science.
The first thing we need to understand is that the geologic column takes
precedence over radioactive dating.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
It is not generally realized that index fossils are still crucial to the millions-
of-years geological dating, in spite of the advent of radioactive ‘dating’
techniques. Not all locations have rocks suitable for radioactive ‘dating’, but
in any case, if a radioactive ‘date’ disagrees with a fossil ‘date’ then it is the
latter which usually has precedence.
(So when the two of them disagree… It’s the geologic column that wins in
their mind (The geologic column is what they mean by “The latter”)
"No matter how 'useful' it is, though, the radiocarbon method is still not
capable of yielding accurate and reliable results. There are gross
discrepancies, the chronology is uneven and relative, and the accepted dates
are actually selected dates. This whole bless thing is nothing but 13th-
century alchemy, and it all depends upon which funny paper you read."
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Evidence of a period of rapid radioactive decay in the recent past (lead and
helium concentrations and diffusion rates in zircons) point to a young earth
explanation.
‘There has been in recent years the horrible realization that radiodecay 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 to a close may not be 65
million years ago but, rather, within the age and memory of man.’
(What did all those just say? They said that the decay rate in the past has
not been constant which means that radioactive dating cannot be accurate.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Different faces of the same zircon crystal and different zircons from the
same rock giving different “ages” undermine all “dates” obtained from
zircons.
(The same rocks often give different ages when you use dating methods
showing that they can not be accurate.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:800
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:800
The number of atoms of the parent and daughter isotopes have not been
altered since the rock or mineral crystallized, except by radioactive decay. In
other words, it is assumed that the rock or mineral remained closed to loss of
gain of the parent and/or daughter isotopes since crystallization
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:800
The rate of decay of the parent isotope is known accurately, and has not
changed during the existence of the rock or mineral since it crystallized.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:836
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:836
These radioisotope “Dating” methods for rocks and minerals are based on
analyses of radioactive parent and radiogenic daughter isotope pairs. The
calculation of “ages” from those isotope analyses depends on crucial
assumptions, particularly that the daughter isotopes have been derived by
radioactive decay of the parent isotopes. If this assumption was shown to be
false, that so much radioactive decay has not occurred, then it could be
argued that the measured daughter isotopes are merely an artifact of mineral
compositions, and of the geochemistry of the rocks and the sources from
which they were derived.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:838
By the time the radioisotope “dating” methods had been developed, the
geological timescale had already been imposed on the globally-correlated
rock sequence.
(Just before we get into more radioactive dating we need to keep in mind
that the Geologic column was invented long before radioactive dating was
ever invented. And now they have just tried to make radioactive dating agree
with the column.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:821
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:801
For the isochron dating method to work, it is essential that all rock samples
have to be from the same rock unit, and there has to be uniformity within the
rock unit of the original daughter strontium isotope ratio.
(Basic info)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:841
Additionally, the minerals separated from one diabase sample yielded a Rb-
Sr mineral “isochron age” of 1,069+-24 million years, and a Sm-Nd mineral
“isochron age” of 1,379+-140 million years.
(Isochron dating methods do not agree with each other when dating the
same samples and areas. We will see a lot more of this later on)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:843
All these contradictions and disagreements between the “ages” derived from
these different radioisotope methods render these methods both unreliable
and highly questionable
(The radioisotope dating method does not work and is not reliable)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:801
The geologic processes that formed the sampled rock unite may have caused
an uneven distribution in the rock unit of the parent rubidium and daughter
strontium isotopes.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:812
(When you date a volcanic eruption with Rb-Sr of known age it fails… But
when you date a volcanic eruption of unknown age it is assumed to work.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:813
It was suggested that in general these variations could have been caused by
either differences in the ignition 87Sr/86Sr ratios at the source regions of the
rocks in the upper mantle and lower crust, or by variable contamination of
their parent magmas with “foreign” Sr via bulk assimilation, wall-rock
reaction, selective migration of radiogenic Sr, and/or isotopic exchange and
equilibration. Thus, it has been argued that the assumption that all rock in a
co-magmatic igneous complex started with the same initial 87Sr/86Sr ratio
may be invalid.
(First off in the original formation of the rock you can have leeching and
removal or extra adding of these elements that would throw the whole ratio
and dating method off)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:813
Variations in the initial 87Sr/86Sr ratios for suites of young lava from a
single volcano have been found. Therefore, the assumption of a well-defined
initial ratio for many suites of rock is difficult to defend, and yet this is a
crucial assumption for successful Rb-Sr isochron dating.
(The original content and amount of Rb-Sr in a sample can not accurately be
known. This throws the whole dating method off and makes it unreliable.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:813
Magma contamination is a case in point. One cannot assume that all the Sr
of the contaminants has been uniformly mixed into the magma; therefore the
assumption that all rocks in the same intrusive suite initially had the same
87Sr/86Sr ratio cannot be justified
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:813
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:814
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:817
(Due to many different things Rb-Sr ages will appear far older than they
actually are when you use the dating method.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:817
(In order for the dating method to be even remotely feasible it has to be a
closer system (meaning that no outside force can effect it and leech some of
the element out) but this is not the case with Rb-Sr dating.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:817
(This is the biggest problem is that the elements themselves are mobile and
can adjust and move around and be taken away throwing off the whole
ratio)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:822
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:820
Variations in initial ratios for suites of young lavas from a single volcano
have been found, suggesting that the assumption of a well-defined initial
ratio for many suites of rocks is difficult to defend. This is a critical problem
for the Sm-Nd whole-rock “dating”, because the relatively small range of
143Nd/144Nd ratios in most rock suites means that any differences in the
initial ratios that are larger than the analytical uncertainties could
substantially affect the calculated ”age”, leading to serious errors.
(You will notice a lot of the same issues between the different dating
methods. Sm-Nd is no exception)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:820
isochron of 1.7 billion years. Even Archean rock suites yield an excellent
whole-rock isochron with a grossly erroneous “ago”.
(The ages they come up with do not even agree with the ages they want us to
believe.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:820
If these isotopes are indeed mobile in ways similar to the other radioisotope
systems, then the reliability of Sm-Nd “ages” is equally questionable
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:822
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:820
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:821
Sm-Nd are not as immobile as often claimed, nor does the Sm-Nd
radioisotope system escape being significantly perturbed, which raises
similar doubts about the reliability of the Sm-Nd “Dating” system, as with
other radioisotope dating systems.
(Sm and Nd are both able to move around and throw off all the ratios with in
the sample. This makes it inaccurate and un-trustworthy)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:821
(Some people will say during metamorphism a rock can become a closed
system (and is not leech-able) this is not known but is only speculation.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:821
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:822
(Sm-Nd has to rely on other dating methods that have problems themselves.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:823
The usefulness of Sm-Nd “model ages” and the “dating” method is very
much dependent on interpretative models, and on the other radioisotope
“dating” systems that also have their own set of problems.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:823
(Model ages for Sm-Nd are not proof that they work whatsoever. Model ages
acquired are not accurate and do not prove the earth is old.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:825
The focus has shifted back to using the U-Th-Pb “Dating” technique on
minerals. This has become the most popular and highly regarded
radioisotope dating method currently in use.
(Just so you all know this is probably the most popular method used.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:825
It was found that U appeared to have been lost from samples which exhibit
no discernible effects of alteration, so it was even suggested the leaching of
U from surficial rocks might be a universal phenomenon. This was because
concentrations of U, Th, and Pb, and the isotopic composition of Pb, for
while-rock samples of granites, showed that open-system behavior is nearly
universal in the surface and near-surface environment, and that elemental
mobility is possible to depths of several hundred meters.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Uranium can be leeched from sample rocks and therefore the ages cannot
be trusted. They don’t know the correct ratio of parent/daughter product.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:827
Not only has it been confirmed that radiation damage can drastically
increase the rate of Pb diffusion, but high temperatures induce even faster
diffusion.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:830
Radiogenic Pb is easily lost by diffusion from some crystals and the process
is accelerated by heat, water, radiation damage, and weathering.
(The lead (Pb) ratios can be thrown off dramatically from how it originally
was. This makes the method unreliable.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:830
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Clearly, the results of U-Th-Pb mineral dating, currently the most popular
method, are highly dependent on investigators interpretations, which are
usually based on expectations determined by the geological contact of the
rock being “dated”
(The ages they come up with using this dating method are very much
dependent on the interpretation of the person dating the rock)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:833
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:834
(In the end this dating method is not reliable, there are to many problems
with it that make it untrustworthy. The U-Th-Pb dating method does not
prove the earth is old.)
(Despite what I have said already about radioactive dating in general and
how it fails to show accurate dates because it relies on faulty assumptions,
we will still look at carbon dating itself because this is by far the most
popular method of dating materials.)
Carbon dating: The earth is bombarded with rays from the sun; through
many scientific processes, Carbon 14 is created. Carbon 14 gets into all the
plants through photosynthesis and then gets into all the humans and animals
because we eat the plants or we eat the animals that eat the plants. All
living things have the same amount of Carbon 14 in them as the atmosphere
at the time they are alive. When the plant, animal or human dies, it stops
taking in Carbon 14 and stops replenishing its’ supply and the current
supply starts to decay. Carbon 14 (C-14) has a half life of 5730 years
(which means every 5730 years half of a pile of carbon 14 will decay away.)
I’m going to simplify this: Let’s say we have a plant with a carbon level of
10 and then we find out that the atmosphere has a carbon level of 20. What
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
does that mean? It means that our Carbon pile has lost half of itself to
decay because once it dies, it stops taking in carbon, and that would mean
that it is one half life old (or 5730 years). That sounds great, certainly
scientific, but it has one major flaw: the atmospheric level of carbon 14 is
not steady. Even the Nation Center for Science education admits this.)
(This mean that you can not determine the age of anything by carbon dating
because you do not know the level of carbon 14 that was in the atmosphere
when it died, so you can not get a accurate comparison. Add this on to all
the other problems with radioactive dating and you certainly don’t get
science.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:857
Radiocarbon dating has somehow avoided collapse onto its own battered
foundations, and now lurches onward with a feigned consistency. The
implications of pervasive contamination and ancient variations in carbon-14
levels are steadfastly ignored by those who baser their arguments upon the
dates.
(There are other problems with C-14 dating – The samples can be
contaminated and distort the ratios.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:856
(The carbon 14 laboratories do not tell you the age of what they are dating,
they only tell you the amount of Carbon-14 in the item and the rest is up to
the interpretation of whoever is dating the sample.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:863
(After the flood the environment would have drastically changed and things
prior to the flood would look much older than they really are.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 1 – Page:90
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 1 – Page:90
Potassium and uranium, both common parent elements, are easily dissolved
in water, so could be leached out of rocks.
(Potassium can easily be leeched which will throw off the ratios)
In Australia, some wood was buried by a basalt lava flow, as can be seen
from the charring. The wood was: dated: by radiocarbon analysis at about
45,000 years old, but the basalt was “Dated” by the K-Ar method at 45
million years.
In summary, many scientists assume that since argon is a gas, all of it should
have escaped from the lava before it cooled. Therefore, all the 40Ar in the
rock should be the result of decay from potassium. Based on the measured
potassium, argon, and the decay rate, they calculate an age. That is why it
does not matter how long the magma was in the volcano before it erupted.
They believe that when the volcano erupts, all the 40Ar escapes, and the
atomic clock gets reset to zero.
(Did you catch one of the first things said about scientists? They assuming
that all the argon would escape, but this is simply not what happens.)
Because it is known that excess 40Ar* is carried from the mantle by plumes
of mafic magmas up into the earth's crust, it is equally likely that much of
the excess 40Ar* in crustal rocks could be primordial 40Ar. Thus, we have
no way of knowing if any of the 40Ar* measured in crustal rocks has any
age significance
(Clearly there is Argon that does not escape, proving the method to be false
and unable to give accurate dates. But just in case that was not enough in
itself to disprove Potassium-Argon dating, some scientists decided to send
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
blind tests to labs of volcanic rocks from known and dated eruptions to see
what ages would be determined. Here are the results.)
Potassium-Argon dating does not work
Andrew A. Snelling, Ph.D - Andrew A. Snelling is a geologist, research scientist and
technical editor. He completed a Bachelor of Science degree in Applied Geology at the
University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, graduating with First Class
Honors in 1975. His Doctor of Philosophy (in geology) was awarded by The University
of Sydney, Australia - http://www.icr.org/article/436/
(They’re dating in the millions years, even though we know they’re nowhere
near that old.)
Steve Austin, PhD geology, had a rock from a newly formed 1986 lava
dome from Mount St. Helen dated. Using Potassium-Argon dating, the
newly formed rock gave ages between 0.5 and 2.8 million years. These dates
show that significant argon (daughter element) was present in the rock
solidified.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:838
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:839
There have been reported studies where two or more of the radioisotope
dating methods have been applied to the same samples and have yielded
different “ages.”
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:840
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:841
(Dating methods do not agree with each other, do not let them tell you they
do. Radioactive dating methods do not prove anything when it comes to the
age of the earth. They can’t even agree among themselves.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:842
Across the Uinkaret Plateau, on the north rim of the western Grand Canyon,
are up to 160 volcanic cones from which basalt lavas have flowed, and most
of the poured southward into the inner gorge of Grand Canyon. Thus, these
basalt lavas are so recent that, having erupted after the Grand Canyon has
been eroded into its present form; they cascaded down the north wall of the
Grand Canyon and formed dams that temporarily filled the inner gorge of
Grand Canyon to different heights; block the flow of the Colorado River.
Today only erosion remnants remain. These basalt lavas, therefore, yield
various potassium-argon “model ages: of around 0.5-1.0 million years.
(There are lava flows in the bottom of the Grand Canyon that are “dating”
as being younger than the top of the canyon. Obviously radioactive dating
and the geologic column do not agree.)
Dr. Steve Austin took samples from the Cardenas basalt, which is among the
oldest strata in the eastern Grand Canyon. Next, samples from the western
Canyon basalt lava flows, which are among the youngest formation in the
canyon, were analyzed. Using irochron dating methods, an age of 1.07
billion years was assigned to the oldest rocks and a date of 1.34 billion years
to the youngest rock. The youngest rocks gave an age 270 million years
older than the oldest rocks!.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(The layers supposed to be the oldest at the bottom actually give ages young
than those at the top. Obviously something is wrong here.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:843
(Talking about Uinkaret Plateau) However, the same basalt lavas yield a
rubidium-strontium “isochron age” of 1,143+-220 million years! Such an
“age” is virtually identical with the rubidium-strontium “isochron ages” of
the 1,111+-81 million years and 1,060+-24 million years for the Cardenas
Basalt and Bass rapids diabase sill
(Areas supposed to be millions of years apart are giving the same ages when
you use different dating methods.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:841
The next rock unit studied in the Grand Canyon was metamorphosed basalt
lava flows called the Brahma amphibolites, deep in the crystalline basement
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:842
Even worse were two samples collected only 0.84 meters apart from the
same outcrop. They yielded potassium-argon “model ages” of 1,205.3+-31
and 2,574.2 +-73 million years. Otherwise, these samples yielded a
rubidium-strontium “isochron age” of 1,240+-84 million years, a samarium-
neodynium “isochron age” of 1,655+-40 million years, and a lead-lead
“isochron age” of 1,883+-53 million years.
(Model ages among dating methods is not an accurate science. The ages
disagree massively with each other.)
Dendrochronology is the study and dating of tree rings and the idea that all
tree rings are annual.) This is mainly done in the White mountains of
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
California with the Bristol cone pines. Here are some pieces of evidence to
fight with.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:898
Growth of tree rings would have been particularly critical in the first
thousand or more years after the Flood, when climatic conditions and
weather patterns were extremely variable, due to the after-effects of the
Flood cataclysm and the climatic readjustments associated with the post-
Flood Ice Age.
(So first off, the argument does not take into account the Biblical pre-flood
world, so it’s not something creationists need to worry about in the first
place. But in case some people don’t like that answer we will look further.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Conditions are so bad that few other plants can survive: short cool summers with a
growing season thought to be only several weeks long; desert-like aridity, many trees
grow out of little more than cracks in dolomitic rocks. Strong winds coupled with air that
in the summer is said to be the driest on earth.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:895
The longest tree-ring chronology first established was achieved using the
stunted bristlecone pine, found primarily In the White mountains of
California where the semi-desert habitat has facilitated the great longevity of
this tree, and has permitted good preservation of the dry wood after death.
(Remember what the conditions are for where these trees are at.)
An expert in the genus Pinus didn’t seem to have any problem believing that White
Mountain BCPs grew multiple rings per year. In his book, The Genus Pinus, Mirov
states, ‘Apparently a semblance of annual rings is formed after every rather infrequent
cloudburst.’5 If an expert like Mirov readily accepted multiplicity in these BCPs, then
perhaps the doubters of this notion should at least give the evidence a serious
examination.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:897
Even the production of one growth-ring each year is not a certain process,
and it is possible under certain conditions for a tree to miss a growth-ring or
to produce two-growth rings in one season.
(Also keep in mind that the experts don’t think multiple rings per year is a
far fetched idea and it’s very possible. It actually does happen as we will
see.)
(The trees they are dating can not be as old as they want us to believe they
are because the wood on the ground that they use to back track the dates of
these trees would have rotted)
The claim that wood can lay on the ground undecayed for 7,000 years is
even more fantastic when one considers the rate at which the mountains that
these trees are growing on are eroding away. LaMarche has found an erosion
rate of about 1 foot (30 cm) per 1,000 years in the White Mountains in
general, and a higher rate in the areas where the oldest trees grow…. How is
it possible that seven feet (213 cm) of dolomitic surface, can erode away
over the course of 7,000 years, while dead wood could remain essentially in
place on the surface of the ground over that same period? Can the dead
wood really be that much more resistant to destruction than the rocks are?
(The wood that they use to back track the age to over 4400 years - Biblical
flood - could not be that old. The mountains erode too quickly to support
this theory.)
Similarly, researchers have found that in the central area of a stand of BCP
trees, where growing conditions are the best, the trees do not have more than
several hundred rings. But at the margins of the stand, where the soil thins
and growing conditions become progressively poorer, the trees with the most
rings are found.15 It seems more probable that all the trees in the stand are
about the same age, but that the trees growing at the margins are starved for
water and grow multiple rings to conserve water. When the tree is young and
its circumference is small, it may have access to enough water to meet its
basic needs, so it grows only one ring per year. As it ages and the surface
area of the tree expands it loses more and more water out of the bark, but by
switching to a multiplicity growth habit it can conserve water.
(There is the reason for multiple rings per year: The conditions where these
trees grow force them to grow multiple rings to conserve water.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:898
It was extremely likely that trees would have grown multiple rings in many
of the early calendar years after the flood. Therefore, all tree-ring
chronologies are likely to be seriously in error prior to 100 BC, because they
are all based on the assumption of essentially one growth-ring per calendar
year.
(The post-flood conditions would also make the trees grow many more rings
than they normally would.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The Green River Formation of Wyoming, USA, is familiar to geologists not only for its
well-preserved fossils but also because it has come to the forefront of debate on the age
of the earth. Critics of creationism have frequently appealed to the Green River
Formation as irrefutable evidence for a multi-million-year-old earth.
(They claim that layers are annual and different fossils in the layers prove
millions of years, kind of like a miniature geologic column.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:949
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:949
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:949
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:948
(Rapid layers can form quickly under the right conditions, like a flood.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:951
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:951
The Green River Formation can hardly be any ordinary lake deposit, because
modern lake on which the varve concept is modeled do not provide
conditions needed for such exquisite preservation of abundant fossil fish,
birds, bats, and flowers
(The mixed animal and plant fossils are strong evidence that a world-wide
flood happened - not a local one.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:951
It has been shown experimentally that, even on the muddy bottom of marsh
in oxygen-poor conditions, fish carcasses decay quite rapidly, all flesh
having decayed, and even the bones becoming disconnected, after only six
and a half days. Some fish may have taken a day or two to have been buried
and fossilized because of being found preserved with scales scattered and
even exploded. However birds have hollow bones that tend not to be well
preserved in the fossil record, so how then did these birds lay dead on the
bottom of a lake protected from scavenging and decay for thousands of
years, until a sufficient number of very thin annual varve layers had build up
to bury them?
(Again we need a quick flood for this formation to come about as it is.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:950
The number of laminae between the two tuff beds varies from 1,089 to 1,566
(Talking about the Green river formation)….The organic content of the shale
laminae also changes, so these laminae cannot present annual depositional
layers, as there should be the same number of varves between the two
volcanic ash layers, and the laminae should be consistent thickness and
organic content if that were the case
(Many times old earth age believers will use the fact that there are volcanic
layers to prove millions of years. However, the sediment layers are different
in different areas between the layers, so obviously they don’t represent
accurate time.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
One of the most impressive evidences, that the GRF and its associated
formations were deposited during the Flood, is that after all this huge
volume of sediment was deposited, the top of the basin fills was greatly
eroded.
(The erosion on the top proves that erosion occurs there, but there is only
erosion on the top. If each layer took a year then there should be erosion
marks throughout the entire formation.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:946
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:946
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Varves are thin repetitive sedimentary layers that are used to argue for a long
history of the earth. It is claimed that one varve was deposited each year. But
to me, the fact that they show so little evidence of erosion or any kind of
activity between the layers is suspicious -- they are all so flat and even. In
addition, many well-preserved fossil fish are found in the Green River
varves. This is an evidence that these varves were laid down rapidly.
(Experiments have shown that if fish are not buried rapidly, the bones fall
apart.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:945
There are several obvious and important difficulties to this verve dating
method, however one of which is the impossibility of knowing that the
couplets of laminae all actually represent annual cycles of deposition
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:945
gradual settling of the finer particles with suspended organic matter, and this
would thus give the appearance of laminae as a varve couplet.
(In the end the Green river formation does not prove that the earth is old, all
it proves is that there was a world-wide flood like the Bible says.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:952
(It is reasonable and scientific to believe that the green river formation was
deposited during the flood like the Bible says)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:
One critic of the biblical model of earth history claimed that the Enewetok
Reed would have to have grown at a rate of at least 140 millimeters per year
to have formed in less than 10,000 years since the Flood, and states: “Such
rates have been shown to be quite impossible.” However, this claim is
ignorant of earlier published, well-documented, direct measurements of reef
growth rates of 280-414 millimeters per year, which are far more accurate
than many published estimates based on radiocarbon “dating” for coral
growth rings.
It is also often claimed that the growth of coral reefs to their current size
would require very long time periods. Coffin shows that coral reefs can grow
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
very fast when they are farther from the surface of the ocean. At the surface,
the growth rate slows due to water action and various other factors. So coral
reefs are also not an evidence for a long history of the earth since the origin
of life.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:932
Growth rates of the corals that build the frames of reefs have also been
measured at 120-432 mm per year. Analyzing these direct measurements, it
can be easily calculated that coral growth would have been rapid enough to
build the Enewetok Reed in only 3,400 years, well within the time since the
Genesis Flood.
(When you take the real measurements of the coral reefs and how fast they
grow, you can obviously see that the timeframe fits in a Biblical worldview
of a flood around 4400 years ago.)
Enewetok reef had to form when the water was more shallow
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:931
Coral doesn’t grow if it is more than 50 meters below the ocean surfacem so
the Enewetok Reef must have begun growing when the ocean there was
quite shallow and then evidently continued growing as the ocean flood
gradually subsided.
(Another interesting fact about the largest reef in the world is that it had to
have formed when the water level was shallower. The old earth believers do
not have an explanation for this.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:935
Such observations do not negate the evidence that massive reed cores, which
had earlier grown elsewhere, were transported and deposited during a
catastrophic upheaval.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:936
(Sometime reefs will be found fossilized in places where there had not been
any water for a long time – old earth believers will use this argument as
well, however when we look at the evidence we see that reefs can be
transported during a flood like you would have in the Biblical view of
history.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:935
(They will try to convince you that because these reefs are in the upright
position they could not have been transported, however again this is not the
case. They could have been transported and still be upright)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:936
Our present knowledge indicates that the question of time for the formation
for claimed fossilized reefs and limestone’s generally, is not a serious
challenge to either a recent creation or a recent global cataclysmic Flood.
(Reefs are simply not a problem for any Bible believing Christian.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:909
It is not difficult to see, if one is willing to see, how they could have formed
in a very short period if the hydraulic and sedimentation activity were
intense enough, as it undoubtedly was during the Flood.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:913
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:913
(Lithification can happen very quickly and does happen very quickly. By
definition it does not have to take a very long time. Lithification is not proof
that the earth is old.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:912
It has further been claimed that the Lithification of mud’s, for example,
requires a thickness of other overlying sediments of at least a mile in order
to compact the fine grains, squeeze out the pore water, and provide enough
pressure to cause solidification. Thus, any sedimentary rock now appearing
at the earth’s surface must at some time in its history have had at least a mile
of other sediments lying on top of it, which have since been eroded away. Of
course, exactly these conditions would have occurred during the global
Flood, when enormous thicknesses of sediments were eroded, transported,
and deposited on top of one another, the last deposited sediment layers then
being subsequently eroded away as the flood waters retreated off today’s
land surface into the current ocean basins.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:912
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:913
(The flood can most accurately for Lithification. The conditions during the
flood were the conditions needed for Lithification to have happened quickly.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
There is no evidence that Lithification can only happen slowly, and there is
much evidence that it can happen quickly under certain conditions.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:926
The chalk beds in the geologic record are so pure in comparison to today’s
sea flood calcareous oozes. If the chalk beds accumulated at an even slower
rate than today’s sea flood calcareous oozes, then why are they so pure and
not have more other materials mixed into them? This observation alone must
rule out the accumulation of today’s sea floor calcareous oozed as the model
for the formation of the chalk beds in the geologic record.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:928
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:828
(Such purity in these chalk beds is very strong proof that they could not have
formed slowly over hundred of thousands and millions of years. They had to
form quickly like the Bible says in the flood.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:927
(First off it is very possible for all the chalk beds to have been formed in a
Biblical time frame of the pre-flood world. Don’t let them convince you it
would take millions of years.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:929
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:928
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:829
Furthermore, in many places the clank layers are rhythmically bedded, with
regularly-spaced, joint-like breakings or bedding planes, and the occasional
thick marl bands. This rhythmacity/cyclincity match the cyclic variations in
the oxygen up isotopic composition and carbonate, which is consistent with
fluctuation of up to 4.5 C in the water temperatures correlate with explosive
production of coccolithophores and deposition of prue chalk, which is
consistent with copious quantities of nutrient-carrying hot waters being
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
explosively added to the ocean waters by volcanic eruptions late in the Flood
year.
(The conditions that would have been present during the flood would easily
be able to account for the chalk beds that we see.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:929
What is often overlooked is that chalk pebbles occur in some of the marls,
and marl-chalk junctions are cut by erosion hollows in some places.
Furthermore, the chalk ooze was not merely deposited in “flat spreads”, but
was sometimes piled into heaps and banks up to 50 meters high and 1.5
kilometers in length, accompanied by slumping. Smaller and less obvious
carbonate banks with and without detectable cross-bedding are widespread
in the English chalk beds Submarine erosion surfaces are common in the
chalk, and some fine-grained chalks shows a textural, parallel lamination
bedding. All of these features are indicative of deposition involving rapid
and current flows, and not the slow-and-gradual depositions over millions of
years that is usually claimed.
(Not only can the flood account for the Chalk beds, but now we find out that
we need the flood conditions to get the chalk beds how they are today.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:926
The diatomite beds in the geologic record are exceedingly pure, so that many
of them are of commercial interest, because of relatively pure silica in them
favors their use in chemical processing.
(First off diatomite beds are found to be extremely pure just like chalk beds
are. This is a good sign that they had to form quickly)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:929
Similar arguments apply to the vast. Thick and pure diatomite beds in the
geologic record. (Same arguments are for chalk beds) The scale and purity
of these beds necessitates diatom accumulation rates significantly higher
than in today’s oceans, with abundant explosive diatom blooms resulting
from abundant food supplies and favorable conditions for reproduction,
combined with ocean currents rapidly accumulating and then depositing
them on the ocean flood. The presence of volcanic ash in some of these
diatomite beds is also highly significant. Such explosive volcanic activity
would have helped provide nutrients for the abundant explosive diatom
blooms, and the ash would have added to the density currents that rapidly
swept the diatom skeletons to the ocean floor.
(It is realistic to assume that Diatomite beds formed during the flood. The
flood can accurately account for all the diatoms that we find)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:930
Major evidence for more repaid modes of deposition of diatomite beds arises
from the present of huge fossil vertebrates in some of them. The most
striking example are the fossilized baleen whales in the diatomite beds of the
Pisco formation of Peru, and in the Monterey formation in the Lompoc area
of California. Within the Peruvian Pisco formation, 346 fossilized baleen
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
whales 5 to 13 meters long have been found in a 1.5 square kilometer area of
exposed outcrop. The burial of these huge whales and their fossilization was
so rapid that occasionally soft tissues have been preserved, including the
baleen.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:930
(Obviously a whale is not going to stand on its face for millions of years
while the diatoms slowly form around it. They had to be deposited during a
catastrophic event – just like the flood of the Bible)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:
Other common fossils found with these baleen whales are sharks teeth, but
this formation also yielded fossilized fish, turtles, seals, porpoises, penguins,
and even ground sloths.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:930
…To also preserve such abundance of other fossils. had to have been
catastrophic, in an event that affected land (ground sloth), air (birds), and the
sea. Thus the evidence is totally consistent with the catastrophic formation
of these diatomite beds, along with the chalk beds, towards the end of the
global Flood cataclysm
(But its not just whales that we find in these diatomite beds, there are many
other animals that should not be there if they formed slowly. Plus the
animals found there are from different habitats and should not be found
together if this is a slow gradual process)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:943
The proportion of the different salt minerals found in ancient salt beds is
completely different from what theoretical and experimental geochemical
methods would predict based upon the uniformitarian evaporite model. As
already noted, salt beds contain great thicknesses of primarily one salt
mineral to the exclusion of all others. Furthermore, some of the more soluble
salts, such as magnesium sulfate, are absent in large salt beds, whereas they
generally form in the claimed modern analogous evaporative lagoons
(First off the current secular evaporite model can’t explain the ancient
evaporites that we find, so make sure anyone who brings this argument up
against you knows that the model they believe in can not account for what
ancient evaporites that we find.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:941
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:944
(Seawater is not the only method by which we get evaporites; there are
actually many other ways.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:941
Volcanic waters and hydrothermal fluids are usually very saline, and when
they mix with bodies of cold water the sudden temperature drop causes the
water mixture to become super-saturated in the salts, so that the solution can
no longer hold the alts, which rapidly precipitate. This is precisely what
happens around deep-sea hot hydrothermal vents, where layers of highly
saline supercritical waters may have ponded on the ocean bottom.
(Evaporites can form quickly by different methods that would have been
occurring and around during the flood.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:942
fluids given off by intrusive magmas and during the intense volcanic
activity. The resulting super-saline, hot supercritical waters consequently
stratify in layers at the bottom of the depositional basin, as has been
currently observed at the bottom of the Red sea.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:944
During the global Genesis Flood cataclysm, bedded salt deposits would have
been formed catastrophically as a result of the intense volcanic and
magmatic activity, with the associated voluminous quantities of saline
hydrothermal fluids “bursting forth” from the earth’s crust that was torn
apart during catastrophic plate tectonics. Both the purity of the bedded salt
deposits and their frequent, thin repeating laminae are testimony to the rapid
water transport and deposition by turbidity currents, while the sale mineral
rapidly precipitated as supercritical saline hydrothermal fluids
catastrophically mixed with the colder ocean waters. Not only is the
hydrothermal precipitite model more viable for this rapid formation of
bedded salt deposits within a year-long Genesis Flood, but it is clear that the
geologic evidence is far more consistent with that model than with the
uniformitarian evaporite model.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:943
(The best explanation for evaporites is the flood. It is possible and scientific
that evaporites formed during the flood due to massive volcanic and
magnetic activity among others. There are also many reasons such as the
purity of the salt showing that they had to form quickly like you would get
with a worldwide flood. And if that is not enough we can even see examples
of it happening today in some places.)
10. Petrified forests (Yellow stone) don’t prove the earth is old
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:954
However, there are numerous features of these petrified tree stumps that
conclusively indicate that these trees grew elsewhere, and were then
transported and buried catastrophically into their present locations.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:954
Both upright trees and horizontal trees are found in these buried forests, with
the percentage of upright trees varying from location to location.
(The Petrified Forests were only buried where we find them. There are
massive amounts of evidence that the forests could not have grown there.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:954
Usually the upright trees stumps on one level appear broken off at their tops,
only about a vertical foot below the beginning of the next “forest” level.
However, occasionally a tree stump in one level extends through or into the
“forest” level above it. If these were successive forests that grew in place,
the tops of any tree stumps protruding into the next growing forest would be
subject to infestation by insects, rotting, and decay, yet the petrified wood
tissue in these tree stumps looks as fresh as the wood tissue in living trees
(If these forests formed on top of each-other over long periods of time the
trees passing into the next layer should have had signs of rotting/decaying
among other things. There is no way that these forests formed over a long
period of time.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:954
The alignment of the fallen petrified trees, and the long axes of the cross-
sections of the tops of standing tree stumps, on any particular level show a
tendency to be aligned in the same direction. Such parallel orientation is not
seen in living forests.
(The trees found in these forests do not follow natural growing patterns and
alignments. They had to be moved to where they are for them to have the
alignment that we see.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:955
The most abundant of the fossilized tree stumps are Sequoia (redwoods),
with pines being second in abundance. From identifications of the fossil
wood,, pollen, leaves, and needles, the number of plant species represented
in these Yellow-stone petrified forests is over 200. This represents a diverse
grouping of species including exotic genera such as cinnamon, breadfruit,
katsura, and Chinquapin that presently restricted to southeastern Asia. We
would not expect such a ecological diversity if the trees represent a forest in
the position of growth. These species range from temperate (pine, redwoods,
willows) to tropical and exotic (figs, laurels, breadfruit), and from semi-
desert to rainforest types. This mixed flora is most easily explained by the
transporting of trees and plants from different habitats and geographical
locations into a flooded basin
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Many different kinds of trees are found in these forests, if these forests all
grew in place then we would only expect to find one type of tree. Multiple
plant diversity is strong proof that these trees were transported and buried.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:955
If these petrified trees are standing where they originally grew, then it is
significant why there are no animal fossils, such as those of land snails,
some amphibians and retiles, many insects, spiders, and worms, and their
traces, that would have not escaped in situ burial with these fossil “forests”,
However, the trees and organic debris making up the proposed soil levels
were instead transported in by water, then the separation of animals from the
plants before burial is much easier to explain.
(We should be finding remains of some of the animals that would not be able
to escape if volcanic ash and sediment suddenly covered the whole forest.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:956
(If these were annual forests then we should find clay and we should have
soil horizons which we do not. This is proof that the forests did not slowly
form one after another, but instead were transported and buried.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:957
Rather than being a difficulty for a global Flood cataclysm 4,500 years ago
the evidence in the Yellowstone :forests” clearly is consistent with
catastrophe transport and deposition of tree stumps in volcanic mudflows
and catastrophic water flows, to be successively buried upright in a sequence
of repeating organic levels that give the appearance of successive buried
forests
(Yellow Stones petrified forests are strong proof of a global flood that
transported and deposited these trees where we find them now.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1024
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The reality is that most, if not all, of the purported evidence for these ancient
ice ages can be easily confused with, and interpreted as, the result of non-
glacial sedimentation and activity.
(Ancient ice ages are not very well understood and do not prove that we
have had many ice-ages. There is only scientific evidence for one ice-age
which the Bible view can account for.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1029
The evidence for claimed ancient ice ages is consistent with the catastrophic
Genesis Flood.
(The evidence they are finding for ancient ice ages actually are just
consistent with the Genesis flood.)
12. Metamorphic rock was formed quickly and is compatible with the Bible
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1008
(Metamorphic rock can form at normal temperatures and does not always
require large amounts of heat.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1003
(There is no solid evidence that the rock itself has to pass through several
grades to become metamorphic rock. Old earth believers will tell you there
are many steps involved and it had to happen over a long period of time –
this is simply not true.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1008
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1010
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1011
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1011
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:999
There are two major types of metamorphism – contact and regional. Contact
metamorphism is basically the baking of rocks around intruding and cooling
magmas, and thus primarily involve elevated temperatures. Given it has now
been demonstrated granitic plutons are intruded rapidly, and it can be shown
that the magmas crystallize and cool rapidly, with hydrothermal convective
flows carrying heat out into the wall-rocks, contact metamorphism must
likewise occur rapidly, and is thus explainable within the biblical timescale
for the Flood cataclysm and the young earth
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:999
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The catastrophic rate of sedimentation during the Flood would deeply bury
some sedimentary strata in only a matter of weeks or months, producing the
necessary pressure increase needed for metamorphism of the sediments
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1004
It is now generally accepted that the sulfide minerals of these ores were laid
down as fine chemical precipitates as part of the original sediments
themselves, as found and observed where modern-day analogues are
forming on the sea flood associated with hydrothermal springs. These sulfide
ores are thus intrinsic parts of the rock in which they occur, so the
metamorphic mineral assemblages within and surrounding the ores must
result from the metamorphism of the sedimentary materials laid down with,
and adjacent to, the sulfide precipitates. Thus, they are genuine metamorphic
rocks, and they therefore have been used in a landmark series of studies of
metamorphic phenomena in metamorphosed politic rocks that only question
the conventional explanation for regional metamorphism, but provide an
alternative explanation requiring only moderate temperatures on short
timescales, commensurate with the biblical framework for earth history.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1010
Sedimentary strata would not need to have been buried as deeply to reach
moderate temperatures needed for transformations of precursor minerals,
due to catastrophic sediment accumulation and the increase heat flow from
the mantle because of catastrophic plate tectonics. The waters trapped in the
Flood sediments would have been warmed than waters being trapped in
sediments today, so pore and hydrothermal fluids would have been another
important factor in facilitating rapid regional metamorphism
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(The flood and the third day of creation can accurately account for all the
metamorphic rock that we see today. The conditions during the flood have
been proved to be able to form metamorphic rock quickly.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:
Catastrophic erosion caused by the retreating Flood waters would also have
exhumed these regionally metamorphosed rocks to expose them and their
zones at the earth’s surface today.
(The erosion after the flood from the water rushing off into the oceans would
easily make the metamorphic rock that we see today visible.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1000
(Fossils could not be in these metamorphic rocks unless they formed quickly.
The flood is the best explanations for these fossils.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:1009
The biblical framework of earth history, there is more than one episode
capable of producing large regions of zoned metamorphic rocks. The
formation of the dry land on day three of the creation week must have
involved earth movements (tectonism), volcanism, magmatism, and the
release of hydrothermal fluids, erosion of the emerging land surface due to
the retreating waters, and deposition of sediments in the developing ocean
basins. Such sedimentation could thus have been capable of producing zones
of sediments with subtle differences in bulk chemistry and mineralogy that
would be a precursor for accompanying or subsequent regional
metamorphism…. At the outset of the Flood these pre-flood zoned
sediments would have experienced rapid burial and heat released as renewed
volcanic and magmatic activity occurred sufficient to induce precursor
transformations in those regional zones that would mimic conventional
grades. The flood event itself provided the greatest scope for regional
metamorphism. Catastrophic sedimentation, deep burial of large volumes of
fossil-bearing strata, vast outpourings of lavas on a global scale, ensuring the
release of copious amounts of hydrothermal waters during sedimentation and
interbedded volcanics, massive repeated intrusive magmatism, and the rapid
deformation of catastrophic plate tectonics, would have ensured both
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(That’s just to sum it up. The Biblical framework can accurately account for
everything we see in this world today, including metamorphic rock.)
In this section we will be looking at evidence for a young earth and solar
system just as the Bible teaches.
Red blood cells and hemoglobin have been found in some (unfossilized!)
dinosaur bone. But these could not last more than a few thousand years—
certainly not the 65 million years from when evolutionists think the last
dinosaur lived.
Feature Article from Creation Magazine Vol. 15, No. 4, pages 12-15
http://www.present-truth.org/3-Nature/dinosaurs_2.htm
Oxford molecular biologist Bryan Sykes admitted in the journal Nature that
the rate at which DNA breaks down in the laboratory is such that ‘no DNA
would remain intact much beyond 10,000 years.
(DNA cannot last for more than 10,000 years and yet it’s found in many
dinosaur bones, proving the dinosaurs were recent and the earth is young.)
Natural diamonds are believed to have been formed deep underground in the
upper mantle of the earth’s crust. Under extreme temperature and pressure,
pure carbon is formed into the diamond’s crystalline form. Over time, the
diamond is moved upwards by rising magma. Natural diamonds are
commonly believed to have been formed millions of years ago… But carbon
14 has been measured within natural diamonds.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:861
The diamonds chosen for analysis came from underground mines where
contamination would be minimal. In any case being the hardest natural
mineral, diamonds are extremely resistant to contamination vie chemical
exchange with the external environment. Furthermore, the diamonds chosen
are regarded by uniformitarian geologists to have formed in the earth’s
mantle between one and three billion years ago, so they should have
definitely been “radiocarbon-dead.” Nevertheless, they still contain
significant levels of carbon-14, well above the detection threshold of the
AMS equipment.
Carbon 14 in diamonds
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
(Carbon 14 can only last 250,000 years in the natural environment, yet it is
found in diamonds which are supposed to form deep in the earth after
billions of years. This is consistent with the Bible and the earth not being
billions of years old.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:861
The average carbon-14 from these coal samples over each of these three
geological intervals were remarkably similar to one another, around 50,000
years, even thought the uniformitarian ages range from 40 million years to
350 million years
Carbon 14 in oil
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
(Getting fossil wood is supposed to take millions of years, yet if this were
true, all the Carbon 14 in the wood would be gone by the time it fossilized.
Yet we find this is not true. This is great evidence that the earth is young as
the Bible says.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:858
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(There is no valid explanation for why this carbon 14 has been able to last if
these objects are millions of years old. Carbon 14 is a great proof that the
earth is young and everything formed quickly in the flood 4400 years ago,
and that is why it all still has Carbon 14 within it.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:872
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:870
(Comets lose mass as they are flying through space – that is what the tail is.
Smaller comets have been shown to only be able to last for about 20,000
years. Old earth believers have tried to invent something to solve this
problem but have failed.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Granted, that we don't have photos of the Oort Cloud or the Hills Cloud, or
even of the Kuiper Belt.
(No one has ever seen any of them, yet old earth believers assume they are
there because there are comets flying around. They don’t want to believe
that they don’t have a way of replenishing comets so they invented the Oort
Cloud, Hill Cloud and the Kuiper Belt to support their faulty theory.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:871
(The very few objects that do exist in the Kuiper belt are not even classified
as comets. The Kuiper belt cannot solve the comet problem.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:871
In recent years, with the failure of the hypothetical Oort Cloud to supply the
needed comets, attention has focused on the Kuiper Belt, a donut shaped
disc of supposed comets sources lying in the plane of the solar system just
beyond the orbit of Neptune and outside the orbit of Pluto. To solve the
evolutionary astronomer’s dilemma, there would have to be billions of
comets nuclei in this Kuiper belt. However, astronomers have so far only
found less than a thousand icy asteroid-sized bodies in this Kuiper Belt.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:871
In recent years, with the failure of the hypothetical Oort Cloud to supply the
needed comets, attention has focused on the Kuiper Belt, a donut shaped
disc of supposed comets sources lying in the plane of the solar system just
beyond the orbit of Neptune and outside the orbit of Pluto. To solve the
evolutionary astronomer’s dilemma, there would have to be billions of
comets nuclei in this Kuiper belt. However, astronomers have so far only
found less than a thousand icy asteroid-sized bodies in this Kuiper Belt.
(The Kuiper belt would quickly become exhausted and run out of comets if it
were not being replenished from the Oort cloud.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr Danny R. Faulkner - has a B.S. (Math), M.S. (Physics), M.A. and Ph.D.
(Astronomy, Indiana University). He is Full Professor at the University of South
Carolina
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v15/i2/oort.asp
There are problems with the Oort cloud; the greatest being that there is
absolutely no evidence that it even exists!1 However, a recent study has
revealed a new problem.2 Evolutionary theories of the origin of the solar
system state that comet nuclei came from material left over from the
formation of the planets. According to the theory, this icy material was sent
out to the Oort cloud in the outer reaches of the solar system by the gravity
of the newly formed planets. All of the earlier studies ignored collisions
between the comet nuclei during this process. This new study has considered
these collisions and has found that most of the comets would have been
destroyed by the collisions. Thus, instead of having a combined mass of
perhaps 40 Earths, the Oort cloud should have at most the mass of about a
single Earth.
(So first off there is no proof for the Oort cloud except “It must be there”.
This is not science and even if their theory is true, which it is not, the Oort
cloud still does not have enough comets to replenish the solar system.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
“Near-infrared spectra of the Kuiper Belt Object, Quaoar and the suspected
Kuiper Belt Object, Charon, indicate both contain crystalline water ice and
ammonia hydrate. This watery material cannot be much older than 10
million years, which is consistent with a young solar system.
(The Kuiper belt also proves to be the result of a young solar system - go
figure – so even in an attempt to fight against a creationist young earth
argument, they gave us more proof.)
Dr Danny R. Faulkner - has a B.S. (Math), M.S. (Physics), M.A. and Ph.D.
(Astronomy, Indiana University). He is Full Professor at the University of South
Carolina
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v11/i3/comets.asp
It must be emphasised that the Oort cloud has not been observed, nor is it
likely to be observable for some time to come. Consider this quote from
Sagan and Druyan: ‘Many scientific papers are written each year about the
Oort Cloud, its properties, its origin, its evolution. Yet there is not yet a
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
shred of direct observational evidence for its existence.’ This raises a very
important question as to the scientific status of the Oort cloud. Can
something that cannot be observed, even indirectly as in the case of
subatomic phenomenon, be classed as scientific? While the Oort cloud is
often referred to as a theory, given the usual definition of a theory and the
impossibility of observation, can the Oort cloud be termed a theory? Indeed,
given that it is doubtful that this idea can ever be tested, one has to question
whether the Oort cloud is even an hypothesis.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:871
The hypothetical Oort Cloud has never been observed, so rather than being
even a scientific theory, it is in reality an ad hoc device to explain away the
obvious discrepancy that is fatal to the dogma of the earth and the solar
system being billions of years old.
(Even believers in the big bang admit the Oort cloud does not exist. So in
the end, comets are proof that the solar system and earth are young and
consistent with the Biblical view of history and the age of the earth.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The known decay in the earth's magnetic field and the inexorable depletion
of its energy clearly point to an imminent and inevitable end of the earth's
magnetic field. A Department of Commerce publication lists evaluations of
the strength of the earth's dipole magnet (its main magnet) since Karl Gauss
made the first evaluation in the 1830's. It states that the rate of decrease is
about 5% per hundred years. It then states that if the decay continues the
magnetic field will "vanish in A.D. 3391."6
(Just a simple fact we need to get out of the way; everyone agrees that the
magnetic field is declining. This presents a problem for evolutionist because
if the magnetic field is declining, then it used to be stronger. And if it gets
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
too strong, life can not exist. It only takes 20,000 years to get to that point
and that’s way too early for the evolutionist and his billions of years.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
The decay of the earth’s magnetic field. Exponential decay is evident from
measurements and is consistent with theory of free decay since creation,
suggesting an age of the earth of less than 20,000 years.
(Well it’s great to say that magnetic reversals happen every 170,000 years
but that still does not help your problem. It would only take 20,000 years
before life could not exist on earth because the magnetic field is too strong.
So how did life exist in order to evolve pre-20,000 years? It couldn’t.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Not only did the theory of magnetic reversals not solve there problem, it is
not even scientific.)
Dalrymple quotes the following statement from Barnes: "As of now there is
no physical evidence, seismic or otherwise, that there is any motion within
the core."
(There is no evidence the core is moving and that is what the magnetic field
reversals are based off of.)
The rate of energy consumption is now known. From that information and a
reasonable limit on the maximum plausible initial energy one can show that
the earth's magnetic age is limited to thousands of years, not the billions
claimed by evolutionary scientists.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:873
The earth’s magnetic field has been decaying so fast that it couldn’t be more
than about 10,000 years old. Rapid reversals during the flood year and
fluctuation shortly after just caused the field energy to drop even faster.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:876
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The magnetic field has rapidly and continuously lost total energy ever since
it was created, and the rate of that loss indicates that the earth and its
magnetic field were created only about 6,000 years ago.
(Incase we have not had enough evidence for this point there is another one:
The magnetic field proves the earth HAS to be young.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:875
It was predicted that in a thin lava flow, the outside, the outside would cool
first and record the earth’s magnetic field in one direction, while the inside
would have cooled a short time later and have recorded the field in another
direction. Three years after this prediction appeared in print, leading
paleomagnetism researchers found such a thin lava layer that has cooled
within fifteen days and had 90° of reversal recorded continuously in it.
Furthermore, a few years later the same investigators reported finding similar
evidence of an even aster reversal
(Any magnetic reversals would have to happen very quickly, not over
thousands of years like old earth believers will tell you. This also proves that
even if there were magnetic reversals throughout time, they still don’t solve
the problem because the gaps between them are to long.)
Magnetic reversals would have happened during the flood
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:875
year of the Flood, every week or two, and then after the Flood there would
have been large fluctuations due to residual motion.
(A huge catastrophic event like the flood would be the only way to explain
very quick magnetic reversals.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:876
(Even if magnetic reversals happened just like old earth believers wanted,
the magnetic field as a whole is still loosing mass amounts of energy.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:876
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
In any case, if the decay had been linear, the upper limit for the age of the
earth’s magnetic field would still only be 90 million years, well short of the
uniformitarian 4.5 billion years.
(Even with the most generous situations to old earth believers, there is no
way that the earth can be over 90 million years old.)
The game is up for the evolutionist if he acknowledges that the earth is only
a few thousand years old. To avoid being completely wiped out he knows
that he must fight with all his might, fair or foul, against this scientific
theory and supporting evidence of a young magnetic earth-age.
(Don’t expect them to ever give up though on their claims. If they lose this
one, it’s over for them and they know that.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
One year ago, one of the most startling discoveries in the history of solar
system exploration was announced. One of Saturn's little moons, Enceladus,
less wide than Arizona erupted and continues erupting. Plumes had been
suspected months earlier, but by November 2005, the evidence was
unmistakable: up to 375 kilograms of water per second is being ejected at
temperatures up to 180 kelvins…. The findings were reported in a special
issue of Science 3/10/2006. It wasn't long until scientists began wondering
how to fit the observations into 4.5 billion years, the assumed age of the
solar system. At current eruption rates, Enceladus would have ejected 1/6 of
its mass and recycled its entire mass in that time. Neither radioactivity nor
tidal flexing appear sufficient to sustain the activity. Apparently Enceladus
also gets hyperactive. A huge surge in the E-ring was observed in early 2004
on approach.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Enceladus could not have been erupting for 4.5 billion years. It speaks
strongly against an old solar system and supports the Biblical account.)
Air is mainly nitrogen (78.1%) and oxygen (20.1%). There is much less
helium (0.0005%). But this is still a lot of helium—3.71 billion tonnes.
However, since 67 grams of helium escape from the earth’s crust into the
atmosphere every second, it would have taken about two million years for
the current amount of helium to build up, even if there had been none at the
beginning. Evolutionists believe the earth is over 2,500 times older—4.5
billion years
(Helium is a good proof that the earth is not billions of years old. God
created the world with a certain amount of helium and we have gained a
little bit since then.)
The amount of helium in the air and in rocks is not consistent with the
earth’s being billions of years old, as believed by evolutionists and
progressive creationists. Rather it is good scientific evidence for a short age,
as taught by a straightforward reading of Genesis.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:889
The measured flux, or rate of introduction, of helium from the crust of the
earth into the atmosphere is estimated to be 2 x 10(6) atoms per cm(2) per
second (13 million helium atoms per square inch each second). On the other
hand, the estimated flux, or theoretical rate of escape, of helium from the
atmosphere to space due to thermal escape is 5 x 10(4) atoms per cm(2) per
second (about 0.3 million atoms per square inch each second). Other escape
mechanisms such as the polar wind, solar wind sweeping, and hot-ion
exchange have not been found to be important contributors to the loss of
helium in space. Therefore, the helium in the atmosphere has been
accumulating at a very rapid rate. The current measured column density of
helium of in the atmosphere is 1.1 x 10(20) atoms per cm(2). If the earth’s
atmosphere at the current estimated rate, then the present density of helium
in the atmosphere would have accumulated in less than only 1.8 million
years. Of course, this is not to say that this is the age of the earth’s
atmosphere, but 1.8 million years is more than 2,500 times shorter than the
presumed age of the earth of more than 4.5 billion years
Helium is pouring into the atmosphere from radioactive decay, but not much
is escaping. But the total amount in the atmosphere is only 1/2000th of that
expected if the atmosphere were really billions of years old.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Now, of course, they will always say that lots of helium escapes, howeve,r
that’s not the case since only a small amount can get away.)
A very few atoms travel much faster than the average, but still the amount of
helium escaping into space is only about 1/40th the amount entering the
atmosphere. Other escape mechanisms are also inadequate to account for the
small amount of helium in the air, about 1/2000th the amount expected after
the alleged billions of years.
The only way around this problem is to assume that the helium is escaping
into space. But for this to happen, the helium atoms must be moving fast
enough to escape the earth’s gravity (i.e., above the escape velocity).
Collisions between atoms slow them down, but above a critical height
(the exobase) of about 500 kilometres (300 miles) above the earth, collisions
are very rare. Atoms crossing this height have a chance of escaping if they
are moving fast enough—at least 10.75 kilometres per second (24,200 miles
per hour).
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(While some helium does escape, it is a very small amount. And when you
add those numbers up you figure out that we still only have 1/2000th of the
helium we should have if the earth is 4.5 billion years old like biological
evolution needs it to be. Helium is proof of a young earth.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:890
Making this helium problem worse for uniformitarians is the discovery that
there are large volumes of helium in the earth’s crust that have no been
derived by radioactive decay, but instead are considering primordial, that is,
they have been present inside the earth since its beginning. This means there
is even more helium to escape through the earth’s crustal rocks into the
atmosphere than just the helium that has been generated by radioactive
decay. It also means that if the earth is 4.5 billion years old there has been
even more helium that has needed to escape into outer space from the earth’s
atmosphere by this postulated heating in the outermost atmosphere. On the
contrary the presence of this primordial helium only serves to suggest that
the maximum age of the atmosphere measured by helium accumulation is
much less than the calculated 1.8 million years.
(Geologists have now found more helium leaking into the atmosphere from
this “Primordial” Helium. If there was more helium leaking into the
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
atmosphere than originally thought that would mean the age derived for the
earth would be even younger when this is taken into account.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:890
The usual method used by old-earth advocates, to avoid this helium evidence
for a young atmosphere and earth, is to assume that the enormous quantities
of helium generated during past eons somehow attained the required escape
velocity, overcame gravity and escaped from the atmosphere completely into
space. However this requires temperatures in the outermost portions of the
atmosphere that are extremely high, much higher than those required for all
the necessary helium to reach escape velocity
(Some will try to convince you that in the past managed to escape out of the
atmosphere at a higher rate than today. This is not the case.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:889
(Old earth believers who have studied the topic will admit that this is still a
very serious problem for them.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:887
uranium also contain large amounts of helium. Even the deepest and hottest
zircons (at 197C or 387F) contained far more helium in them than expected,
given the uranium-lead radioisotope “age” for the zircon crystals of 1.5
billions years. At the time of that study, no experimental measurement of the
leakage or diffusion rate of helium from zircons was available. But it was
still possible to calculate that in some of the zircon crystals, up to 58 percent
of the helium that would have been generated from uranium decay over 1.5
billion years was still present in them.
Uranium and thorium generate helium atoms as they decay to lead. A study
published in the Journal of Geophysical Research showed that such helium
produced in zircon crystals in deep, hot Precambrian granitic rock has not
had time to escape.25 Though the rocks contain 1.5 billion years worth of
nuclear decay products, newly-measured rates of helium loss from zircon
show that the helium has been leaking for only 6,000 (± 2000) years.26 This
is not only evidence for the youth of the earth, but also for episodes of
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:887
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:887
There is so much helium still elft in these zircons that based on the measured
rate of helium diffusion from zircons, these zircon crystals have an average
helium diffusion age of only 6,000 (+-2000) years
(Helium-Zircon is probably the best proof that the earth is young. The
amount of Helium leaking has not been shown to be able to change
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:888
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:888
It has been suggested that perhaps helium has instead diffused into the
zircon crystals from outside sources, thus giving them this incorrect young
diffusion age. However, such criticism ignores the experimental
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Out side sources do not affect the Helium-Zircon dating method. It is still
by far the most reliable methods known.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:888
(There has been no charge in the generation of helium over history. This is
by far the most stable and trustworthy dating method we know of, and it
agrees with the Biblical model of the age of the earth.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:888
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Another critic has suggested that there could have been resistance to the
diffusion of helium out of the zircon crystals at the boundary or interface
between the zircon crystal and the surrounding biotite flakes. This resistance
would stop the helium from diffusing out of the zircon crystals, and cause
the retention of anomalous high helium concentrations. However, this
desperate postulation was also easily refuted, because the zircon crystals are
always found sitting in between the parallel stacked sheets that make up the
biotite flakes. Therefore, there is an intrinsic weakness within the biotite
flakes that would have in fact made it easier for helium to leak out of the
zircon crystals between the biotite sheets into the biotite flakes. Thus, all
available evidence confirms that the true age of the zircon crystal, and
granitic rock containing them, is not 1.5 billion years, but only 6.000+-2,000
years.
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Jupiter’s larger moons, Ganymede, Io, and Europa, have magnetic fields,
which they should not have if they were billions of years old, because they
have solid cores and so no dynamo could generate the magnetic fields. This
is consistent with creationist Humphreys’ predictions.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Volcanic activity and magnetic fields prove moons to be young in our solar
system and are consistent with a Biblical view.)
9. Jupiter and Saturn energy radiation proves young solar system (Evidence)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
The giant gas planets Jupiter and Saturn radiate more energy than they
receive from the sun, suggesting a recent origin. Jupiter radiates almost
twice as much energy as it receives from the sun, indicating that it may be
less than 1 % of the presumed 4.5 billion years old solar system.
From the laws of physics one can show that the moon should be receding
from the earth. From the same laws one can show that the moon would have
never survived a nearness to the earth of less than 11,500 miles. That
distance is known as the Roche limit.1The tidal forces of the earth on a
satellite of the moon's dimensions would break up the satellite into
something like the rings of Saturn. Hence the receding moon was never that
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
close to the earth. The present speed of recession of the moon is known. If
one multiplies this recession speed by the presumed evolutionary age, the
moon would be much farther away from the earth than it is, even if it had
started from the earth. It could not have been receding for anything like the
age demanded by the doctrine of evolution. There is as yet no tenable
alternative explanation that will yield an evolutionary age of 4 billion years
or more for the moon.
The moon is slowly receding from the earth at about 1-1/2 inches (4cm) per
year, and the rate would have been greater in the past. But even if the moon
had started receding from being in contact with the earth, it would have
taken only 1.37 billion years to reach its present distance. This give a
maximum possible age of the moon – not actual age.
The age of the earth and moon can not be as old as required in the doctrine
of evolution, as has been shown when the great laws of physics are applied
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Tidal friction causes the moon to recede from the earth at 4 cm per year. It
would have been greater in the past when the moon and earth were closer
together. The moon and earth would have been in catastrophic proximity
(Roche limit) at less than a quarter of their supposed age.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(This is probably the most common argument and most disputed among
young and old earth believers. This is a massive proof that the earth is not
billions of years old. This presents an absolute maximum.)
Being much closer in a more-distant past, the moon would have caused
larger tidal bulges, creating a greater “pulling” force, increasing the angular
momentum; thus the moon receded at a much greater speed (as shown by the
red arrows). With the earth where it is today tidal bulges are much smaller
(than the theoretical past), making the “pulling” force smaller; thus the
angular momentum is much less, resulting in the present and seemingly
more-constant recession rate of 4 cm per year. The moon could never have
been closer than 18,400 km (11,500 miles), known as the Roche Limit,
because Earth’s tidal forces (i.e., the result of different gravitational forces
on different parts of the moon) would have shattered it.
The recession of the moon is not constant over time. It would have been
faster in the past. So, it is incorrect to assume that the rate has always been 4
cm/year.
(Due to the laws of physics, the moon would have receded more in the past
than it is now.)
Hansen's models assumed an Earth with one single continent, placed at the
pole for one set of models, and at the equator for another (the location is
chosen to simplify the computations, but the basic idea of a one-continent
Earth may not be all that bad; Piper, 1982 suggests that our current multi-
continent Earth is actually abnormal, and that one continent is the norm)
(Old earth believers have a response, but their response relies on the
assumption that all the continents used to be connected some 300 million
years ago, which has many flaws in itself.)
It takes but one proof of a young age for the moon or the earth to completely
refute the doctrine of evolution. Based upon reasonable postulates, great
scope of observational data, and fundamental laws of physics there is proof
that the moon and the earth are too young for the presumed evolution to
have taken place.
age skeletons should still be around (and certainly the buried artifacts). Yet
only a few thousand have been found.
Cites “not enough Stone Age skeletons” as one of his reasons to believe in a
young earth.
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
“Stone age” human skeletons and artifacts. There are not enough for
100,000 years of a human population of just one million, let alone more
people.
(There is nowhere near enough skeletons to account for man being on earth
for more than 10,000 years. This is proof that maybe we have not been here
more than that - just like the Bible says we have not.)
Every year, rivers8 and other sources9 dump over 450 million tons of
sodium into the ocean. Only 27% of this sodium manages to get back out of
the sea each year.9,10 As far as anyone knows, the remainder simply
accumulates in the ocean. If the sea had no sodium to start with….
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:880
All observations suggest that all of the incoming sodium that isn’t returned
to the land simply accumulates in the ocean. Thus, if the oceans originally
contained no sodium, then the sodium in them today would have
accumulated in less than 42 million years.
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Amount of salt in the sea…. assuming zero starting salinity and all rates of
input and removal so as to maximize the time taken to accumulate all the
salt, the maximum age of the oceans, 62 million years, is less than 1/50 of
the age evolutionists claim for the oceans. This suggests that the age of the
earth is radically less also.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:880
If input and outputs rates are used in the calculations that are most generous
to evolutionary scenarios, then the estimated maximum age is still only 62
millions years.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
The amount of salt in the world’s oldest lake contradicts its supposed
age and suggests an age more consistent with its formation after Noah’s
Flood, which is consistent with a young age of the earth.
(Salt in oceans and lakes proves that the oceans and earth cannot be billions
of years old, and are more consistent with a Biblical view. Even if we give
old earth believers the benefit of the doubt and make situations as generous
as possible, it is still only a fraction of the time they claim)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Origin of agriculture. Secular dating puts it at about 10,000 years and yet
that same chronology says that modern man has supposedly been around for
at least 200,000 years. Surely someone would have worked out much sooner
how to sow seeds of plants to produce food.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:900
185,000 years during the Stone Age, before discovering agriculture as little
as 5,000 years ago
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:901
(While this does not prove the age of the earth itself, it does show how
unrealistic it is that man has been around for over 10,000 years. Which, if
man is less than 10,000 years old, would be consistent with a Biblical
worldview.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/where-are-all-the-people
Evolutionists claim that mankind evolved from apes about a million years
ago. If the population had grown at just 0.01% per year since then (doubling
only every 7,000 years), there could be 10-43 people today—that’s a number
with 43 zeros after it. This number is so big that not even the Texans have a
word for it! To try to put this number of people in context, say each
individual is given ‘standing room only’ of about one square metre per
person. However, the land surface area of the whole Earth is ‘only’ 1.5 x 10-
14 square metres. If every one of those square metres were made into a
world just like this one, all these worlds put together would still ‘only’ have
a surface area able to fit 10-28 people in this way.
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/where-are-all-the-people
(Many times old earth scientists will reply with population statistics saying
how the population is going down right now. To them that means it has
been going up and down through out history. This argument is flawed
because it assumes humans had two resources throughout history that we
have today; birth control and abortion. We know this is false.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:903
(Over history world population have always been rising, this further
supports the evidence that the earth would have been massively over-
populated with a evolutionary scenario.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(We are currently looking into some responses to this topic; they are out
there and there is still researching being done on both sides of the debate.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
The amount of sediment on the sea floors at current rates of land erosion
would accumulate in just 12 million years; a blink of the eye compared to
the supposed age of much of the ocean floor of up to 3 billion years.
Each year, water and winds erode about 20 billion tons of dirt and rock from
the continents and deposit it in the ocean.6 This material accumulates as
loose sediment on the hard basaltic (lava-formed) rock of the ocean floor.
The average depth of all the sediment in the whole ocean is less than 400
meters.7 The main way known to remove the sediment from the ocean floor
is by plate tectonic subduction. That is, sea floor slides slowly (a few
cm/year) beneath the continents, taking some sediment with it. According to
secular scientific literature, that process presently removes only 1 billion
tons per year.7 As far as anyone knows, the other 19 billion tons per year
simply accumulate. At that rate, erosion would deposit the present mass of
sediment in less than 12 million years. Yet according to evolutionary theory,
erosion and plate subduction have been going on as long as the oceans have
existed, an alleged three billion years. If that were so, the rates above imply
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:883
There is only one known mechanism by which sediments are removed from
the ocean flood and that is during subduction of the ocean floor at trenches.
As the sea floor slides slowly (a few cm per year) beneath the continents at
the trenches it is estimated that about 1 billion tons of sediment per year is
subducted into the mantle with the sea floor. As far as is known, the other 23
billion tons of sediment per year simply accumulate on the ocean floors. At
that rate of sediments accumulating on the ocean flood as a result of erosion
the continents would have accumulated in approximately 12 million years.
(Sediments on the sea flood prove the earth is very young - even with
removal mechanisms.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
17. Spiral arm galaxies prove young universe and earth (Evidence)
The stars of our own galaxy, the Milky Way, rotate about the galactic center
with different speeds, the inner ones rotating faster than the outer ones. The
observed rotation speeds are so fast that if our galaxy were more than a few
hundred million years old, it would be a featureless disc of stars instead of
its present spiral shape.1 Yet our galaxy is supposed to be at least 10
billion years old. Evolutionists call this “the winding-up dilemma,” which
they have known about for fifty years. They have devised many theories to
try to explain it, each one failing after a brief period of popularity. The same
“winding-up” dilemma also applies to other galaxies.
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
The ageing of spiral galaxies (much less than 200 million years) is not
consistent with their supposed age of many billions of years.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(The spiral arm galaxies prove a young universe and solar system and thus
prove a young earth.)
Faint sun proves the solar system and earth can’t be billions of
years old
Dr Danny R. Faulkner – (Has a B.S. (Math), M.S. (Physics), M.A. and Ph.D.
(Astronomy, Indiana University). He is Full Professor at the University of South
Carolina)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v11/i3/neutrinos.asp
maintain that life appeared on the Earth around 3.8 billion years ago. Since
then, the Sun would have brightened about 25%.... we find that a 25%
increase in solar luminosity increases the average temperature of the Earth
by about 18°C. Since the current average temperature of the Earth is 15°C,
the average temperature of the Earth 3.8 billion years ago would have been
below freezing (-3°C). Thus when life supposedly was just beginning, much
of the Earth would have been frozen…. If the Earth had ever been mostly
covered with ice year round, then its average temperature would have been
even cooler than the -3°C mentioned above. The increased ice cover would
increase the reflectivity of the Earth, reducing the heat absorbed from the
Sun.
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
(The fact that the temperatures would be too cold for life to exist proves that
life did not evolve 3.5 billion years ago. Instead this lines up with a Biblical
world view that our solar system is young.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr Danny R. Faulkner – (Has a B.S. (Math), M.S. (Physics), M.A. and Ph.D.
(Astronomy, Indiana University). He is Full Professor at the University of South
Carolina)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v11/i3/neutrinos.asp
Mars is a very cold planet today, yet there is abundant evidence that, early in
its history, liquid water once flowed on its surface, indicating that Mars was
much warmer. Most researchers say this happened about 3.8 billion years
ago. However, at that time the Sun would have been 25% fainter than today.
Therefore, the early faint Sun paradox provides a very different problem for
Mars: why was that planet much warmer when the Sun was at its faintest?
(Mars proves also that the solar system can not be 4.5 billion years old.)
nearby parts of our galaxy in which we could observe such gas and dust
shells contain only about 200 supernova remnants. That number is consistent
with only about 7,000 years worth of supernovas.3
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:868
The stark reality is that we actually observe only 200 such supernova
remnants, a number that is totally consistent with a 6,000-7,000 years old
galaxy, and , therefore, and earth of the same age.
(There are not enough super Nova remnants for the solar system and
universe to be billions of years old. The solar system we find is in line with
a 7000 year old solar system like the Bible clearly teaches.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
The rate of expansion and size of supernovas indicates that all studied are
young (less than 10,000 years).
(Super Nova rings also prove that they all blew up within the last 10,000
years, confirming the truth in the Bible.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:868
(If the universe were really billions of years old we should be find many
super nova remnants to support that position. Yet we do not.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:869
The only solution offered by astronomers are conjectural and assume flaws
in their own estimates. However, there is no mystery about the assumed
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(There has been no good reply by people who believe in an old universe to
this argument. Super novas are very strong evidence that our solar system
and earth are indeed young like the Bible says.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
(There is not enough Methane; it’s as simple as that. Old earth scientists
have tried to come up with mechanisms to solve this problem, and while they
have “Theories” none of them have been proven true. All we know is that
unless a mechanism can be proven, methane proves Titus and the solar
system are young, just as the Bible says.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:881
The average height reduction for all the continents across the earth’s surface
is estimated to be about 2.4 inches (61 mm) per thousand years. This average
rate of land erosion might seem quite slow, but it needs to be seen from the
perspective of the uniformitarian geologic timescale, and the current
thinking that there has been exposed land surface available for erosion for
3.5 billion years. As has already been pointed out, using an estimated
average erosion rate of 61 mm per thousand years, the North American
continent would be eroded flat to sea level in a mere 10 million years.
(Current rates of land erosion show that if earth had been around for the past
10 millions years, all the continents should have eroded flat.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:882
This question is even more acute when one considers mountains ranges such
as the Caledonides of Western Europe and the Appalachians of eastern
North America, which geologist assume are several hundred million years
old. Why are these ranges still here today if they are so old? After all, rates
of erosion are fast in mountainous regions, with erosion rates as high as
1,000 mm per thousand years in the Himalayas
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Land erosion should have removed the oldest mountains that we see today.
Yet these mountain ranges are still present today. Obviously they can not be
millions and billions of years old.)
Old earth believers can’t solve erosion problem
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:882
(There has been no valid explanation on how the earth can be billions of
years old and still be the way it is today. Land erosion is powerful evidence
that the earth has to be young like the Bible says.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:885
volcanoes, suggested that in 3.5 billion years the entire earth should have
been covered by a thick blanket of volcanic materials reaching a hight of 7
km.
(If the earth were billions of years old we should be able to find much more
volcanic ash than we actually do. This is proof the earth is not billions of
years old.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:886
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:886
No matter which way the evidence is viewed, volcanoes simply could not
have been erupting for the 2.5 to 3.5 billion years during which the strata
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(The volcanic amounts that we find around the world prove that the earth
can not be billions of years old. There is no valid explanation on why we
have so little volcanic ash compared to what we should have if the earth was
indeed billions of years old.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:886
The removal of this volcanic material by erosion does not offer a good
solution to this inconsistency for the long uniformitarian geological ages,
because erosion would only transfer the volcanic materials from one place to
another. Furthermore removal of volcanic materials would also eliminate the
other rock layers containing it.
(Erosion would only move the volcanic materials around, not destroy them.
Erosion can not solve the problem for people who believe in an old earth.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:886
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Within the biblical framework, much of the earth’s continental crust would
have been built catastrophically during the Creation Week, and in the year-
long flood cataclysm. The evidence for continental crustal growth via
volcanic activity is most definitely consistent with that biblical frame work
for earth history
(The Biblical framework can accurately account for all the volcanic
materials that we see present in the world.)
23. Amount of human graves proves mankind has not been around long
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:899
Evolutionary anthropologists insist that man has been around much longer
than even the biblical timescale back to creation since man supposedly
evolved from his hominid ancestors. The latest suggestion is that Homo
sapiens existed for at least 185,000 years before they developed agriculture.
During this long period of human cultural development, called the Stone
Age, the world population of humans is said to have been roughly constant,
between 1 and 10 million people. Of course, all through that time those
people buried their dead, and often with artifacts. According to that scenario,
it is easily calculated that these Stone Age people would have buried at least
8 billion bodies. If the evolutionary timescale is correct, then buried human
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
bones should be able to survive intact for much longer than 200,000 years.
Thus, many of the supposed 8 billion buried Stone Age skeletons should
have survived to still be easily found near the present land surface, along
with all their buried artifacts. However, only a few thousand have been
found. This must imply that the Stone Age was much shorter than
evolutionists believe, perhaps only a few hundred years in many areas.
(If man had been here as long as evolution says then we should find a whole
lot more graves than we actually do. This is a good indication that man has
not been around for hundreds of thousands of years.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:899
(Interesting fact is that there is no real record written down before about
3000 BC, right around the time of the Biblical flood.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:902
(Historical records show that mankind has not been around for the hundreds
of thousands of years that evolutionists say. Instead it lines up with the
Biblical world framework of a world wide flood a few thousand years ago.)
Here we will be looking at a few different evidences from geology that some
scientists use as proof of an old earth and looking at some geological and
historical evidence that supports the Biblical flood account
1. Rapid formations can happen and support the Biblical flood (Evidence)
2. Clastic Pipes don’t prove millions of years (Evidence)
3. Coal-Oil-Opals can form quickly and is not proof of an old age
(Evidence)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
1. Rapid formations can happen and support the Biblical flood (Evidence)
Yes, canyons can form rapidly. A good maxim to remember is that, "It either takes a little
water and a long time, or a lot of water and a short time." But then, we've never seen a
canyon form slowly with just a little water. Whenever scientific observations are made,
it's a lot of water and a short time.
How rapidly can a canyon form? Mount St. Helens has provided some clues. Numerous
features there indicate the required erosion was rapid, contrary to conventional
geomorphic theory.
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
(One common argument is that canyons, like Grand Canyon, take millions of
years to form. But all we ever see in history is that they form quickly, not
over long periods of time.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
NASA scientists accept that there have been “catastrophic floods” on Mars
that carved out canyons although no liquid water is present today. But they
deny that a global flood happened on earth, where there is enough water to
cover the whole planet to a depth of 1.7 miles… If it weren’t for the fact that
the Bible teaches it, they probably wouldn’t have any problem with a global
flood on earth.
(Many astronomers believe that floods were responsible for rapidly forming
the huge canyons on mars. Why on earth can they not come to the same
conclusion for earth?)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(This argument is not brought up much at all, but if it is you will be able to
argue against it. Clastic pipes do not take millions of years to form. They
are very in line with a young earth Biblical view.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Experiments show that with conditions mimicking natural forces, opals form
quickly, in a matter of weeks, not millions of years, as had been claimed.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(It does not take millions of years for them to form. This is a rare argument
to be brought up, but in case it is, I wanted you to have something to go off
of and use.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University
of Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Experiments show that with conditions mimicking natural forces, oil forms
quickly; it does not need millions of years, consistent with an age of
thousands of years.
(There are many processes to actually form oil from dead animals or plants
these days; they can do it in factories in a matter of minutes. Look into
Thermal Depolymerization for more on this topic, it’s pretty interesting
stuff.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Experiments show that with conditions mimicking natural forces, coal forms
quickly; in weeks for brown coal to months for black coal. It does not need
millions of years.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Many geological processes can happen much more quickly than is conventionally
thought. For instance, mainstream science believes that coal, diamonds, and oil require
vast amounts of time to develop, when they in fact can form in under a year
Among the most fascinating types of fossils associated with coal seams are
upright tree trunks which often penetrate tens of feet perpendicular to
stratification. These upright trees are frequently encountered in strata
associated with coal, and on rare occasions are found in the coal. In each
case the sediments must have amassed in a short time to cover the tree
before it could rot and fall down. One's first impression may be that these
upright trees are in their original growth position, but several lines of
evidence indicate otherwise. Some of the trees penetrate the strata
diagonally, while others are found upside down. Sometimes an upright
tree appears to be rooted in growth position in a stratum which is entirely
penetrated by a second upright tree. The hollow trunks are commonly filled
with sediment unlike the immediately surrounding rocks.
(These trees in the coal beds indicate and prove that they did not take
millions of years to form and that they formed quickly. This is what you
would get with a worldwide flood that would bury all the forests and plant
life on the earth in a matter of days and turn them into coal.)
Coal was formed quickly – Boulders prove it
(Their boulders also prove that the coal had to be formed quickly like the
Bible says. This is proof against the millions of years that old earth
scientists will tell you. The old earth scientist have no explanation how coal
could form quickly, only the creationists do.)
The nature of the process of metamorphosis of peat to form coal has been
disputed for many years. One theory suggests that time is the major factor in
coalification. The theory, however, has become unpopular because it has
been recognized that there is no systematic increase in the metamorphic rank
of coal with increasing age. There are some blatant contradictions: lignites
representing low metamorphic rank occur in some of the oldest coal-bearing
strata while anthracites representing the highest metamorphic rank occur in
some of the youngest strata.
A third theory (by far the most popular) suggests the temperature is the
important factor in coal metamorphosis. Geological examples (igneous
intrusions into coal seams and underground mine fires) demonstrate that
elevated temperature can cause coalification. Laboratory experiments have
also been quite successful. One experiment8 produced a substance like
anthracite in a few minutes by using a rapid heating process with much of
the heat being generated by the cellulosic material being altered. Thus, the
metamorphosis of coal does not require millions of years of applied pressure
and heat, but can be produced by quick heating.
(This is how coal is formed; vast amounts of heat and pressure - like you
would get during the flood when all the forests were buried.)
The Bible view can account for all the coal reserves
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:961
If all today’s land surfaces were covered with lush vegetation, then the
volume of such vegetations would be at least doubled, and with minimal
compaction, thus accounting for up to 50 percent or more of the know coal
reserves
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:
Far more of the earth’s surface was covered with lush vegetation in the pre-
Flood world, so fewer years of vegetation growth would have been required
to provide the column of vegetation necessary and stored chemical energy,
equivalent to the stored energy value of today’s known coal beds.
(our current land mass could hold half of the coal reserves we see around
the world, if the pre-flood world was different like the Bible says all the coal
reserves can easily be accounted for.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 2 – Page:
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Thus, there is nor reason to reject the Flood as a possible framework for the
formation of the great oil deposits of the world. The Character of petroleum
deposits, and such field and experimental observation as have been
accumulated regarding the origin, generation, and migration of oil,
harmonize perfectly well within the year-long global cataclysm only about
4,500 years ago in the biblical framework for earth history.
(The Biblical framework can also account for all the oil in the world)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
(Think about it, if the layers were millions of years old, we ought to have
some markings between them called ephemeral markings. Yet we don’t find
these. This is just proof that all the layers were deposited quickly and there
was no time for these markings to occur).
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
(Don’t you think that maybe once in a few million years it ought to rain?
The fact the there are no erosion lines between these layers proves that they
all formed quickly during the flood just like the Bible said. If they were old
we would have these markings as proof, but we don’t.)
(As we can obviously conclude it does not take millions of years for things to
petrify, it happens quickly. Petrifaction is also an interesting thing to look up
in reference to the geologic column and how there are petrified trees
running through the layers showing that they could not be from different
ages.)
Dr Don Batten (He holds a B.Sc.Agr. with first-class honors from the University of
Sydney and a Ph.D. in plant physiology from the University of Sydney.)
http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Dr. Stephen Meyers, (Meyer earned his Ph.D. in the History and Philosophy of
Science from Cambridge University for a dissertation on the history of origin of life
biology and the methodology of the historical sciences. Previously he worked as a
geophysicist with the Atlantic Richfield Company after earning his undergraduate
degrees in Physics and Geology.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v9/i4/stalactites.asp
(The animal would have decomposed quickly were it not for these
stalagmites forming quickly. This is very strong evidence that they do not
take millions of years to form and they form very quickly just like the
Biblical timeline supports.)
Dr. Stephen Meyers, (Ph.D. in the History and Philosophy of Science from
Cambridge University his undergraduate degrees in Physics and Geology. )
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v9/i4/stalactites.asp
(Modern day bridges and tunnels that we know when they were build.
Obviously these can’t take millions of years to form like some people like to
claim)
(They have performed accurate laboratory tests and have proven the rapid
formations of stalactites.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
A large stalagmite like Great Dome may contain 100 million cubic
centimeters of calcite, which, if accumulated in 4,000 years, would require a
deposition rate of 25,000 cubic centimeters (67,000 grams) of calcite yearly.
If the dripping water is assumed to deposit 0.5 gram of calcite per liter,
133,000 liters of water would have to drip over the stalagmite each year.
Because about 6,000 drops comprise 1 liter, it would take about 800 million
drops of water per year to form the stalagmite. This works out to 25 drops of
water per second; which is a considerable flow. Whether a stalagmite would
be deposited in the above hypothetical situation is not known. One would
want to carefully examine the assumptions and the complex environmental
factors which might affect stalagmite growth.
(Measurements from the biggest formations show that it is possible for them
to have formed since the flood. Stalactites and stalagmites are not proof for
billions of years. If you actually look at the formation rate that we can
observe, you will actually see that it support a young earth as the Bible
teaches in Genesis.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
One of the strongest evidences for the global flood which annihilated all people on Earth
except for Noah and his family, has been the ubiquitous presence of flood legends in the
folklore of people groups from around the world. And the stories are all so similar. Local
geography and cultural aspects may be present but they all seem to be telling the same
story. Over the years I have collected more than 200 of these stories, originally reported
by various missionaries, anthropologists, and ethnologists. While the differences are not
always trivial, the common essence of the stories is instructive as compiled below:
Putting them all back together, the story would read something like this: Once there was a
worldwide flood, sent by God to judge the wickedness of man. But there was one
righteous family which was forewarned of the coming flood. They built a boat on which
they survived the flood along with the animals. As the flood ended, their boat landed on a
high mountain from which they descended and repopulated the whole earth. Of course
the story sounds much like the Biblical story of the great flood of Noah's day. The most
similar accounts are typically from middle eastern cultures, but surprisingly similar
legends are found in South America and the Pacific Islands and elsewhere….
Anthropologists will tell you that a myth is often the faded memory of a real event.
Details may have been added, lost, or obscured in the telling and retelling, but the kernel
of truth remains. When two separate cultures have the same "myth" in their body of
folklore, their ancestors must have either experienced the same event, or they both
descended from a common ancestral source which itself experienced the event.
(It is pretty self explanatory; almost all cultures around the world have flood
legends, and I would assume that is because there was a flood.)
9. Fossil graveyards indicate a flood
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n2/world-graveyard
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n2/world-graveyard
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n2/world-graveyard
(All the mixed fossil graveyards with animals from all around the world that
would never live together is proof of a world-wide flood)
Sometimes the fossils of many dinosaurs are found all jumbled together in a
huge fossil graveyard, just as you would expect if they had been tossed
around in a gigantic flood.
Fossils of dinosaurs and many other animals have been found in all parts of
the world; many have been dug up in places where they could not survive
the climate that exists there today. How could they have existed there?
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
10. Fossil marine life found where they should never be (indicate a flood)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v2/n4/geologic-evidences-part-one
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
We find fossils of sea creatures in rock layers that cover all the continents.
For example, most of the rock layers in the walls of Grand Canyon (more
than a mile above sea level) contain marine fossils. Fossilized shellfish are
even found in the Himalayas.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/high-dry-sea-creatures
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/high-dry-sea-creatures
Marine fossils are also found high in the Himalayas, the world’s tallest
mountain range, reaching up to 29,029 feet (8,848 m) above sea level.3 For
example, fossil ammonites (coiled marine cephalopods) are found in
limestone beds in the Himalayas of Nepal.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/high-dry-sea-creatures
Fossils of sea creatures are found in rock layers high above sea level. This is
just one more evidence of the truth of God’s Word.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/high-dry-sea-creatures
The fossilized sea creatures and plants found in rock layers thousands of feet
above sea level are thus silent testimonies to the ocean waters that flooded
over the continents, carrying billions of sea creatures, which were then
buried in the sediments these ocean waters deposited. This is how billions of
dead marine creatures were buried in rock layers all over the earth.
(Fossil marine life is found where they could never get to unless there was a
world-wide flood that put them there just like the Bible says)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n1/high-dry-sea-creatures
Could the continents have then sunk below today’s sea level, so that the
ocean waters flooded over them? No! The continents are made up of lighter
rocks that are less dense than the rocks on the ocean floor and rocks in the
mantle beneath the continents. The continents, in fact, have an automatic
tendency to rise, and thus “float” on the mantle rocks beneath, well above
the ocean floor rocks.4 This explains why the continents today have such
high elevations compared to the deep ocean floor, and why the ocean basins
can hold so much water.
(Saying the continents were below sea level at one point is the evolutionists
way of trying to explain these fossils. However it is not possible that the
continents were ever below sea level.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n2/world-graveyard
Some fish were buried alive and fossilized so quickly in the geologic record
that they were “caught in the act” of eating their last meal (figure 12). Then
there is the classic example of a female marine reptile, an ichthyosaur, about
6 feet (2 m) long, found fossilized at the moment of giving birth to her baby
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n2/world-graveyard
(Fossilization had to happen quickly. There are many examples of this. Jelly
fish are all soft tissue and can not fossilize unless it is very quick.)
Here we will discuss problems with biological evolution and rebut some of
the arguments made for it
The battle rages on all fronts to preserve the unborn baby. Christians are
lobbying and protesting across the nation to preserve the inherent right to
life. However, those in the scientific and medical community have continued
to depersonalize the humanity of the unborn with supposed findings based
on evolutionary philosophy.
(Just to get this straight; evolution is the reason that abortion was accepted
in society and the reason millions of children are murdered.)
yolk sac produces the first blood cells. All of these morphological
phenomena are necessary stages in normal human development.
(All the claims made have been refuted about the “fetus” evolving through
different evolutionary phases. Even the National Center for Science
Education agrees with this point now and they are the most pro-evolution
organization you will get.)
http://www.forerunner.com/forerunner/X0717_Abortion__Evolution.html
Dr. Peter Singer in Pediatrics magazine ten years after the 1973 Roe vs.
Wade decision expresses this ethic: “If we compare a severely defective
human infant with a dog or a pig … we will often find the nonhuman to have
superior capacities … only the fact that the defective infant is a member of
the species homo sapiens leads it to be treated differently from the dog or
pig. But species membership alone is not relevant … If we can put aside the
obsolete and erroneous notion of the sanctity of all human life, we may start
to look at human life as it really is: the quality of life that each human being
has or can obtain.“
(Evolution degrades human life like nothing else. If evolution was true then
life is meaningless and there is no point to your existence.)
Human life no longer seems special. We now compare our children to pigs
or dogs, and whichever has the greater ability should be allowed to live. As
implied by philosopher Michael L. Tooley, abortion is morally permissible
since “a newborn baby does not possess the concept of a continuing self,
anymore than a newborn kitten possesses such a concept.“2 Winston L.
Duke, a nuclear physicist, continues along the same lines: “It should be
recognized that not all men are human … It would seem to be inhumane to
kill an adult chimpanzee than a newborn baby, since the chimpanzee has
greater mental awareness
(Some people say the way we need to decide what is living is just based on
mental awareness; we are comparing a living human being child to an
animal because of its mental awareness. All humans were made in the
image of God and abortion is murder.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
For instance, the current debate in this country over abortion will not be
"won" by the practical reasons for the practice nor by some philosophical
ethic concerned with freedom-of-choice nor by a formal religious belief
which considers abortion to be murder. Rather, the issue will be resolved, if
it is resolved at all, by the evolution of a collective cultural "decision" on the
matter.
(Don’t just wait for the “Cultural evolution” to fight against abortion. If
you heard there was someone going around killing little kids you would
want to have that stopped. Well that’s exactly what’s happening through
abortion; the murdering of little kids. Everyone should be involved in
helping stop this as much as possible.)
This is the actual case, for example, in chromosomal mutations that lead to
antibiotic resistance in bacteria, cell functions are routinely lost. The
resistance bacterium has not evolved. In fact it has digressed genetically and
is defective. Such a mutant stain is rapidly replaced by superior, natural
bacteria as soon as the antibiotic is removed.
(In the case of resistance, information overall is lost. This is not evolution
since, for evolution to work, we need new information and positive net
benefits.)
Although the mutant bacteria can survive well in the hospital environment,
the change has come at a cost. The altered protein is less efficient in
performing its normal function, making the bacteria less fit in an
environment without antibiotics. Typically, the non-mutant bacteria are
better able to compete for resources and reproduce faster than the mutant
form.
(This is not proof for evolution, there is nothing new created and overall it is
a net loss. Bacteria resistance does not prove evolution in any way.)
http://www.icr.org/article/how-can-geology-professor-believe-that-earth-young/
If Earth and the Universe are quite young, the implications are tremendous,
since all evolutionary theories are meaningless without immense time.
(One way that you can fight against biological evolution is by using the
arguments for a young earth. Evolutionists understand that if you take away
the millions and billions of years that they hide their evolution in, it’s not
possible. So a tactic you can use is to prove the earth is young and by doing
so prove that biological evolution did not have time to take place.)
“An organism’s genome is the sum total of all its genetic parts, including all
its chromosomes, genes, and nucleotide. A genome is an instruction manual
that specifies a particular form of life. The human genome is a manual that
instructs human cells to be human cells and the human body to be the human
body. There is no information system designed by man that can even begin
to compare to the simplest genome in complexity.”
“All this information is contained within a genomic package that is, in turn,
contained within a cell’s nucleus-a space much smaller than a speck of dust.
Each human body contains a galaxy of cells more than 100 trillion-and every
one of these cells has a complete set of instructions and its own highly-
prescribed duties. The human genome not only specifies the complexity of
our cells and our bodies, but also the functioning of our brains. The structure
and organization of our brains involves a level of organization entirely
beyond our comprehension”
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is
comparable with the chance that 'a tornado sweeping through a junk yard
might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein'."
Ernest Chain, Nobel Prize winner said – “To postulate that the development
and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations
seems to be a hypothesis based on no evidence and irreconcilable with the
facts. These classical evolutionary theories are a gross oversimplification of
an immensely complex and intricate mass of facts, and it amazes me that
they are swallowed so uncritically and readily, and for such a long time by
many scientists without a murmur of protest.
(Life in general, is far too complex for it to have evolved by random chance.
The brain is the most complex thing in the universe and evolutionists want
us to believe that by random chance it happened to evolve. Complexity is
more evidence that there was a Creator who is very wise and knows exactly
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
what He wants and what He is doing. Just as the Bible says, “In the
beginning God created” and God created everything so complex as proof of
His great wisdom.)
(Richard Dawkins himself even admits that life looks like it was designed
because of the mass amounts of complexity)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
In several papers genetic binding sites were analyzed using a Shannon information theory
approach. It was recently[1] claimed that these regulatory sequences could increase
information content through evolutionary processes starting from a random DNA
sequence, for which a computer simulation was offered as evidence. However,
incorporating neglected cellular realities and using biologically realistic parameter values
invalidate this claim. The net effect over time of random mutations spread throughout
genomes is an increase in randomness per gene and decreased functional optimality.
http://www.trueorigin.org/schneider.asp
(The computer models they use increase the chances of positive mutations
beyond what is natural. Any program that does not use realistic models as it
would be in the real world can not be used for proof of evolution.)
(The computer model had to use special intelligence to get the results they
wanted. You do not have special intelligence in the natural world to help if
evolution is the way that we got here)
Structural features of DNA may serve as relevant or incorrect binding sites. Where the
binding site is located is biologically critical, and there are various possibilities(15). A
legitimate simulation needs to mimic the trial and errors needed to identify a binding
address and all the attempts to create a useful cellular outcome under the control of such
binding interactions.
(The computer programs do not take this into account. This is a major
problem and is even more proof that these computer programs and
simulations are not proof for evolution)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The same protein may contain multiple recognizer sites which can be used for unrelated
binding purposes. Should a protein already have been fine-tuned for a specific function,
adding post facto another recognizer site without interfering with the geometry, folding
order and so on of the previous function would require a multitude of random trials.
Kenneth Patman
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i2/genetics.asp
Most mutations in the DNA are either silent (leading to no change at the
phenotypic level), lethal (leading to death of the organism), or slightly
deleterious (not altering phenotype sufficiently to be specifically detected by
any selection process).
Everything about the true distribution of mutations argues against their possible role in
forward evolution.
Even when one (Mutation) may be classified as beneficial in some specific sense, it is
still usually part of an over-all breakdown and erosion of information
The problem is simply that mutations, by definition, are rare errors in the
copying of the genetic code. They are genetic mistakes and, as a result, are
almost always negative or neutral in their effect.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The extinction of the human genome appears to be just as certain and deterministic as the
extinction of stars, the death or organisms, and the heat death of the universe.
(If humans have been alive for a very long time, we would have eventually
gone extinct. Everything tends towards disorder - just like the laws of
entropy say. Entropy proves that we could not have had living things
around for billions of years)
Bacteria can also become antibiotic resistant by gaining mutated DNA from
other bacteria. Unlike you and me, bacteria can swap DNA. But this still is
not an example of evolution in action. No new DNA is generated (a
requirement for molecules-to-man evolution), it is just moved around. It’s
like taking money from your left pocket and putting it into your right
pocket—it doesn’t make you wealthier. This mechanism of exchanging
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of gas
kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a two-
year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently served in
a number of university administrative
posts.)http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/hasnt-evolution-been-proven
(That is all Darwin found… finches producing finches, after their kind. This
was not proof that finches evolved from dinosaurs.)
Kenneth Patman
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i2/genetics.asp
Kenneth Patman
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i2/genetics.asp
Geneticists began breeding the fruit fly, Drosophila melanogaster, soon after
the turn of the century, and since 1910 when the first mutation was reported,
some 3,000 mutations have been identified.3 All of the mutations are
harmful or harmless; none of them produce a more successful fruit fly
(All mutations of fruit flies are either harmful to the fruit fly or they are
harmless - but not beneficial. We never see beneficial forward movement
because of a mutation.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of gas
kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a two-
year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently served in
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
It cannot be overemphasized that there are many places in the fossil record
where it is expected that plenty of intermediate forms should be found—yet
they are not there. All the evolutionists ever point to is a handful of highly
debatable transitional forms (e.g., horses), whereas they should be able to
show us thousands of incontestable examples.
Many do not find it hard to reject evolution, particularly with the fossil
record showing distinct categories of plants and animals with no hint of any
basic category changing into another.
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science)
http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
Scientists not only have been unable to find a single undisputed link that
clearly connects two of the hundreds of major family groups, but they have
not even been able to produce a plausible starting point for their hypothetical
evolutionary chain
The truth of the matter is that the fossil record shows no evidence of
transitional fossils and consequently does not accurately describe a large
class of observations.
(Charles Darwin even agrees that the lack of transitional fossils is the
biggest objection to his theory.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science)
http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of gas
kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a two-
year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently served in
a number of university administrative posts.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/hasnt-evolution-been-proven
If we look carefully at Miller’s experiment, we will see that what he did fails
to address the evolution of life. He took a mixture of gases (ammonia,
hydrogen, methane, and water vapor) and he passed an electric current
through them. He did this in order to reproduce the effect of lightning
passing through a mixture of gases that he thought might have composed the
earth’s atmosphere millions of years ago. As a result, he produced a mixture
of amino acids. Because amino acids are the building blocks of proteins and
proteins are considered to be the building blocks of living systems, Miller’s
experiment was hailed as proof that life had evolved by chance on the earth
millions of years ago. There are a number of objections to such a conclusion.
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of gas
kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a two-
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently served in
a number of university administrative posts.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/hasnt-evolution-been-proven
(It never happened. They did not create life in the lab, and they did not
prove that it would be possible for life to arise from non living material)
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of gas
kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a two-
year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently served in
a number of university administrative posts.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/hasnt-evolution-been-proven
There is no proof that the earth ever had an atmosphere composed of the
gases used by Miller in his experiment.
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of gas
kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a two-
year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently served in
a number of university administrative posts.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/hasnt-evolution-been-proven
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The next problem is that in Miller’s experiment he was careful to make sure
there was no oxygen present. If oxygen was present, then the amino acids
would not form. However, if oxygen was absent from the earth, then there
would be no ozone layer, and if there was no ozone layer the ultraviolet
radiation would penetrate the atmosphere and would destroy the amino acids
as soon as they were formed. So the dilemma facing the evolutionist can be
summed up this way: amino acids would not form in an atmosphere with
oxygen and amino acids would be destroyed in an atmosphere without
oxygen.
(You can not get life to come into existence (abiogenesis) with oxygen in the
atmosphere and you can not get it without oxygen in the atmosphere - they
are trapped, life can not come about from non living material)
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of gas
kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a two-
year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently served in
a number of university administrative posts.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/hasnt-evolution-been-proven
The next problem concerns the so-called handedness of the amino acids.
Because of the way that carbon atoms join up with other atoms, amino acids
exist in two forms—the right-handed form and the left-handed form. Just as
your right hand and left hand are identical in all respects except for their
handedness, so the two forms of amino acids are identical except for their
handedness. In all living systems only left-handed amino acids are found.
Yet Miller’s experiment produced a mixture of right-handed and left-handed
amino acids in identical proportions. As only the left-handed ones are used
in living systems, this mixture is useless for the evolution of living systems.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(A mixture of right and left handed amino acids that Miller created was
proof that he was not able to create life in the lab)
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science) http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
Yet another difficulty is, even if the source of the amino acids and the many
other compounds needed for life could be explained, it still must be
explained as to how these many diverse elements became aggregated in the
same area and then properly assembled themselves.
(Even if they did create amino acids that work for life, they did not explain
or demonstrate how they could assemble themselves in the proper manner)
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of gas
kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a two-
year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently served in
a number of university administrative posts.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/hasnt-evolution-been-proven
Another major problem for the chemical evolutionist is the origin of the
information that is found in living systems. There are various claims about
the amount of information that is found in the human genome, but it can be
conservatively estimated as being equivalent to a few thousand books, each
several hundred pages long. Where did this information come from? Chance
does not generate information. This observation caused the late Professor Sir
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(A huge problem for abiogenesis is that it can not tell us where information
itself came from. You can not naturally create information, so where did it
come from? How do we have it nowadays? The most logical way would be
to conclude that God programmed us this way)
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science) http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
The reasons why creating life in a test tube turned out to be far more difficult
than Miller or anyone else expected are numerous and include the fact that
scientists now know that the complexity of life is far greater than Miller or
anyone else in pre-DNA revolution 1953 ever imagined. Actually life is far
more complex and contains far more information than anyone in the 1980s
believed possible.
(That’s the end fact: it is way more difficult than thought due to complexity)
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science) http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Making the building blocks of life is easy—amino acids have been found in
meteorites and even in outer space. But just as bricks alone don’t make a
house, so it takes more than a random collection of amino acids to make life.
Like house bricks, the building blocks of life have to be assembled in a very
specific and exceedingly elaborate way before they have the desired function
(Davies, 1999, p. 28).
(Just because you can create amino acids does not mean that you can create
life. That’s like saying because you have made bricks you have made a brick
house)
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science) http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
(The very atmosphere that Miller used is being called into question. There
is no way to tell what the atmosphere was like 3.5 billion years ago - if the
earth is actually that old)
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science) http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Although widely heralded by the press as “proving” the origin of life could
have occurred on the early earth under natural conditions without
intelligence, the experiment actually provided compelling evidence for
exactly the opposite conclusion. For example, equal quantities of both right-
and left-handed organic molecules always were produced by the Urey/Miller
procedure. In real life, nearly all amino acids found in proteins are left
handed, almost all polymers of carbohydrates are right handed, and the
opposite type can be toxic to the cell.
(Nothing was proved through this experiment except that life is extremely
hard to bring about from non living life forms. It was more support for
creationists and for a creator of life view overall.)
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science) http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
(Life can not form in a natural environment. It demands a creator just like
the Bible says)
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science) http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
Miller’s results seem to provide stunning evidence that life could arise from
what the British chemist J.B.S. Haldane had called the “primordial soup.”
Pundits speculated that scientists, like Mary Shelley’s Dr. Frankenstein,
would shortly conjure up living organisms in their laboratories and thereby
demonstrate in detail how genesis unfolded. It hasn’t worked out that way.
In fact, almost 40 years after his original experiment, Miller told me that
solving the riddle of the origin of life had turned out to be more difficult than
he or anyone else had envisioned (1996, p. 138).
(Miller did not solve the riddle of the origin of life that so many people have
tried to solve. All he did is support the Biblical account of a creator. He
showed us how complex life is and how unlikely it is to have come about
(abiogenesis) from natural causes.)
Harold C. Urey, Nobel Prize for chemistry – Professor Urey said, “All of us
who study the origin of life find that the more we look into it, the more we
feel it is too complex to have evolved anywhere . . . . And yet we all believe
as an article of faith that life evolved from dead matter on this planet. It is
just that its complexity is so great that it is hard for us to imagine that it did.
(Urey himself said that life is to complex to have evolved anywhere and that
it takes a lot of faith to believe in evolution)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science) http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
(Did you hear that number? Trillions of links are needed for evolution to
happen. This is not realistic)
(Those odds are one against a number with 161 zeros after it. This is clearly
not something realistic that will happen. Mathematics proves evolution to
be false)
(The probability of how life arose on earth is dramatically siding with the
creation model and not the evolutionist’s model.)
If we consider one chance in 10-150 as the standard for impossible, then the
evolution of the first cell is more than 104,478,146 times more impossible in
probability than that standard.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
“In brief, randomness cannot have been the driving force behind the success
of life. Our understanding of statistics and molecular biology clearly
supports the notion that there must have been a direction and a Director
behind the success of life.”
No missing links
Answers is Genesis
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Docs/263.asp
These are ones that everyone agrees are not pre-human intermediates between apes and
humans.
(There are no valid missing links that we know about. This is a quick
overview of the common ones that are referred to)
(Piltdown man is not a valid missing link by any means. Even evolutionists
agree with this now.)
Nebraska man was formed from one tooth (Not missing link)
More about ‘Nebraska man’—that now-discarded pig’s tooth that was reconstructed by
some to look as though it came from a primitive evolutionary ‘ape-man’.
More about ‘Nebraska man’—that now-discarded pig’s tooth that was reconstructed by
some to look as though it came from a primitive evolutionary ‘ape-man’.
(Formed from a tooth of a pig - this shows you just how desperate
evolutionists are to come up with missing links. This is not proof for
evolution.)
femur, was crushed completely, so the evidence that she walked upright is
speculative and inconclusive.
(There is no evidence that Lucy could walk upright. Lucy moved like an ape
according to the evidence. Lucy is not proof of a missing link.)
-Answers in Genesis
-The Weekend Australian, May 7-8, 1983, Magazine section, p. 3.
-Dr Charles E. Oxnard, Fossils, Teeth and Sex—New perspective on
Human Evolution, University of Washington Press, Seattle and London,
1987, p. 227.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v12/i3/lucy.asp
According to Richard Leakey, who along with Johanson is probably the best-known
fossil-anthropologist in the world, Lucy’s skull is so incomplete that most of it is
‘imagination made of plaster of paris’.1 Leakey even said in 1983 that no firm conclusion
could be drawn about what species Lucy belonged to.
(The people who discovered Lucy did not have a complete enough fossil to
conclude that it was indeed a missing link. Many of the bones were crushed
and could not be recognized)
Lucy is Unique
-Answers in Genesis
-The Weekend Australian, May 7-8, 1983, Magazine section, p. 3.
-Dr Charles E. Oxnard, Fossils, Teeth and Sex—New perspective on
Human Evolution, University of Washington Press, Seattle and London,
1987, p. 227.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v12/i3/lucy.asp
In reinforcement of the fact that Lucy is not a creature ‘in between’ ape and man, Dr
Charles Oxnard, Professor of Anatomy and Human Biology at the University of Western
Australia, said in 1987 of the australopithecines (the group to which Lucy is said to have
belonged): ‘The various australopithecines are, indeed, more different from both African
apes and humans in most features than these latter are from each other. Part of the basis
of this acceptance has been the fact that even opposing investigators have found these
large differences as they too, used techniques and research designs that were less biased
by prior notions as to what the fossils might have been’.2 Oxnard’s firm conclusion?
‘The australopithecines are unique.
(Lucy is not like Humans, she is unique and is not a missing link.)
Answers in Genesis
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/05/19/ida-missing-link
The well-preserved fossil (95 percent complete, including fossilized fur and more) is
about the size of a raccoon and includes a long tail. It resembles the skeleton of a lemur
(a small, tailed, tree-climbing primate). The fossil does not resemble a human skeleton.
The fossil was found in two parts by amateur fossil hunters in 1983. It eventually made
its way through fossil dealers to the research team. Ida has opposable thumbs, which the
ABC News article states are “similar to humans’ and unlike those found on other modern
mammals” (i.e., implying that opposable thumbs are evidence of evolution). Yet lemurs
today have opposable thumbs (like all primates). Likewise, Ida has nails, as do other
primates. And the talus bone is described as “the same shape as in humans,” despite the
fact that there are other differences in the ankle structure.3 Unlike today’s lemurs (as far
as scientists know), Ida lacks the “grooming claw” and a “toothcomb” (a fused row of
teeth) In fact, its teeth are more similar to a monkey’s. These are minor differences easily
explained by variation within a kind.
(Ida is not like a Human, she lacks many things that humans have and is not
good evidence of a missing link)
Answers in Genesis
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/05/19/ida-missing-link
[Talking about Ida] Nothing about this fossil suggests it is anything other
than an extinct, lemur-like creature. Its appearance is far from chimpanzee,
let alone “apeman” or human.
(Ida is an extinct lemur (not Human or chimp) and is not a missing link)
Answers in Genesis
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2009/05/19/ida-missing-link
(The way Ida was buried and preserved also is leaning towards the fact that
there was a flood and that the fossils were buried quickly like the Bible says)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Answers is Genesis
http://www.answersingenesis.org/Docs/263.asp
very early man in North America, and Eoanthropus or 'Piltdown Man,' the
jaw of an orangutan and the skull of a modern human that were claimed to
be the 'earliest Englishman'.”
(Evolutionist’s have yet to bring forth any real missing links. There are a
bunch of scams that they try to sell themselves as a missing link and fail.)
Mark Matthews – (B.A. in English (first two years at the University of Chicago,
USA) Bob Jones University, Greenville, South Carolina, USA (1984) M.Ed. in English
Education, Bob Jones University (1988)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0404neandertal.asp
In the past, some anthropologists have proposed that Neandertals died out
because their clumsy hands were unable to manufacture advanced tools. A
new three-dimensional computer simulation of their thumb and forefinger,
however, indicates that Neandertals had the same ‘precision grip’ as modern
humans.
Mark Matthews – (B.A. in English (first two years at the University of Chicago,
USA) Bob Jones University, Greenville, South Carolina, USA (1984) M.Ed. in English
Education, Bob Jones University (1988)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0404neandertal.asp
all the variation that we find within the human race, they are all descendants
of Adam and bear his resemblance.
(Neanderthals are not a problem for a creationists, they are simple a variety
of human, obviously the same “kind” and made in the image of God - just
like we are.)
Mark Matthews – (B.A. in English (first two years at the University of Chicago,
USA) Bob Jones University, Greenville, South Carolina, USA (1984) M.Ed. in English
Education, Bob Jones University (1988)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0404neandertal.asp
(That is right, fully human and not at all ape or anything else)
Mark Matthews – (B.A. in English (first two years at the University of Chicago,
USA) Bob Jones University, Greenville, South Carolina, USA (1984) M.Ed. in English
Education, Bob Jones University (1988)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2003/0404neandertal.asp
(If Neanderthals are what we evolved from and they are not human that
would just mean that we are getting dumber as we evolve and have a smaller
brain capacity - which is the opposite of evolution. The Neanderthals have
greater brain capacity because man before the flood, and a few generations
after, were much smarter than we are today.)
"The problem with a lot of anthropologists is that they want so much to find
a hominid that any scrap of bone becomes a hominid bone.'"
(That is the problem: they are blinded because they want it so bad)
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science)
http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
Scientists have yet to discover a single molecule that has “learned to make
copies of itself” (Simpson, 1999, p. 26). Many scientists seem to be
oblivious of this fact because… Articles appearing regularly in scientific
journals claim to have generated self-replicating peptides or RNA strands, but they
fail to provide a natural source for their compounds or an explanation for what
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
fuels them... this top-down approach... [is like] a caveman coming across a modern
car and trying to figure out how to make it. “It would be like taking the engine out
of the car, starting it up, and trying to see how that engine works” (Simpson, 1999,
p.26).
(Scientists don’t know how a molecule can copy itself and expand and
produce another molecule in the natural world – which is what we live in
every day. This is vitally important to the theory of evolution, but it can’t be
proven.)
(Over-all, the grey moth is a genetic loss of information and is the opposite
of evolution. Evolutionists need an increase in information and complexity,
not a decrease)
16. Mouse skin color change does not prove evolution (Rebuttal/Evidence)
Dr. Georgia Purdom (Dr. Purdom graduated with a Ph.D. in Molecular Genetics
from Ohio State University in 2000. Her specialty is cellular and molecular biology.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v1/n1/evolution-or-adaptation
Dr. Georgia Purdom (Dr. Purdom graduated with a Ph.D. in Molecular Genetics
from Ohio State University in 2000. Her specialty is cellular and molecular biology.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v1/n1/evolution-or-adaptation
A major surprise for the researchers was that the mutation they found would
have to had occurred fairly rapidly, as the islands on which P. polionotus
lives are considered to be less than 6,000 years old.2 This is no surprise to
creationists, as such processes (and perhaps other factors affecting the
genome) would have occurred rapidly after the Flood, producing variation
within the animal kinds (in addition to their already created diversity). Such
effects are largely responsible for generating the tremendous diversity seen
in the living world.3 In addition; there are many other modern-day examples
of adaptation that has occurred quickly.
(It happened quickly enough to have taken place in a biblical model as well,
just an interesting fact showing how this argument supports the Biblical
model of creation about 6000 years ago.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Georgia Purdom (Dr. Purdom graduated with a Ph.D. in Molecular Genetics
from Ohio State University in 2000. Her specialty is cellular and molecular biology.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v1/n1/evolution-or-adaptation
The mutation, although beneficial to the beach mice, still leads to a loss of
genetic information. The mutant Mc1r protein does not bind as well to MSH
and thus, the mice have decreased melanin production leading to lighter fur
color.
(Melanin is what controls how dark or how light your skin is. If you have
high amounts you have darker skin, and if you have low amounts you have
lighter skin. With these mice there skin got lighter, which means that they
lost Melanin and did not gain it. This is a over all loss)
Dr. Georgia Purdom (Dr. Purdom graduated with a Ph.D. in Molecular Genetics
from Ohio State University in 2000. Her specialty is cellular and molecular biology.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v1/n1/evolution-or-adaptation
melanin gene or pigmentation, only the loss of them, thus it is not relevant to
the discussion of molecules-to-man evolution.
Dr. Georgia Purdom (Dr. Purdom graduated with a Ph.D. in Molecular Genetics
from Ohio State University in 2000. Her specialty is cellular and molecular biology.)
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v1/n1/evolution-or-adaptation
(Once the mice leave that specific environment it is no long beneficial. What
evolution needs is a permanent beneficial gain in information. The mouse
and skin color is not an example of that by any means)
‘
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Predators have been thought to serve prey species by removing the old, sick
and maimed. this alleged selective elimination of the weak is central to the
dogma of natural selection and evolution. Recent evidence seems to indicate
that random selection plays a major role in determining which animal is
eaten. Further evidence indicates that at least under certain situations there is
a selection against the strong and healthy.
(The problem is that not all animals actually go after the weaker ones and
sick ones, most of the time they will go after the strong prey to give them a
challenge. Natural selection only would work if the strong killed the
weaker, not the strong kill each other off. This is proof against evolution
and natural selection.)
One paramount argument for the theory of evolution is the idea of "survival of the
fittest." Early evolutionists thought that predators have a beneficial effect toward the
species they prey upon by removing the old, sick, and maimed. The selection of the weak
as prey is central to the dogma of evolution. Recent evidence instead indicates that
random selection, not selection of the weak, determines which animal is eaten. Further
studies show that under certain situations there is a selection against the strong and
healthy, with predators passing up weak and sick animals for healthy ones. The
implications of these studies against evolution are obvious
(Random chance, not natural selection, is how nature would work. The
strong animal would not always go after the weaker one. Which means
natural selection cannot work because you don’t always have the weaker
ones being killed. The stronger ones and more evolved ones are being killed
as well)
(In the end, natural selection is not a creative force and does not work for
evolution as a mechanism to bring about life.)
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral)
Science) http://creation.com/do-any-vestigial-organs-exist-in-humans
Dr. Jerry Bergman - (M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science) http://creation.com/do-any-vestigial-organs-exist-in-humans
(Humans do not have vestigial organs. And organs that were thought to be
vestigial have been proven to have needed and beneficial functions)
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of gas
kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a two-
year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently served in
a number of university administrative posts.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/hasnt-evolution-been-proven
If we accept that the universe and everything in it came from nothing (and
also from nowhere) then we have to follow this to its logical conclusion.
This means that not only is all the physical material of the universe the
product of nothing, but also other things. For example, we are forced to
accept that nothing (which has no mind, no morals, and no conscience)
created reason and logic; understanding and comprehension; complex ethical
codes and legal systems; a sense of right and wrong; art, music, drama,
comedy, literature, and dance; and belief systems that include God. These
are just a few of the philosophical implications of the big bang hypothesis.
(One of the biggest problems evolutionists have is that they cannot provide a
source for information. All these things are proof that an intelligent creator
created the world and we were programmed with this information just as the
Bible says.)
Dr. Jerry Bergman - M.P.H., for Public Health - M.S. in biomedical science -
Ph.D. in human biology - M.A. in social psychology - Ph.D. in measurement and
evaluation, minor in psychology - M.Ed. in counseling and psychology, - B.S. Major
area of study was sociology, biology, and psychology. - A.A. in Biology and Behavioral
Science
http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp
(There is no geologic support for any Peribiotic soup that the evolutionists
believe in - and need for their theory to be plausible. This is evidence that
perhaps life did not spontaneously come into existence, and that God
created us all.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Kenneth Patman
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i2/genetics.asp
(All we see today is the reshuffling of genes. We never see any new genes
introduced into the gene pool)
(This is saying that genes within a certain kind of animal are very much the
same. But once you compare it to a different kind of animal it changes
dramatically and is not similar to their genes)
Simply put, the changes that are observed today show variation within the
created kind—a horizontal change. For a molecules-to-man evolutionary
model, there must be a change from one kind into another—a vertical
change.
(We never see any new kinds coming alive today. All we can observe are
variations within different kinds that we can already observe)
The breeder pools certain rare genes into one individual or population to
achieve the desired combination of traits. Nothing new is produced.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Kenneth Patman
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v20/i2/genetics.asp
From 1800, plant breeders sought to increase the sugar content of the sugar
beet. And they were very successful. Over some 75 years of selective
breeding it was possible to increase the sugar content from 6% to 17%. But
there the improvement stopped, and further selection did not increase the
sugar content. Why? Because all of the genes for sugar production had been
gathered into a single variety and no further increase was possible.
(Breeding is proof that there are limits within the different kinds)
Science affirms over and over again that it always takes intelligence to
produce the specified complexity found in any living entity.
(Everything tells us that in order to get life and complexity you have to have
intelligence, just like the Bible teaches)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Irreducible complexity
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Some biological systems are irreducibly complex; that is, they could not
have evolved as independent parts to form an integrated whole – they come
in one entire package. A mouse trap, for instance, is irreducibly complex – If
any one part of the trap is removed, it cannot function. Behe cites elements
from the human body that could not have evolved because they are likewise
irreducibly complex: the DNA molecule, vision, blood-clotting, cellular
transport, and many more fall into this classification.
(Some life forms are irreducibly complex – They could not have “evolve” in
different steps like evolution teaches, they would have to have all come
about at the exact same time unless the life forms can not function.)
Darwin: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which
could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight
modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Dr. Jean K. Lightner - earned her undergraduate degree in animal science. After
receiving her doctorate, she worked for three years as a veterinary medical officer for the
U.S. Department of Agriculture.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v3/n1/smell-of-change-pseudogenes
Dr. Jean K. Lightner - earned her undergraduate degree in animal science. After
receiving her doctorate, she worked for three years as a veterinary medical officer for the
U.S. Department of Agriculture.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v3/n1/smell-of-change-pseudogenes
Dr. Jean K. Lightner - earned her undergraduate degree in animal science. After
receiving her doctorate, she worked for three years as a veterinary medical officer for the
U.S. Department of Agriculture.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/aid/v3/n1/smell-of-change-pseudogenes
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
It is very common for those who attack creation to use “evidence” from
areas that are not well understood. Often, the “evidence” includes
conclusions that may not be well informed. This certainly appears to be the
case with arguments based on pseudogenes.
(PG’s generally are just not well understood. Just because we do not know
their function does not mean they don’t have function.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
It has been asserted6 that evolutionary trees constructed on the basis of DNA
similarities ‘agree remarkably well with the evolutionary trees derived
earlier from anatomic similarities’. This statement is egregiously untrue. If
anything, primate phylogenies are in a mess as a result of major
contradictions between molecular and morphological data.
(The DNA tree they show you is inconsistent and does not prove evolution.
They only show you the similarities and leave out the countless times they do
not match)
Here we are going to just look at a few other things that might be good to
have some information on and that might be interesting and helpful to know.
Dr. Chuck Missler, Ph.D in Biblical study (naval academy graduate and former
Branch Chief of the Dept. of Guided Missiles, had a remarkable 30-year executive
career.)
http://www.khouse.org/articles/2003/492/
The account of the creation of the universe in six days still is a "bone in the
throat" to many Christians. Many point out that the word for "day" is yom ,
and is translated to 54 other words; however, 1181 of 1480 occurrences it is
"day," and when used with a number it is always a literal day. But the real
problem isn't the account in Genesis. It is in Exodus. In the middle of the
Ten Commandments, the Creator Himself wrote it with His own finger in
stone! For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that
in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the
Sabbath day, and hallowed it. - Exodus 20:11 It is undeniable that God
intended us to understand that it was, indeed, six literal days.
Professor James Barr, (Oriel Professor of the interpretation of the Holy Scripture,
Oxford University, England, in a letter to David C.C. Watson, 23 April 1984. Barr,
consistent with his neo-orthodox views, does not believe Genesis, but he understood
what the Hebrew so clearly taught.)
Creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days
of 24 hours we now experience
(The Bible says everything was created in six literal, 24 hour periods of
time. Bible Scholars agree with this. The only reason some scholars
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
compromise this is because they are blinded by “Science” and think that the
universe has to be billions of years old.)
The use of a number with the word "day" is very illuminating. This
combination occurs 357 times outside of Genesis 1. The combination is used
in four different ways, but each time it is used, it must mean 24-hour periods
of time.
The meaning of the word "day" with a number always means a 24-hour
period of time outside of Genesis 1, then it should also mean a 24-hour
period of time inside Genesis 1
The Hebrew language is one that must be observed closely. The most
common observation among Jewish and Christian commentators is that the
use of the article on the last two days is to show the importance of the sixth
and seventh days.8 This also is in full accord with the Hebrew grammatical
rule that the article may be used in this manner.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
. A substantive is a noun that one can touch, such as a chair. He cites many
examples where the number and noun occur without the article, yet the
meaning is definite. There are 13 other occurrences similar to Genesis 1,
where the noun does not have the article but is with a number. In each of
these other occurrences, the English translation uses the definite
article.11 Therefore, we must conclude that the absence of the article in
Genesis 1 does not mean that the days are long periods of time. Moses' point
is still very clear: The days are to be thought of as normal 24-hour days.
(The use of the article does not change the literal meaning of the days. It is
only to show that those days are important, not different in some other way
like the length of them)
The Old Testament records 38 times when these two words are used in the
same verse. Each time they occur, the meaning must be that of a normal day.
Here are a couple of examples to illustrate the point: Exodus 16:8 says, "And
Moses said, this shall be when the Lord shall give you in the evening flesh to
eat, and in the morning bread to the full." Also Exodus 18:13, "and the
people stood by Moses from the morning until the evening." All the other
occurrences are essentially the same. So then, it would appear that when the
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
words "morning" and "evening" are used in the same verse, they must refer
to a normal day.
(Using evening and morning in this context always means that it is a literal
24 hour period. The Bible is very clear.)
God did not leave the length of the creation days open to question. He told
us the exact length of each day. In Exodus 20:11, He said that in "six days
the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them and rested on
the seventh day." The context of the statement is an emphatic command.
God tells the people, "remember" and "keep" the Sabbath. God then tells
them how to keep the Sabbath in their daily lives. The people can tell
whether they are keeping the Sabbath if they are resting on the seventh day.
God then anchors the reality of the present days to the reality of the past
days of creation. God has set the pattern of Israel's work week. The "days"
are the same kind of days that the people would have readily known. As it
has been demonstrated previously, "day," used with a number, means a 24-
hour day. It seems obvious that all throughout Israel's history, the people
have understood this to mean a 24-hour day. Even those who hold to the
long ages of Genesis 1 acknowledge the "days" of Exodus 20:8-11 to be 24-
hour days.13 Therefore, the "days" of creation must also have been 24 hours
in length.
(Exodus 20:11 puts all the days as being the same length. It was a liter week
just like we have now days. God could not have been straighter forward.)
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
What can we conclude concerning the length of the "days" of creation? The
usage of the word "day," with a number, means a 24-hour period. The
absence of the article does not alter that meaning. Further, the use of
"evening" and "morning" indicates that normal time is meant in Genesis 1.
God, Himself, said that the creation took only six days. We also must ask
ourselves; did Moses and God deceive us by using the word "day," when it
really was a long period of time? If our answer is yes, then we should not
use the Bible for any of our beliefs. For, if God can deceive us concerning
the events of creation, He might have done that in regards to the life, death,
and resurrection of our Lord. The bottom line is that we then can have no
confidence in God's Word, if the long-day view is held. It is far better to
believe God at His Word, and take the creation days as 24-hour days.
(In the creation account everything points to it being 24 hour literal days,
not these long periods of times. We should not try to make the Bible say
something it so obviously does not.)
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 1 – Page:73
The scriptural record of the flood clearly states that the flood waters rose and
prevailed upon the earth, covering all the mountains under the whole heaven
for a period of five months, and that an additional seven months were then
required for the waters to subside sufficiently for Noah and his family to
disembark from the ark in the mountains of Ararat
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 1 – Page:73
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
The Bible says that the waters of the Flood covered the highest mountains to
a depth at least sufficient for the Ark to float over them.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 1 – Page:73
The expression “fountains of the great deep were broken up” is clearly
indicative of vast geological disturbances during the Flood, which are totally
incompatible with the concept of a local flood, especially when these
geological disturbances are said to have continued for five months
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 1 – Page:73
The construction of the Ark with a capacity of at least 41,000 cubic meters
just for the purpose of carrying eight people and a few animals through a
local flood is utterly inconceivable.
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 1 – Page:73
If the flood was only geographically limited, then there would have been no need for an
ark at all, for there would have been plenty of time for Noah’s family to escape from the
danger area, as would be the case also for the birds and animals.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(The Bible so obviously teaches that Noah’s flood was world-wide. It does
not make sense for it to just be a local flood – and it is not scriptural)
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of
gas kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a
two-year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently
served in a number of university administrative posts.
)http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/hasnt-evolution-been-proven
Evolution Genesis
Sun before earth Earth before sun
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(There are dramatic differences between the Bible and evolution. You
cannot put them together because they are polar opposites)
A. J. Monty White (Dr. White holds a B.S. with honors, a Ph.D. in the field of gas
kinetics from the University College of Wales, Aberystwyth, and has completed a two-
year post-doctoral fellowship at the same University. Dr. White subsequently served in
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Ken Ham
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/couldnt-god-have-used-evolution
(The God who uses evolution is a God of death and pain and not the God
that the Bible speaks of)
Evolution and Bible puts death before sin
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Ken Ham
http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/nab/couldnt-god-have-used-evolution
The book of Genesis teaches that death is the result of Adam’s sin (Genesis
3:19; Romans 5:12, 8:18–22) and that all of God’s creation was “very good”
upon its completion (Genesis 1:31). All animals and humans were originally
vegetarian (Genesis 1:29–30). But if we compromise on the history of
Genesis by adding millions of years, we must believe that death and disease
were part of the world before Adam sinned. You see, the (alleged) millions
of years of earth history in the fossil record shows evidence of animals
eating each other,8 diseases like cancer in their bones,9 violence, plants with
thorns,10 and so on. All of this supposedly takes place before man appears
on the scene, and thus before sin (and its curse of death, disease, thorns,
carnivory, etc.) entered the world.
The “big bang” teaches that the sun and many other stars formed before the
earth, while Genesis teaches that they were made on the fourth day after the
earth, and only about 6,000 years ago rather than 10-20 billion years ago.
The “big bang” also entails millions of years of death, disease, and pain
before Adam’s sin, which contradicts the clear teaching of scripture, which
is thus unacceptable to biblical Christians.
The “big bang” teaches that the sun and many other stars formed before the
earth, while Genesis teaches that they were made on the fourth day after the
earth, and only about 6,000 years ago rather than 10-20 billion years ago.
The “big bang” also entails millions of years of death, disease, and pain
before Adam’s sin, which contradicts the clear teaching of scripture, which
is thus unacceptable to biblical Christians.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(People who believe evolution and the Bible place death coming about
before Adam sinned. The Bible does not have any room for evolution in it.)
Psalms 33:6 - By the word of the LORD the heavens were made, and all
their host by the breath of his mouth.
Psalms 102:25 - Of old thou didst lay the foundation of the earth, and the
heavens are the work of thy hands.
Hebrews 1:10 - And, "Thou, Lord, didst found the earth in the beginning,
and the heavens are the work of thy hands;
2 Peter 3:5 - They deliberately ignore this fact, that by the word of God
heavens existed long ago, and an earth formed out of water and by means of
water,
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(Here are a few different verses in the Bible that show that God created the
heaven and the earth - just so you have some on record)
All the animals could have started around the Ararat region
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 1 – Page:181
Dr. Answer A. Snelling (Ph.D Geology) (B.S. Applied Geology, The University of New
South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney,
Australia) - Earths Catastrophic past – Volume 1 – Page:181
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
(There is no problem believing that all the animals could start in one area
like the Bible says after the flood and then migrate over the whole earth in
the Biblical timeframe. Especially with the pre-flood environment)
Feature Article from Creation Magazine Vol. 15, No. 4, pages 12-15
http://www.present-truth.org/3-Nature/dinosaurs_2.htm
Bruce Miller
http://ncseweb.org/rncse/17/5/why-teach-evolution
… but here’s what I really think about the theory of evolution: It’s not real.
It is not the way we got here. In fact, the life you see on this planet is really
just a list of creatures God has allowed to live. We are not creations of
random chance. We are not accidents. There is a God, a Creator, who made
you and me. We were made in His image, which separates us from all other
creatures.
8. Some creation scientists alive today and some from the past
Dr. John Rankin (Ph.D Mathematical physics) B.S. (Hons) with first class
honors in applied mathematics from Monash University, a Ph.D. in mathematical physics
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v2/i2/universe.asp
Cedarville University
Dr S.H. ‘Wally’ Tow (Tow Siang Hwa), retired chairman of the Department
of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the University of Singapore
* Or recently deceased.
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Blaise Pascal (biography page) and article from Creation magazine (1623–
1662) Hydrostatics; Barometer
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
Questions
If you have any questions you would like answered or would like more
information or would like a explanation on a topic please feel free to email
and let me know.
AnswersOnCreation@gmail.com
18
Creation source book - Quin Friberg – Answers On Creation
I would greatly appreciate any donations you can make, or if you are able to
support my ministry monthly that would also be greatly appreciated.
(Contact me if you can)
One way to help support our ministry would be to buy a hard copy of this
Source-Book (Contact me if you are interested) The source-book will come
with a new three-ring binder (This way you can remove the sections you
want out to talk about) The cost (Due to three ring binder and cost of
printing will be $15.00 for a hard copy) the small profit goes to supporting
the ministry. If you will need shipping on this item it will be a additional
$5.00 (to anywhere in the USA) Email me if you are interested! We choose
to put this online for anyone to view because we know not all people can
afford it and not all people think its worth paying for but we still want them
to have access to the information to help build their faith. Also you will get a
word Doc. If you purchase a hard copy (So you can print additional ones off
in the correct format)