Radioactive! (Imagine Deep Time)-Confessions of a YEC part 22

I will freely confess that I am a Young Earth Creationist (YEC). I believe Genesis 1 when it tells us how God created the heavens and the earth about 6,000 years ago. Previously I showed how the Bible- including the words of God in the Old Testament and the words of Jesus in the New Testament- confirms this over and over. I also showed how Big Bang cosmology fails to provide an alternative, and now we’re examining why Geology doesn’t even scratch the paint off Genesis 1 but rather confirms the Genesis history, especially the flood.

But wait! There is one more fabu` super powered, very popular and little understood science trick up the deep time sleeve which is SURE to save the day for BILLIONS of years! Radio Dating! This is where a device which was designed to receive signals from various AM and FM sources logs onto a popular matching website to find an MP3 player which he feels he is compatible with, and they go out for dinner and a movie.

Oh, wait, no! That may be the plot of a new Pixar movie. But Radio Dating is those methods which use the decay rates of unstable atoms to determine the age of rocks. The majority of these methods are only able to be used on volcanic rock. When the liquid hot rock cools and hardens, the clock is set at zero and the radioactive elements in the rock begin to decay. We can measure the rate at which radioactive elements decay and thus we can measure the amount of original element to the amount of daughter element which it becomes when it decays. If you know the ratio of parent to daughter and you know the rate of radioactive decay, then you know how old the rock is, right?

Here’s a metaphor. Imagine a box full of red marbles. No matter how many marbles you start with, HALF of them will turn blue in one hour after you open the box, and every hour after, half of the remaining red ones will also turn blue, hour after hour until ALL of them are blue. Thus, one hour is the HALF LIFE. If you find a box, you can determine how long it has been open by counting the red ones and the blue ones and doing a little math.

If you start with 100 red ones, in one hour, fifty will be blue. Another hour later, seventy five will be blue because half of the remaining red ones will have turned blue. After three hours, another 12 marbles will be blue. If you count 87 blue marbles in a box of 100 marbles, the box has been open for three hours.

Here’s the problem.

Suppose we come upon such a box and do the counting and math:

  • How do we know all of the marbles were red to start with? How do we know NONE of the marbles were already blue when the box was opened? We don’t. We have to assume that.
  • How do we know the red ones turn blue at the same rate all the time? We don’t know that. We have to assume it.
  • And how do we know that no one has come along and put more blue or red marbles since it was opened? We don’t know that either. We have to assume that the number of marbles has remained unchanged.

How can we trust our method of determining how long the box has been open? Either we stubbornly dig in our heels and cling to the unprovable assumptions, or we admit that we cannot use that method to know anything for certain.

Do we have any cause to doubt the results of Radio Dating? Boy, do we!

I could go on for pages with examples, but my favorite comes from right here in the good old US of A. When the lava rock at the top of Mt. St Helens was dated using these methods, we first got dates that ranged from 300,000 to 2.8 Million years. That’s a HUGE margin- like two scientists measuring the Empire State Building and one declaring that it is 1,250 feet tall (Which it is) and the other declaring that it is more than two MILES tall. Which it is not. That’s a ratio of 8:1, which I do not consider very accurate. However, the accuracy is wrong by far more then eight times.

The best part about this lava flow they tested is this: We KNOW when the lava rock formed. How? We watched it happen in 1980. (Quick unnecessary joke: Science tells us that the rock is 300,000 years old, and we know that Madonna is older than that rock! I suppose she does look good for her age. [rim-shot] OK, back to the science.)

The rock was less than 30 years old. This is like our two scientists having come to the two measurements above by measuring a model of the Empire State Building which is actually an inch and a half tall.

Starting to see why some of us don’t trust these methods? This is like figuring out that someone calculated how long your box of marbles had been open, and determined it was six hours, when you had opened the box yourself just fifteen seconds before. His math might be perfect, but his assumptions lead to a false conclusion. To put a point on it- we ALWAYS find blue marbles when we open a new box. In fact, we may never find any boxes which are all red to start with. What does that do to our system of determining how long the box has been open? Once again, it proves it to be unreliable.

And this is not a new issue. We didn’t just discover the failure of these dating methods recently. Check out the date on this quote:

“200 year old lava rock dated at 1.60 million to 2.96 billion years!”
Journal of Geophysical Research, July 15, 1968.

This system has been failing ever since we started using it. Optimism dies hard, I suppose. I wonder if there are an unbalanced number of Chicago Cub’s fans among these geologists? (note- this comment was funnier before 2016)

There is another issue to consider. We’ve assumed that the red marbles turn blue at the same rate, under any conditions. However, what if we discover that, the higher the humidity or temperature, the faster they change? The calculations between February and August would be VASTLY different for boxes opened the same amount of time. But is there evidence that anything like that can happen with radioactive decay? Yes, there is. To get the details on one such report, read this article. https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/acceleration-of-radioactivity-shown-in-laboratory/

This is like discovering that your box of one hundred marbles can turn almost entirely blue in less than eight seconds. That should shake your confidence in the process, yes?

Here’s one more quote which I think sums up my argument.

“The radioactive potassium-argon dating method has been demonstrated to fail on 1949, 1954, and 1975 lava flows at Mt Ngauruhoe, New Zealand, … We know the true ages of the rocks because they were observed to form less than 50 years ago. Yet they yield “ages” up to 3.5 million years which are thus false. How can we trust the use of this same “dating” on rocks whose ages we don’t know? If the method fails on rocks when we have an independent eye-witness account, then why should we trust it on other rocks where there are no independent historical cross-checks?”
https://answersingenesis.org/geology/carbon-14/radioactive-dating-failure/

The funny thing about such scientific results is the response from those who are DETERMINED to hold onto these dating methods. They will cry some form of contamination. They either argue,

“A whole bunch of blue marbles from some other box fell into this one before we started counting,”

or, “A whole lot of red marbles fell out of the box before we started counting,”

or “A bunch of these marbles were blue before the box was opened.”

Somehow they think those are argument in defense of these methods, but if you give it any thought, you’ll see that they are agreeing with my premise; Their assumptions CANNOT be trusted to be accurate, and thus the conclusions of these dating methods are NOT reliable. We have the data to back that up in droves.

Here is a link to an article which lists more examples of volcanic rock being dated MILLIONS of years older than we KNOW it actually is. https://answersingenesis.org/geology/radiometric-dating/more-and-more-wrong-dates/

EVERY TIME we date volcanic rock we know the age of, the resulting ages are wrong by hundreds of thousands or millions of years. Why would we trust it to find the age of rocks we don’t know? If my bathroom scale says my hamster is 800 lbs, I’m not stepping on that thing to see what I might weigh.

Enjoy a fun look at more of the same from Ian Juby, including even more funny replies from the stubborn optimists who refuse to let radio dating go. And as always, remember #JesusLovesYou

Posted in Confessions of a YEC | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Fossils Date the Rocks Date the Fossils Date the Rocks- Confessions of a YEC part 21

I’ve been explaining why I am a Young Earth Creationist, which means we’re looking into SCIENCE! Recently we’re looking into the alleged evidences for deep time which are used to show that the Genesis account of creation in a single week about 6,000 years ago must be wrong. So far the Big Bang has failed, and now we’re seeing how geology also does nothing to falsify YEC (Young Earth Creationism). What Geology does is examine the layers of rock which exist on all continents on earth. Last time, we saw that those layers can form very quickly, so having a lot of layers does not necessarily mean we have a lot of time. It can mean we had a BIG mudslide or massive flood. That works for us. We believe there was a massive flood. We also believe it was nothing like that movie with Russel Crowe and Hermoine Granger.

The layers we find all over the world meet at clean lines, showing that there was not time for erosion to occur between one and the other. In the Grand Canyon, we can see a mile high pile of rock layers which meet at clean lines. What do we find in LOTS of those clean layers? Marine invertebrates.The earliest, and many of today’s best geologists acknowledge the flood of Noah to be the only event which would make sense of such huge and even rock deposits full of sea creatures. For more on the Grand Canyon- Check out Ian Juby discussing it HERE.

Last time we saw acknowledgement that the “Geological Column” found in textbooks ONLY exists in textbooks. Any one spot on earth may only have a few of those layers, and not always in the order suggested by the picture in your school book. You can’t just say, “We’re four layers down, so this must be Jurassic rock!”But if the list of layers doesn’t really exist, and the order isn’t always the order we expect with the older rocks under younger ones, how do we determine the age of the rock layers we do have? We use “index fossils”! This means if the rock has a fossil in it which is 300 million years old, the rock must be 300 million years old. How do we know the fossil is 300 million years old? Simple- we find it in rock which is 300 million years old.

So we date the fossil using the rock, and then use the rock to date the fossil.

This is where you expect me to say something about radio dating methods. OK, here you go: They almost never have anything to do with this. We’ll talk about that more next time.

But there is a bigger problem with using the fossils to date the rocks than mere circular reasoning. The fossils are dated using the evolutionary theory. We believe a certain type of creature evolved X Million years ago, so when we find the lowest rock layer that has that fossil, we decide the rock layer is X Million years old. But how do we know the lowest layer with that fossil represents the time when the creature first came into being? We don’t, and I can prove that.

Where we find fossils in the rock layers ONLY tells us when the fossils (On evolutionary assumptions) were laid down. It CANNOT tell us that the species did not exist before or after that time, or even that they do not exist today. Case in point- fossils tell us that the coelacanth (a fat flippered fish) went extinct (according to Evolutionary dogma) 65 million years ago. How do we know the fish went extinct? Because we do not find any fossils of this fish in more recent rock layers. But a funny thing happened in the early half of the 1900’s. We found some coelacanth- not in the fossil record, but swimming in the ocean.

The fossils don’t tell us the whole story, because while the “fossil record” shows the fish disappearing, the fish himself tell us, “The news of my extinction has been somewhat exaggerated.” And if I may, I think Monty Python sums up my feelings on the evidence in the fossil record; “I will not buy this record- IT is scratched.”ceolacanth fossil timeline copyTo clarify- if you draw a timeline of evolutionary history, somewhere on that timeline we see the earliest Ceolacanth fossils we have being formed and assume that he did not exist before that. We see his line end as we hit the layers of rock where he no longer show up and assume he has gone extinct. But 65 MILLION years later, he’s still swimming around. This means that, even given the deep time and evolutionary assumptions about the geological column, the fish is capable of existing for 65 MILLION Years without leaving a fossil. How then can we know he did not exist BEFORE his lowest fossil without leaving one? We can’t. He could have been there from the very beginning.

So what follows? If we can’t use the fossil record to create the evolutionary history, then we can’t use the evolutionary history to create the timeline which is used to date the fossils which are used to date the rocks which are used to date the fossils according to evolutionary assumptions. In the end, deep time is built on a pile of “IF” and “Maybe” that are demonstrably false. To date the rock layers with deep time, you have to first make a host of assumptions- assumptions which we can prove to be false. Rock layers don’t need thousands of years to form. Canyons can form quickly- in days or even hours. Fossils don’t prove when a species began to exist, nor does a lack of fossils prove a species is extinct. There is nothing in Geology which demands the conclusion of deep time. From any observable fact, the earth may be 6,000 years old.

Even if all of their assumptions weren’t the hot mess they are, the logic is. Dating a fossil by the rock it’s found in while using fossils to date the rocks is completely invalid. It’s like two criminals using each other as their only alibi. But you needn’t take my word for it.

“And this poses something of a problem,: If we date the rocks by their fossils, how can we then turn around and talk about patterns of evolutionary change through time in the fossil record?”
NILES ELDREDGE, Columbia Univ. TIME FRAMES, 1985, p.52

“A circular argument arises: Interpret the fossil record in the terms of a particular theory of evolution, inspect the interpretation, and note that it confirms the theory. Well, it would, wouldn’t it?”
TOM KEMP, Oxford, New Scientist, Vol.108, Dec.5, 1985, p. 67

“The rocks do date the fossils, but the fossils date the rocks more accurately. Stratigraphy cannot avoid this kind of reasoning if it insists on using only temporal concepts, because circularity is inherent in the derivation of time scales.”,
J. E. O’ROURKE, American Journal of Science, Vol. 276, p.51

This stuff is no secret to the scientists actually digging fossils and examining rocks. It’s the textbooks and their dedication to evolutionary dogma which leaves the students in the dark about so many facts. We’re told over and over that SCIENCE has discovered the age of the earth, but I hope you can see now that Evolution has determined the age of the earth based on a lot of blind leaps of faith. I can say with confidence that real science, meaning observation and reason, defends the Biblical account of creation, including the age of the earth. She may look a bit worn, but the old girl is only in her thousands.

Deep time rock and roll has only one more trick up its sleeve, and next time things are going to get radioactive! And as always, remember #JesusLovesYou

Posted in Confessions of a YEC | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

When is a Column NOT a Column?- Confessions of a YEC part 20

Welcome to Earth! Under your feet is a whole mess of rocks- layer after layer of rocks of different kinds, MILES deep. We’re told by various school books and PBS Kids cartoons that these layers tell us the history of the Earth, and that its history is DEEP! BILLIONS of years deep. In short, each of these thin layers supposedly takes a thousand years to form, and thus it would take several BILLION years to form all of the layers we have on Earth. But is it science? Or DARK MAGIC….? Uh, or something else? Let’s find out.

 

Continue reading

Posted in Confessions of a YEC | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Geology and the Myth of Deep Time- Confessions of a YEC part 19

Welcome back to the Confessions of a Young Earth Creationist (YEC). We’ve looked into the Bible and then into the stars, and now we’re going to take a look at the ground beneath our own feet. When trying to prove that the earth is very, very old, many people will point into the dirt and call upon the science of Geology to prove Deep Time. In the coming weeks, I shall call upon the science of Geology to prove that the Earth is in fact much younger than she looks. Maybe she was created 6,000 years ago by God? Maybe it’s Maybelline… Continue reading

Posted in Confessions of a YEC | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Distance to the Stars!- Confessions of a YEC part 18

It is true. I confess! I believe the bible when it says God created the heavens and the earth within a single week, about 6,000 years ago. I know it sounds crazy to all of the kids raised on PBS, Discovery Channel and public school, but I know I can defend my position with the Bible and Science! So far I have shown why God/Jesus is a Young Earth Creationist, why the Bible says this clearly several times, and how the alternative theory of the Big Bang fails to provide a plausible alternative. I shall not be absolved of my choice to believe the Bible, and if you follow me down the yellow brick road of science, you may too someday need to confess that you believe it too.

Confession is good for the soul. So is SCIENCE, Bro!

The best argument the non-young earth creationists or Big Bangers have against the youth of the cosmos is a very simple math problem. If light travels a light year in a year, then we should not be able to see stars which are more than six thousand light years away if God made all the stars six thousand years ago. But we CAN see stars which are much further away, and thus, the stars came into being a LONG LONG LONG SUPER DUPER LONG STUPID LONG time ago. Continue reading

Posted in Confessions of a YEC | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Not So Smoking Gun of the Big Bang- Confessions of a YEC part 17

Now let’s take a look into the “smoking gun” of the Big Bang: The Cosmic Background Radiation. Discovered by accident in 1964, it’s basically a faint glow of heat, everywhere we look in the night sky. It’s Cosmic, it lurks in the background, and like all mutant superheros, it’s powered by radiation. Cosmic. Background. Radiation.

This is also not a smoking gun.

THAT is how you name science stuff!  It sounds like the title of a Marvel comic series where in the whole UNIVERSE is threatened! It even starts with the word COSMIC. That’s BIGGER than “Big,” even without a sound effect after it.
“Big Bang.” Pttthhhh!

Anyhoo, to see why the smoking gun isn’t the airtight case it gets peddled as, all you need is a little science history. Continue reading

Posted in Confessions of a YEC | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Red Shift, Escape, Delete: Science- Confessions of a YEC part 16

Last time, we took a look at the Data which is presented as observable evidence for the Big Bang (AKA: The Horrendous Space Kablooie). What about it then? Does the data point to a BIG BANG?

Would you be terribly surprised if I said I don’t think so? Continue reading

Posted in Confessions of a YEC | Tagged , , | 2 Comments