Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site iham1.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!ihnp4!iham1!rck From: rck@iham1.UUCP (Ron Kukuk) Newsgroups: net.origins Subject: The Scientific Case for Creation: (Part 37) Message-ID: <395@iham1.UUCP> Date: Tue, 2-Jul-85 14:52:52 EDT Article-I.D.: iham1.395 Posted: Tue Jul 2 14:52:52 1985 Date-Received: Wed, 3-Jul-85 08:36:06 EDT Distribution: net Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 76 THE SCIENTIFIC CASE FOR CREATION: 116 CATEGORIES OF EVIDENCE I. (Life Sciences): THE THEORY OF ORGANIC EVOLUTION IS INVALID. (See 1-36.) II. (Astronomical Sciences): THE UNIVERSE, THE SOLAR SYSTEM, AND LIFE WERE RECENTLY CREATED. A. NATURALISTIC EXPLANATIONS FOR THE EVOLUTION OF THE SOLAR SYSTEM AND UNIVERSE ARE UNSCIENTIFIC AND HOPELESSLY INADEQUATE. (See 37-56.) B. TECHNIQUES THAT ARGUE FOR AN OLD EARTH ARE EITHER ILLOGICAL OR ARE BASED ON UNREASONABLE ASSUMPTIONS. (See 57-67.) C. MOST DATING TECHNIQUES INDICATE THAT THE EARTH AND SOLAR SYSTEM ARE YOUNG. Evolution requires an old earth and an old solar system. Without billions of years, virtually all informed evolutionists will admit that their theory is dead. But by hiding the ''origins question'' behind the veil of vast periods of time, the unsolvable problems of evolution become difficult for scientists to see and laymen to imagine. Our media and textbooks have implied for over a century that this almost unimaginable age is correct, but practically never do they examine the shaky assumptions and growing body of contrary evidence. Therefore, most people instinctively believe that things are old, and it is disturbing (at least initially) to hear evidence that our origins are relatively recent. Actually most dating techniques indicate that the earth and solar system are young--possibly less than 10,000 years old. Listed below are just a few of these evidences. 68. The atmosphere has less than 40,000 years worth of helium, from just the decay of uranium and thorium. Detailed experimentation [a] has shown that there is no known means by which large amounts of helium can escape from the atmosphere, even when considering the low atomic weight of helium. The atmosphere appears to be young [b]. a) ''What Happened to the Earth's Helium?'' NEW SCIENTIST, Vol.420, 3 December 1964, pp. 631-632. b) Melvin A. Cook, PREHISTORY AND EARTH MODELS (London: Max Parrish, 1966), pp. 10-14. 69. Lead diffuses (or leaks) from zircon crystals at known rates that increase with temperature. Since these crystals are found at different depths in the earth, those at greater depths and temperatures should have less lead. Even if the earth's crust is just a fraction of the age that is claimed by evolutionists, there should be a measurable difference in the lead content of zircons in the top 4000 meters. Actually, no measurable difference is found [a,b]. Similar conclusions are reached from a study of the helium contained in these same zircon crystals [c]. In fact, these helium studies lead to a conclusion that the earth's crust is only thousands of years old [d]. a) Robert V. Gentry, Thomas J. Sworski, Henry S. McKown, David H. Smith, R.E. Eby, and W.H. Christie, ''Differential Lead Retention in Zircons: Implications for Nuclear Waste Containment,'' SCIENCE, 16 April 1982, pp. 296-298. b) Robert V. Gentry, ''Letters,'' PHYSICS TODAY, October 1982, pp. 13-14. c) Robert V. Gentry, ''Letters,'' PHYSICS TODAY, April 1983, p. 13. d) Robert V. Gentry, personal communication, 24 February 1984. TO BE CONTINUED III. (Earth Sciences): Ron Kukuk Walt Brown