About this site
About us
Our beliefs
Your first visit?
Contact us
External links
Good books
Visitor essays
Our forum
New essays
Other features
Buy a CD
Vital notes

World religions
BUDDHISM
 
CHRISTIANITY
Who is a Christian?
Shared beliefs
Handle change
Bible topics
Bible inerrancy
Bible harmony
Interpret Bible
Persons
Beliefs, creeds
Da Vinci code
Revelation, 666
Denominations
 
HINDUISM
ISLAM
JUDAISM
WICCA / WITCHCRAFT
Other religions
Cults and NRMs
Comparing religions

Non-theistic...
Atheism
Agnosticism
Humanism
Other

About all religions
Main topics
Basic info.
Gods/Goddesses
Handling change
Doubt/security
Quotes
Movies
Confusing terms
Glossary
World's end
True religion?
Seasonal topics
Science/Religion
More info.

Spiritual/ethics
Spirituality
Morality/ethics
Absolute truth

Peace/conflict
Attaining peace
Religious tolerance
Religious hatred
Religious conflict
Religious violence

"Hot" topics
Very hot topics
Ten Commandments
Abortion
Assisted suicide
Cloning
Death penalty
Environment
Homosexuality
Gay marriage
Nudism
Origins
Sex & gender
Sin
Spanking kids
Stem cells
Women-rights
Other topics

Laws and news
Religious laws
Religious news

 

Web site logo


Indicators of a young Earth, with rebuttals

Indicators based on observations on the Earth


Sponsored link.


Eleven indicators of a young earth included in this essay are:

  1. Second law of thermodynamics
  2. Mineral halos
  3. Pressure on oil deposits
  4. Presence of oil
  5. Shape of the earth
  6. Sedimentary rock on Mt. St. Helens
  7. Earth's magnetic field
  8. Earth's rotational speed
  9. Population growth rates
  10. Topsoil depth
  11. Erosion of the continents

Indicator 1: Second law of thermodynamics: Henry Morris wrote:

"All processes manifest a tendency toward decay and disintegration, with a net increase in what is called the entropy, or state of randomness or disorder, of the system. This is called the Second Law of Thermodynamics." 1

Evolution teaches the opposite: that entropy decreases and complexity and order increases. Evolution is impossible because it violates the universally accepted second law of thermodynamics.

Rebuttal: This argument has been around for decades. Scientists have repeated the same rebuttal, but Creationists continue to ignore it. Creationists often do not quote the full text of the Second Law. In fact, Morris' conclusion is incorrect. All processes do not exhibit a tendency towards decay and disintegration. It is only the overall entropy of a closed system which decreases over time.

K.R. Miller writes:

"This means that some parts of a system may indeed become more orderly and complex so long as this increase in order is balanced by an equal or greater decrease in order elsewhere. This, of course, is exactly what living things do -- as they grow and evolve they use enormous amounts of energy (usually in the form of food), producing a thermodynamic balance in the system as a whole. The second law no more forbids evolution than it forbits a tiny seed from growing into a larger, more complex tree. Both processes require energy to proceed, and both are in perfect accordance with the laws of thermodynamics." 2

There are many examples on earth in which entropy decreases and order increases:

  • The formation of snowflakes.
  • Formation of salt crystals.
  • Seeds becoming plants.
  • Eggs becoming chickens.

Evolution of species of life is one more example. Evolution on earth was/is made possible by the rise in entropy in the sun. Talk.Origins has a full treatment of this topic online. 3


Indicator 2: Mineral halos: Dr. Gentry discovered in the late 1970's countless halos found inbiotite and flourite, which are minerals found within some granites. These "are beautiful microspheres of coloration produced by the radioactive decay of primordial polonium." 4 P0 214 has a half life of about of 3 minutes. The "Polonium Halos" web site explains these halos by analogy:

"A speck of polonium in molten rock can be compared with an Alka-Seltzer dropped into a glass of water. The beginning of effervescence is equated to the moment that polonium atoms began to emit radioactive particles. In molten rock the traces of those radioactive particles would disappear as quickly as the Alka-Seltzer bubbles in water. But if the water were instantly frozen, the bubbles would be preserved."

Essentially all geologists, who are not creation scientists, believe that these structures took millions of years to crystallize. The existence of the halos thus is convincing evidence that the granite rocks (and the rest of the world) were created instantaneously - a type of flash freezing.

Rebuttal: A number of alternative explanations have been suggested. All are consistent with an earth that cooled down over millions of years, and subjected to hundreds of millions of hears of weathering, - not created during the course of a Genesis day: Some have suggested: 5

  • the halos were created by fluids that carried Polonium into the crystals
  • the halos were created from Po ions in fluids released during the weathering of uranium-bearing minerals
  • the halos were caused by diffusion of beta-emitting lead isotopes
  • the halos were formed by uranium, not polonium.

All of these explanations have been met with counter arguments by Gentry. However, L.G. Collins noted that Po halos only occur in granite rock which contains myrmekite. This indicates that the granite did not form from the gradual cooling of magma. It formed by subsequent, long-term replacement of the solid rocks through cataclasis and recyrstallization. This provided openings for the introduction of uranium-bearing fluids. Radon associated with the uranium "nucleate in the rapidly growing biotite (and florite) crystals whence they are positioned to produce the Po halos." 5


Indicator 3: Pressure of oil deposits: M.A. Cook claimed in his book "Prehistory and Earth Models" that if underground oil was as old as geologists claim that its pressure would have dissipated long ago. The fact that oil is found under pressure indicates that it is 10,000 years or less old. Presumably all of the natural gas would have escaped as well if the earth was old.

Rebuttal: Gas and oil accumulate gradually, as pressure and heat work on organic matter over long periods of time. If the rocks holding in the reservoirs of gas and oil were as leaky as creation scientists indicate, then this pressure never would have built up in the first place.


Sponsored link:


Indicator 4: Presence of oil: "They say it takes millions of year to make oil but scientists did it in a lab in 20 minutes." Another visitor to our site referred to a sewage treatment plant in Halifax, NS, Canada. They stated that: "Using heat to turn  Halifax's half-million tons of sewage per year into 700,000 barrels of oil, the entire process takes about 30 minutes!"

Rebuttal: Under normal conditions (those found in nature) it does take a long time for oil to develop. But under ideal conditions (temperature, pressure, catalysts, etc.) it can be almost instantaneous. 

It is useful to remember that oil is formed from plant life that is laid down in sedimentary layers. But by the time that it is found, the oil has typically migrated considerable distances through rock of varying porosities. Such migration typically takes millions of years to accomplish. So, the existence of underground oil is a good indicator of an old earth. 


Indicator 5: Earth's shape: The increase of the earth's equatorial bulge would have flattened it out into a spinning pancake if it were really 5 billion years old.

Rebuttal: The shape of the earth (or of any planet or moon) is the result of two opposing factors:

  • Force of Gravity: The earth behaves as a highly viscous fluid. Over a long enough time period,
    "it will flow to relieve shear stresses and to bring normal stress to the hydrostatic state (the case where all normal stresses are equal). In this state, pressure is only a function of depth. Since pressure is the product of gravitational acceleration times the mass of overlaying material, this implies that the planet adopts a spherical shape...Thus, solely under the influence of gravity, we would expect any large planet to flow and eventually adopt a spherical figure." 6
  • Centrifugal effects: Since the earth rotates on its axis, the centrifugal effect pushes the equator outwards, and flattens the polar regions.

The gravitational force is enormously greater than the centrifugal force, so the earth's shape is almost a perfect sphere. The equatorial diameter is about 12,756 km (7,900 miles). The "polar diameter was calculated as about 26.5 miles shorter than the equatorial diameter." 7 The force of gravity has been essentially constant over time. It is a function of the mass of the earth which is increasing only very slowly as a result of impacts of meteorites and space dust accretion. The centrifugal force is decreasing with time as the earth's rotation slows. Both effects will work towards a gradual decrease in the equatorial bulging with time. The earth is becoming closer to a perfect sphere.

Measurements of equatorial radius gave 6,378.140 km in 1976, 6,378.137 km in 1980 and 6,378.136 km in 1983. 8 This seems to indicate that the bulge is decreasing with time. However, the decrease is probably not statistically valid; it is probably due to random measuring errors.


Indicator 6: Mt. St. Helen's: Evolutionists say that it takes millions of years to form a thick layer of sedimentary rock. But when Mount St. Helens erupted in 1980, a few hundred feet of sediment was laid down in a few days. These layers are seen stratified into many layers, just as sedimentary rock appears. This does not prove that the earth is young. However, it does show that layers of rock can form in days rather than millions of years.

Rebuttal: It is true that the ash from St. Helen's did form a deposit within a few days that was a few hundred feet thick in places. But it was a deposit of fine ash, of pumice. Any geologist can differentiate between layers of pumice and actual sedimentary rock -- i.e. sandstone or limestone. Their textures and colors are entirely different.


Indicator 7: Earth's magnetic field: The earth's magnetic field is decaying at an exponential rate. It has decreased about 10% over the past 150 years. If one extrapolates backwards in time for only 10,000 years, it would have been impossibly high. The field would have:

"... been so powerful that enzymes necessary for life processes and enzymes inside the functioning cell could not have held together...If you go back as far as fifteen to twenty-thousand years ago the energy of the earth�s geo-magnetic field would have approximated that of a magnetic star. As a result many of the atoms of the earth could not have held together." 8

Thus, we can safely conclude that the earth must be less than 10,000 years old.

Rebuttal: "In 1835 Carl Gouse of Germany for the first time in history measured the earth's geo-magnetic field." 9 In 1967, Keith McDonald and Robert Gunst collected a series of about two dozen measurements that scientists had made of the earth's magnetic field since 1835. In 1971, Dr. Thomas Barnes of the University of Texas fitted these data to an exponentially decaying function, producing the above results. Barnes concluded that the earth's magnetic field has been reduced by half every 1,400 years. There are a number of errors in Barnes' conclusions. Perhaps the most serious two are:

  • The field does not decay at an exponential rate; it fluctuates widely. Precise measurements of the magnetic field have only been taken since 1845. The measurements that he used were taken over too short a period of time to extrapolate backwards by 1,400 years. "...archaeomagnetic data show that the dipole field was about 20% weaker than the present field 6,500 years ago and about 45% stronger than the present field about 3000 years ago." 10
  • The earth's magnetic field is not in a constant direction; it periodically reduces to zero and then reverses itself. That is, mechanical compasses on earth would gradually become less sensitive. Eventually, the North end of a compass needle would start to point South. This has been detected in the form of zebra-like magnetic stripes in the rocks of the floor of the Pacific Ocean which alternately change polarity on each side of a spreading fault. Hundreds of reversals have occurred over the past 180 million years. Jeremy Bloxham of Harvard University predicts that it could reach zero about 1,500 to 2,000 years from now. 11

Indicator 8: Earth's rotational speed: The speed with which the earth rotates on its axis is slowing. Each day, the time taken for the earth to rotate on it axis is slowing down by about 1.5 milliseconds. This may not seem like much. But it amounts to over six seconds per decade. Astronomers must insert leap seconds many times each decade to compensate for this slowing. If the earth's rate of deceleration has been constant throughout the life of the earth, then its rotational speed would have been very high 4.5 billion years ago. A day would be have been only a few seconds long. This high rotational speed would have long ago flattened into the shape of a pancake. 12 That clearly did not happen, so the age of the earth must be a very small fraction of 4.5 billion years.

Rebuttal: In spite of the many web sites that show the error in this reasoning, many creation science promoters still offer this argument. Their basic belief is wrong: the time taken for the earth to rotate on its axis is slowing down by only about 1.5 milliseconds per century -- not per day.

The Moon raises tides in the ocean. This generates friction between the sea and the earth, diminishing the earth's speed of rotation. "This effect causes a slowing of the Earth's rotational speed resulting in a lengthening of the day by about 0.0015 to 0.0020 seconds per day per century." 13 The insertion of a leap second in most years is not directly related to this deceleration. In fact, if the earth stopped decelerating and achieved a constant speed, there would still be a need to insert leap seconds in most years. The need for leap seconds is caused by our basic definition of time, which is currently derived from atomic clocks. The second has been defined to match the day as it was in the year 1900. Over a century has passed since that time. During that century, each day has lengthened by about 1.8 milliseconds. So, over a year, the difference between an atomic clock and the earth is about 365 x 0.18 = 657 milliseconds, or 0.66 seconds. Thus the need for the leap second in most years. A century from now, the accumulated error will be over a second each year, requiring two leap seconds in some years.

We attempted to dialog with 15 creation science web sites which are in error on this matter. Even though we were able to prove that they were in error, only one webmaster acknowledged that they were wrong. And they decided to retain the error because their essay was part of their archive, so accuracy did not matter.


Indicator 9: Population growth rates: If you start with a single couple who have three children, then after 52 generations (or 1,820 years if we assume 35 years per human generation) the resultant population would be 4.3 billion people. A visitor to this site quoted a creation scientists as saying:

"Reasonable figures show man's antiquity to be in terms of thousands of  years; the same figures spread over a conservative estimate of evolutionary history (one million years) would infer a contemporary population on earth 104,900 times greater than could fit in the entire universe."

Rebuttal: If this argument were true, then it would eliminate the possibility of Genesis being correct. If we started with Noah and his wife in 2313 BCE, 35 years before the flood, then by the late 3rd century BCE, the worlds population would have been 4.3 billion. By the time of the birth of Jesus, it would have reached 42 billion. These figures are obviously wrong, even if the Bible were true. The fatal flaw in this argument is that the population levels work on an entirely different system. Populations tend to increase rapidly out of control rapidly until limited by food supply, wars, natural disasters, etc. That cuts them down a much smaller number, from which they start to increase once more. The concept of the human race starting from a single couple and steadily increasing in numbers according to an exponential equation is without merit.


Indicator 10: Topsoil depth: Scientists have calculated that it takes up from 300 to 1,000 years to accumulate one inch of topsoil. The average depth of topsoil on the earth is about eight inches. Thus, the earth is quite young.

Rebuttal:  If this argument were true, then those areas of the earth where the topsoil level increases quickly -- at the rate of one inch per 300 years -- must be only 2,400 years old. Those parts of the earth would have had to be created circa 400 BCE, following the Babylonian captivity. Meanwhile, parts of the Ukraine have over 50 feet of topsoil. This indicates that the Ukraine is at least 15,000 years old -- much older than most creation scientists are willing to accept.

In reality, topsoil generation is not a process of gradual accumulation at a constant rate. It is a dynamic process. Top soil is built up at a given location by degrading plant material and by minerals leached from the underlying rock. It is washed away through erosion. It is built up through the collection of sediment that may come from great distances. Even if it were left to gradually accumulate undisturbed -- without any active erosion or deposition processes -- there are still mechanisms that cause the soil depth to reach an equilibrium value and stop growing. 14


Indicator 11: Erosion of the continents: The processes of erosion are tearing down the continents and sweeping them into the oceans in the form of sediment. The total weight of all of the continents above sea level is about 383 million billion tons. But erosion occurs at the rate of about 27.5 billion tons each year. Erosion would thus completely flatten the continents in less than 14 million years. No matter how high mountains were on the early earth, they would be long gone by now through the process of erosion. Thus, the earth cannot be billions of years old.

Rebuttal: The fallacy here is that there are additional processes that act to counteract the effects of erosion. There are immense forces from the earth's colliding tectonic plates which are pushing up mountains. There are increases in land mass due to lava from volcanoes, and the addition of rising masses of molten rock from the earth's mantle. The result is that there are many processes involved in mountains: wind and water erosion tear down mountains; other processes build them up. In the U.S. for example, Wisconsin contains a large area of once-tall mountains that "are now worn down so low as to constitute a rather simple plain..." 2 Here, erosion has been the main process in the past many millions of years. The Rocky Mountains are newer and were caused by subducting tectonic plates. This process continues to build up the Rockies today, overwhelming the forces of erosion. 3


Related essays on this web site:


References used:

The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.

  1. Henry Morris, "The remarkable birth of planet earth," Page 14. Out of print. Read reviews or try to get a used copy safely from Amazon.com online book store
  2. K.R. Miller, "Finding Darwin's God,"  Cliff Street Books, (1999). Page 300. Read reviews or order this book safely from Amazon.com online book store
  3. Frank Steiger, "The second law of thermodynamics, evolution and probability," Talk.Origins Archive at: http://www.talkorigins.org/ 
  4. "Polonium Halos: Evidence for earth's instant creation?" at: http://www.halos.com/
  5. L.G. Collins, "Polonium halos and myrmekite in pegmatite and granite" at: http://www.csun.edu/
  6. "Gravity and the Shape of the Earth," at: http://wwwcatsic.ucsc.edu/
  7. Integrated Technology Education Learning Center of Jupiter Middle School, Jupiter, FL at: http://www.comp-acc.com/
  8. "Earth: Geodetic and Geophysical Data" at: http://ssd.jpl.nasa.gov/
  9. "Evangelism: The time is now," at: http://www.layevangelism.com/
  10. "Evidence for a young earth," at: http://genesis.amen.net/
  11. "Report: Earth's magnetic field fading. Slight chance of flipping magnetic poles," CNN News, 2003-DEC-12, at: http://edition.cnn.com/
  12. "Evidence for a young earth," at: http://genesis.amen.net/
  13. "Earth Rotation," at: http://www.colorado.edu/
  14. Dave Matson, "Specific Creationist Arguments," at: http://www.infidels.org/

Copyright © 1996 to 2008 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
Last updated: 2008-AUG-24
Author: B.A. Robinson

line.gif (538 bytes)


Go to the previous page, or to the "Indicators of a young earth" menu, or choose:

Google
Web ReligiousTolerance.org

Go to home page  We would really appreciate your help

E-mail us about errors, etc.  Purchase a CD of this web site

FreeFind search, lists of new essays...  Having problems printing our essays?

 
Sponsored link: