Information Gathered from Hugh Ross’s Books about God of the Universe as well

1. Information Gathered from Hugh Ross’s Books about God of the Universe as well as the Science that runs the Universe (1) The Fingerprint of God: Recent Scientific Discoveries Reveal the Unmistakable Identity of the Creator (2) The Genesis Question: Scientific Advances and the Accuracy of Genesis (3) Creation and Time: A Biblical and Scientific Perspective on the Creation-Date Controversy (4) The Creator and the Cosmos: How the latest Scientific Discoveries Reveal God (5) Beyond The Cosmos: The Extra-Dimensionality of God: What Recent Discoveries in Astrophysics Reveal about the Glory and Love of God

2. The Six Genesis Creation Days – Day One Genesis 1:1-5 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. Initially, there was nothing, and then light was created. As it moved out, away from the creation point, it became mass as electromagnetic radiation was converted into mass in the form of the elementary particles such as electrons, protons and neutrons. This is the “Big Bang” event that is believed to have occurred at the beginning of time. As things were formed, they all began moving away from the creation point and outward in three dimensions. All scientists agree that Life on planet earth originated in the oceans, where the Spirit of God was hovering, or moving over the waters.

3. The Six Genesis Creation Days – Day Two Genesis 1:6-8 Then God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” And God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so. And God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day. This is the beginning of the hydrological cycle that dominated the weather on Earth, the condensation and evaporation of water gives the storms their energy.

4. The Six Genesis Creation Days – Day Three Genesis 1:9-13 Then God said, “Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing after their kind, with seed in them, on the earth”; and it was so. And the earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit, with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, a third day. This is the proper order of how life began on earth. There were plants before any animals could be present as they were the food for the animals, which initially were all herbivores living on plants. Note that it specifically stated that seeds were present so that the plants could reproduce and spread after their kind, in other words one species of plant could not change into another species of plant.

5. The Six Genesis Creation Days – Day Four Genesis 1:14-19 Then God said, “Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. And God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. And God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day. The sun and stars had been created earlier, but from our viewing point on earth nothing could be seen due to the heavy dense atmosphere. So at this point the atmosphere was made transparent so that sun light could reach the surface where plants needed the sun light for photosynthesis. The moon was also created at this point, and that explains the atmosphere clearing, from the collision that formed the moon. This would place the timing of the fourth day about 4.25 billion years ago (slide 7).

6. The Six Genesis Creation Days – Day Five Genesis 1:20-23 Then God said, “Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens.” And God created the great sea monsters, and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.” And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day. We know that life began in the oceans not on land, so it makes sense that God would create creatures in the oceans first as well. The Great Sea Monsters could be the dinosaurs, as they began first in the oceans, and then moved on to land. When God saw how much they ate, and dominated the earth, God did not want them to destroy His prized creation, so he exterminated them by Flood Basalt volcanism (Daccon Flood Basalts, 65 MYr). Note that with creatures of the sea God used the same wording, that they would reproduce “after their kind”.

7. The Six Genesis Creation Days – Day Six Genesis 1:24-31 Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind”; and it was so. And God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.” And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. And God blessed them; and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.” Then God said, “Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and every green plant for food”, and it was so. And God saw all that He made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the Sixth day.

8. The Six Genesis Creation Days – Day Six Animals were created before man, who was introduced later to rule over and control the other animals. Man has been responsible for many species going extinct and is not controlled or threatened by any animal, Man is in charge of Planet Earth. This is an assumed responsibility, and it is hard to live up to, and as a species, we have failed!

9. The Six Genesis Creation Days – Day Seven Genesis 2:1-4 Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. And by the seventh day God completed His work which He had done; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made. This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven. Biologically we find that we are not discovering any new species, which would agree with the statement that God’s creating of different life forms has ceased completely. All we see are slight variations occurring to compensate for changes in our environment, which is what Darwin’s idea of evolution states. We are still in the seventh day, which also tells us that the use of Yom did mean long time periods not 24 hr days. God is waiting for his return to Earth his creation; this will occur at the return of Jesus as foretold in the book of revelation.

10. Young or Old Earth? In 1642 Cambridge University Vice-Chancellor John Lightfoot calculated a date for the creation of the universe of September 17, 3928 BC, based upon the genealogies in Genesis, Exodus, 1 and 2 Kings, and 1 and 2 Chronicles. This was corrected in 1650 by James Ussher, an Anglican archbishop in Ireland, making it October 3, 4004 BC. These dates and time scale were widely backed by the church for many years, driving many scientists and other people away from God! In 1961 Henry Morris, a civil engineering Professor and John Whitcomb, a theology Professor, published a book entitled The Genesis Flood, in 1963 the Creation Research Society (CRS) was formed to push the young-earth teaching. By 1970 the teaching of evolution became legal in all states, the Institute for Creation Research was established in 1972 to push the idea of a young earth and God’s creation of the earth. With these dates, the Earth must be 6,000 years old in 2004! The Hebrew word yom is used in Genesis for day, and in Hebrew it has three meanings; (a) sunrise to sunset, (b) sunset to sunset, (c) a segment of time without any reference to solar days (anywhere from weeks to a year to several years to an age or epoch). It cannot be used for infinite time, but only for a specific time period. How do the ages that are found by Science agree with these “ideas of young age” that are being pushed by the young earth creationists?

11. Age of the Universe • Expansion of the Universe from the “Big Bang”! • Astronomers have been able to measure the motion and speed of Galaxies • and the even older, more power-packed bodies called quasars. What they • see is that the farther away the object, the faster it is moving away. This set • of facts tells us that the universe is expanding outward from a starting point • in space and time. Confirmation of this expansion time measurement • comes from observations of the temperature and smoothness of the • cosmic background radiation. The latest results give dates accurate to • within 15%. • 2. Stellar Burning! • The color and brightness of a star will tell how long it has been burning if • we know it’s mass. This is based upon models of stellar formation and • upon nuclear physics experiments and theories. These estimates of the • ages of the stars should be accurate to within 5%. • 3. Abundances of Radioactive Elements! • Heavy elements are produced only during fast neutron capture in supernovae • explosions. These giant exploding stars produce the heavy elements by • neutron capture on a rapid time scale. Since we still have some of these • long lived isotopes on earth, we can tell the age of the earth. Since shorter • isotopes are not present, we also know that the earth is old and not young.

12. Components of Matter All Matter consists of Elementary Particles, called Atoms, which are composed of Protons, Neutrons and Electrons. (P+, N or n, e-) (A proton is normally designated as 1H) Neutrons are unstable outside of the Nucleus, where they are combined with protons and held together by the strong Nuclear Force, without being combined with a proton, a Neutron is unstable, and decays by a “Radioactive Decay” process. n P+ + e- + Energy or n 1H + e- + Energy This process is called Beta decay and occurs when ever there are too many protons in the nucleus of an atom. A “Beta” particle is nothing more than a high speed (Energy!) electron, normally traveling at a speed of a fraction of the speed of light ( 3.7 x 108m/s) with an energy of millions of electron volts.

13. How are Elements Produced? - I Neutron Capture – Long Time Scale – Star – Hydrogen Burning This process is called Nuclear Fusion and is the source of Energy in Stars such as our sun! 1H + 1H 2H + b+ ( b+ = a positive electron, or positron, a particle of anti-matter!) ( 2H = Deuterium, a “Heavy” isotope of Hydrogen, containing one Proton and one Neutron) When anti-matter and normal matter come into contact with each other, they destroy each other, producing energy in the form of Gamma-rays! e- + b+ 2 g ( 511 kev)

14. How are Elements Produced? - II • The process continues until nearly all of the hydrogen has been • used up producing Helium (several hundred billion years), and • then the star undergoes the second phase of stellar burning, • helium fusion. • 1H + 1H 2H + b+1H + 2H3He (He = Helium) • 2H + 2H 3He + 1n 2H + 3H 4He + 1n • 3He + 3He 4He + 2 1H 3He + 1H 4He + b+ • This is where our Star, the Sun obtains it’s energy currently, and • these Nuclear reactions are occurring producing energy (light and • heat) as well as Helium. This will continue for several billion years.

15. How are Elements Produced? - III Radioactive decay – There are several forms of radioactive decay, we will only consider two: Alpha decay – Heavy elements, Uranium and Thorium etc. 238U 4a+ 234Th +Energy Beta decay – Neutron rich Isotopes 14C b- + 14N + Energy

16. How are Elements Produced? - IV The Neutrons that are produced by the previous nuclear reactions are captured by other isotopes producing neutron rich isotopes. Some of these isotopes are not stable due to the large numbers of Neutrons and they undergo beta decay, where a neutron decays into a proton, producing a new element! Several examples are given below, and on the following slides. 12C(n,g)13C (Stable) 13C(n,g)14C (Radioactive, 5730 year T1/2) 14C b- + 14N 14N(n,g)15N (Stable) 15N(n,g)16N (Radioactive, 7.1 sec T1/2) 16N b- + 16O 16O(n,g)17O (Stable) 17O(n,g)18O (Stable) 18O(n,g)19O (Radioactive, 26.9 sec T1/2) 19O b- + 19F 19F(n,g)20F (Radioactive, 11.0 sec T1/2) 20F b- + 20Ne 20Ne(n,g)21Ne (Stable)

17. How are Elements Produced? - V 21Ne(n,g)22Ne (Stable) 22Ne(n,g)23Ne (Radioactive, 37.2 sec T1/2) 23Ne b- + 23Na 23Na(n,g)24Na (Radioactive, 15.0 hr T1/2) 24Na b- + 24Mg 24Mg(n,g)25Mg (Stable) 25Mg(n,g)26Mg (Stable) 26Mg(n,g)27Mg (Radioactive, 9.4 min T1/2) 27Mg b- + 27Al 27Al(n,g)28Al (Radioactive, 2.3 min T1/2) 28Al b- + 28Si 28Si(n,g)29Si (Stable) 29Si(n,g)30Si (Stable) 30Si(n,g)31Si (Radioactive, 2.6 hr T1/2) 31Si b- + 31P 31P(n,g)32P (Stable) 32P(n,g)33P (Radioactive, 14.3 d T1/2) 33P b- + 33S 33S(n,g)34S (Stable) 34S(n,g)35S (Radioactive, 87.2 d T1/2) 35S b- + 35Cl 35Cl(n,g)36Cl (Radioactive, 3.01 x 105yr T1/2) 36Cl b- + 36Ar 36Ar(n,g)37Ar (Radioactive, 35.0 d T1/2) 37Ar + e-37Cl

18. How are Elements Produced? - VI 37Cl(n,g)38Cl (Radioactive, 37.2 min T1/2) 38Cl b- + 38Ar 38Ar(n,g)39Ar (Radioactive, 369 yr T1/2) 39Ar b- + 39K 39K(n,g)40K (Radioactive, 1.28 x 109yr T1/2) 40K b- + 40Ca 40Ca(n,g)41Ca (Radioactive, 1.03 x 105yr T1/2) 41Ca + e-41K 41K(n,g)42K (Radioactive, 12.4 hr T1/2) 42K b- + 42Ca 42Ca(n,g)43Ca (Stable) 43Ca(n,g)44Ca (Stable) 44Ca(n,g)45Ca (Radioactive, 162.7 d T1/2) 45Ca b- + 45Sc 45Sc(n,g)46Sc (Radioactive, 83.8 d T1/2) 46Sc b- + 46Ti 46Ti(n,g)47Ti (Stable) 47Ti(n,g)48Ti (Stable) 48Ti(n,g)49Ti (Stable) 49Ti(n,g)50Ti (Stable) 50Ti(n,g)51Ti (Radioactive, 5.76 min T1/2) 51Ti b- + 51V 51V(n,g)52V (Radioactive, 3.76 min T1/2) 52V b- + 52Cr 52Cr(n,g)53Cr (Stable)

19. How are Elements Produced? - VII Because of gaps in Nuclear Stability, and the binding energy per Nucleon, it is impossible to make elements above Iron by simple Neutron capture and Beta decay! The only way to produce elements heavier than Iron is by neutron capture on a fast time scale before any of the short lived intermediaries can decay. This must occur during a super Novae explosion, where many neutrons can be captured in a very short time scale (~ 10-6sec). Since elements above Iron are very common on earth, we must have been cycled through at least one super Novae explosion. Followed by subsequent beta decay until we reach Nuclear stability. Example: 55Fe(n,g)56Fe(n,g)57Fe(20n,20g)87Fe 87Fe b- + 87Co 8b- + 79Br

20. How are Elements Produced? - VIII Since there are no Stable elements above the mass of Bismuth, we must have neutron capture on a fast time scale to make elements such as Uranium, which do exist on earth! For example: 209Bi + 29 1n 9b- + 238U The existence of heavy elements on earth with long half-lives shows that every thing on Earth was at least once cycled through a supernovae explosion.

21. Known nuclides

22. Clarification of some fine Points! On some of the previous slides, I was using Scientific notation, and it needs to be explained! In Scientific notation, a number that is very large, or very small can be indicated in an abbreviated form. A number is given as a number between 1 & 10 followed by a factor of 10 multiplier. N x 10n Examples: 100 = 1 x 102 one hundred 1,000 = 1 x 103 one thousand 1,000,000 = 1 x 106 one million 1,000,000,000 = 1 x 109 one billion 1,000,000,000,000 = 1 x 1012 one trillion 0.001 = 1 x 10-3 one thousandth 0.0000001 = 1 x 10-6 one millionth 0.0000000001 = 1 x 10-9 one billionth 0.0000000000001 = 1 x 10-12 one trillionth

23. Natural Decay Series of Existing Isotopes 40K 40Ar + b- T1/2 = 1.29 x 109yrs 87Rb 87Sr + b- T1/2 = 4.8 x 1010yrs 232 Th 208 Pb T1/2 = 1.4 x 1010yrs 235U 207 Pb T1/2 = 7 x 108yrs 238U 206 Pb T1/2 = 4.5 x 109yrs

24. Radiogenic Dating methods The Parent radioisotope decays to the daughter in the time indicated as the half-life. In all changes of this type, ½ of the atoms decays to the daughter in the time indicated. By measuring the quantity of the parent isotope present and the quantity of the daughter present one can calculate the quantity of time that has elapsed since the material being tested has been isolated from outside interference. In the case of the Long lived Uranium and Thorium decay series, there are elements in the decay series that are Noble gases, and being a gas could be lost, but if they are lost, the apparent decay time would be shorter, not longer! Models of Element production by the “S” and “R” processes are used to know how much was initially formed in the Primordial Universe.

25. Figure 21.3: The decay of a 10.0-g sample of strontium-90 over time.

26. Radioactive Dating Methods The most common dating method is 14C which has a Half-life of 5730 years decays by Beta emission (a high energy electron), in which a neutron changes into a proton to produce the product 14N. Professor Willard Libby developed the 14C dating method, and received the Nobel prize for developing the technique in 1960. This method has been used for many years, and as long as representative samples are used, the method delivers excellent data, on samples with ages up to approximately 50,000 years. To measure the very long times needed in the ages of the Earth and Universe, we use the very long lived naturally occurring isotopes such as: 235U, T1/2 = 7.04 x 108 yrs (704,000,000 yrs); Eventually forming 207Pb 238U, T1/2 = 4.47 x 109 yrs (4,470,000,000 yrs); “ “ 206Pb 232Th, T1/2 = 1.40 x 1010 yrs (14,000,000,000 yrs). “ “ 208Pb One Stable Isotope of Lead is 204Pb which is have not found in any radioactive decay series of a naturally occurring Isotope; indicating that it was formed in the original “big bang” event, and represents premordial formation. Each of these decays to a different lead isotope which can be measured, giving a dating method that can be used to date the ages of not only the Earth, but almost any physical object that contains matter.

27. Natural Decay series for Uranium 238 238U234 Th 234Pa 234U 230 Th 226Ra 222Rn 218Po 214Pb 218At 214Bi 210 Tl 214Po 210Pb 206Hg =  decay 210Bi 206Tl =  decay 210 Po206Pb 238U -- 8decays and 6  decays leaves you with -- 206Pb

28. Age of the Universe Relaxation times of star clusters > 4 Billion Years Erosion on Mercury, Mars, and the Moon > 4 Billion Years Star stream interactions in galaxies > 8 Billion Years Expansion of the Universe 15.5 + 4.0 Billion Years Color-Luminosity fitting of Stars 18.0 + 2.4 “ “ Nucleochronology (Radioisotopes) 17.0 + 4.0 “ “ Deuterium abundance and mass density 19.0 + 5.0 “ “ Anthropic Principles 17.0 + 7.0 “ “ Mean age = 17 + 3 Billion Years

29. The Greatest Discovery of the Century-I • Fact: The universe is only billions of years old, not quadrillions • or a nearly infinite number of years. • Theological significance: Religious and philosophical systems • depending on infinite or near infinite age have no • foundation in reality. • 2) Fact: The universe can be traced back to a single, ultimate • origin of matter, energy, time and space (with the • dimensions of length, width, and height). • Theological significance: The cause of the universe – i.e., the • Entity (Creator) who brought the universe into existence – • existed and created from out-side (independent) of the • matter, energy, and space-time dimensions of the • universe.

30. The Greatest Discovery of the Century-II 3) Fact: The universe, our galaxy, and our solar system exhibit more than sixty characteristics that require exquisite fine-tuning for their very existence, and also for the existence of life (any kind of physical life, not just life as we know it). Theological significance: The Entity (Creator) who brought the universe into existence must be personal, intelligent, powerful, and caring, for only a super-intelligent, super-powerful Person could design and manufacture what we see, including life; caring, for only care could explain the enormous investment of creative effort, the attention to intricate detail, and the comprehensive provision for needs. Observations by the COBE satellite of tiny ripples in the radiation left over from the “Big Bang”. Evidence for the birth of the universe!

31. Age of the Solar System The Nucleochronology dating methods use the half-lives of long lived radioisotopes and their daughters to measure the long time periods involved in the ages of the Earth, Moon, and Universe. Age of the Universe 17+ 3 Billion Years Age of the Earth 4.57 Billion Years Age of the moon 4.25 Billion Years -

32. Ages in the Earth-Moon system Based upon Earth’s position relative to the sun, it should have an atmosphere 40 times as dense as it has! What happened to the atmosphere? The answer is our over sized moon! Something happened about 4.25 billion years ago. The moon is moving away from Earth at a rate of several cm per year! This implies that the moon was in contact with the Earth approximately 4.25 billion years ago. The moon is younger than the earth. Radioisotopic dating methods show that the Earth is 4.57 billion years old, and from Apollo samples brought back from the moon, it is only 4.25 billion years old. The size of the moon also puts a drag on the earth’s rotational velocity, and the Earth’s rotation is definitely slowing down. The moon also has a slightly, but significantly different chemical and Isotopic composition than does the Earth, proving that they did not form from the same dust cloud orbiting around the sun. It is postulated that an impactor approximately the size of Mars (nine times the mass of the moon, and one-ninth the mass of Earth), hit the earth and blew the atmosphere (containing methane and ammonia) into space, but retaining the water, which is heavier.

33. The Response of Young Earth Creationists Challenge 1: Astronomers are wrong about the distance to stars and galaxies. Reply: The implication is that astronomers determine the distances of cosmic objects by only one method: the red-shifts of spectral lines. And because red-shift measurements of distances may possibly be off by a large percentage, the distances reported by astronomers are considered unreliable. This, however, is not true. Astronomers use a wide variety of distance measuring tools. While disagreement does exist over which are the most reliable, the uncertainties hover around 10 to 15 percent. Challenge 2: God could have created the light waves already in transit. Reply: This argument obviously belongs to the appearance-of-age category. The overlooked fact here is that star light and galaxy light give direct indications of their travel distances. The spectral lines (light waves at various frequencies) of stars and galaxies are broadened in direct proportion to the distance they travel. The random motions of gas clouds in space cause this effect. The radiation between spectral lines, called the continuum, grows redder as it travels through interstellar and intergalactic dust. This reddening, like the effect of forest fire smoke on our view of the sun, is directly proportional to the distance the light has traveled. Both theory and observations confirm that the broadening and reddening effects are reliable indicators of light-travel time and distance, even up to billions of light years.

34. The Response of Young Earth Creationists Challenge 3: Light may have traveled faster a few thousand years ago. Reply: The work of two Australian creationists has been widely publicized among proponents of a young universe. Barry Setterfield and Trevor Norman teamed up to propose that the reason the universe appears old is that light used to travel much faster than it does today. Given decay in light’s velocity, the present value of the velocity of light would yield an inaccurate measure of the size and age for the universe. The basis for this claim is a misinterpretation of data from speed-of-light measurements made over many years. What the data actually show is the increasing refinement of measurements, not a change in velocity. The first calculation of the speed of light was attempted in 1675 by Olaus Romer, a Danish astronomer. His figure was about 3% higher than the modern measurements show. But the uncertainty in his measurements exceeded 3%. If Romer had had more precise data for one part of his calculation, his speed-of-light figure would have agreed with modern measurements to within 0.5%. Apparently the article describing this research was misunderstood by the Australians, and they took the 1675 speed figure as evidence for the speed-of-light decreasing by 0.5%.

35. The Response of Young Earth Creationists Challenge 4: Light may take a shortcut through space. Reply: This argument arises from the work of young-universe creationist Harold Slusher, who picks up the idea proposed in 1953 by Parry Moon and Domina Spencer who were trying to overthrow Einstein’s theory of relativity. Their theory was that light could travel in a different type of space, a highly curved type of space, and therefore travel faster than its fixed speed. They backed up their theory with no mathematics, or facts, and Slusher did not know how well proven Einstein’s theory of relativity is accepted and understood by scientists.

36. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - I Sample Evidence A: The continents are eroding too quickly Erosion measurements show that the continents are lowered by wind, rain, etc., at a rate of about 0.05 millimeters per year. At this rate, the continents (averaging about 800 meters in elevation) would disappear in about 16 million years. Since continents do still have considerable elevation, the earth must be younger than 16 million years. Reply: The fallacy lies in its failure to acknowledge that lava flows, delta and continental shelf buildup (from eroded material), coral reef buildup, and uplift from colliding tectonic plates occur at rates roughly equivalent to, and in many cases far exceeding, the erosion rate. The Himalayas, for example, as a result of tectonic uplift, are rising at a rate of about 15 millimeters per year. The San Gabriel Mountains, just north of Los Angeles, are rising at an average rate of 9 millimeters per year. Lava flows have increased the land area of the state of Hawaii by several square miles since its admission into the United States in 1959. The amount of land mass added each year as a result of volcanoes and tectonics is roughly independent of the total continental land area. Therefore continental land area continues to increase until there is enough land area that the rate of erosion equals the rate of build up. The time required for the continents to build up from 0% of the global surface area to the present 30% (and equilibrium) takes about 2 billion years. Thus continental erosion is an argument for an old rather than a young earth.

37. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - II Sample Evidence B: Dust accumulates too quickly on the moon’s surface. In the 1950’s measurements at Mauna Loa Volcano in Hawaii by a geophysicist found nickel on air filters, and he assumed that since it is rare in crustal material it must all be from meteorites. Using the data that meteorites are about 2.5% nickel, they calculated that some 14 million tons of space dust settles on the earth every year. Applied to a 4 billion year old moon, this would be 145 feet. Since we know that there is only about 2.5 inches on the moon, this has been used to give an age for the moon of only about 10,000 years by the young-universe creationists. Reply: I have done 10 years of aerosol measurements at Mauna Loa myself, and the Nickel found on atmospheric aerosols is predominately of Crustal origin, not extraterrestrial. In fact the quantity of extraterrestrial material can be measured by an excess of Iridium and it is much less, amounting for only about 20 thousand tons of extraterrestrial dust falling on the earth per year. This number is in good agreement with that obtained from satellites, 23 thousand tons per year. If we use the best data available on the cosmic dust in fall rate we obtain an age of the moon of 4.25 billion years, in agreement with the radiogenic dates for the moon, not the young earth date of 6,000 years!

38. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - III Sample Evidence C: The earth’s magnetic field is decaying too rapidly. The earth’s magnetic field has decreased steadily since measurements were first taken some 150 years ago. Based on the field strength of a typical magnetic star (certainly exceeding any conceivable value for Earth) and on the observed rate of decay, some creationists have calculated that the decay process must have begun on Earth on more than 10,000 years ago. Thus the earth’s age must be 10,000 years or less. Reply: The problem with this evidence is that Earth’s magnetic field does not undergo steady decay but rather follows a “sinusoidal” pattern. That is, the field strength decays, builds up, decays, builds up, etc. The proof for this pattern lies in ancient geological strata found throughout the world. The rocks reveal that the earth’s magnetic field reverses its polarity roughly every half million years. Each reversal lasts roughly 10,000 years. The earth’s magnetic field originates in the core of the earth where the Iron-Nickel material that makes up the core is semi molten, and undergoes circulation patterns as heat from decaying radioisotopes is conducted away from the core. The Iron atoms, being magnetic align themselves with the earth’s magnetic field, and volcanic lava rocks formed during volcanic eruptions show the direction and strength of the earth’s magnetic field as it was when these rocks were cooled from the liquid magma.

39. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - IV Sample Evidence D: The sun burns by gravitational contraction and thus must be young. Before the discovery of nuclear energy, the only explanation astronomers could offer for the enormous energy output of the sun and other stars was gravitational contraction. Given the diameter and energy output of our sun, we can calculate that its maximum age would be about 100 million years if it were generating energy only by this process. When some measurements indicated a very slight decrease in the sun’s diameter, a number of young-earth creationists concluded that the sun’s energy output must arise only from the gravitational collapse of the sun, rather than from nuclear fusion processes at its core. Therefore, they surmised that the sun’s age must be less than 100 million years. Reply: Again, the argument overlooks significant data. First, it has been shown that if a body of our sun’s diameter were experiencing gravitational contraction, the temperature, pressure, and other conditions at its center would inevitably ignite nuclear fusion. Furthermore, various measured characteristics of the sun - including its effective temperature, luminosity, spectra, radius, outflow of neutrinos, and mass - all guarantee that the sun is burning by nuclear fusion and that this fusion has been proceeding for about 5 billion years. As for the observed decrease in the sun’s diameter, the measurements cited were later found to be at odds with other visual measurements.

40. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - V Sample Evidence E: Galaxy clusters are not dispersed widely. For a cluster of heavenly bodies to remain together (contained), the gravity of the system must be sufficient to overcome the velocities of the individual bodies within it. Armed with measurements of the velocities and masses for all the galaxies in a galaxy cluster, astronomers can calculate: (a) the dispersal time (time it takes for all the galaxies to leave the cluster) for clusters with total mass too small for gravitational containment; or (b) the relaxation time (time required for galaxies to assume randomized velocities) for clusters with total mass large enough for containment. Some creationists point out that when such calculations are applied to galaxy clusters, the lack of observed galaxy dispersal indicates an age for the clusters much less than a billion years. Reply: The problem with this argument is that these calculations for dispersal and relaxation times assume not only that all the mass within the galaxy clusters is luminous but also that galaxies approximate point sources (those with diameters very much smaller than the average distances between them). On the contrary, sound evidence exists to conclude that most of the mass is non-luminous (that is, not shining by its own light production). And galaxies cannot be treated as point sources. In fact, their diameters are only about an order of magnitude smaller (that is, about ten times smaller) than the average distances between them within a given cluster.

41. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - VI By comparison, however, essentially all of the mass within the star clusters is visible, and the stars within the clusters are point sources. The average distances between them are at least seven orders of magnitude greater (that is, about 10 million times greater) than their average diameters. When dispersal and relaxation time calculations are applied to star clusters in our galaxy, many clusters show their ages to be greater than 2 billion years.

42. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - VII Sample Evidence F: Granite crystal halos can arise from 218Po decay only if the earth is young. Polonium 218 is a radioactive isotope with a half-life of only three minutes. Yet halos in granite crystals that appear to arise from the decay of polonium 218 show up in what seems to be basement or primordial rock deposits. If the halos arise from primordial polonium, then how did the surrounding rocks crystallize so rapidly that the crystals were ready to receive halo impressions from the decay of polonium? The answer according to young-earth creationist Robert Gentry, among others, is that geologists are wrong about their understanding of the processes shaping the earth shortly after its formation. Instead, they say, God must have imposed the geological structures instantaneously. Therefore, measurements by geologists do not prove that the earth is old, nor can they be used to argue against a young earth. Reply: There is no evidence proof of halos in basement or primordial rocks, and likewise no evidence that halos arise only from the decay of polonium 218. Geologist Jeffrey Wakefield actually visited all of Gentry’s sample sites, in every case Gentry’s samples came not from primordial granites as he had claimed, but rather from young dikes (igneous rock infusions into vertical fissures) that crosscut older igneous and sedimentary rocks. The decay of Uranium or Thorium all have 7 or 8 alpha emitters! Since any alpha emitter can make halos, these other isotopes could be responsible.

43. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - VIII Sample Evidence G: Rapid sedimentation and peat deposition following the 1980 Mount Saint Helens eruption demonstrated that all geological processes are not gradual, but rapid. Within a relatively brief period of time (a few months to a few years) following the violent eruption of Mt. St. Helens, peat layers (the first stage in the formation of Coal) and sedimentary rock already had formed in the vicinity of the volcano. This phenomenon seemed to young-earth creationists to challenge the notion that geologic layers are deposited according to gradual uniformitarian processes taking place over millions and hundreds of millions of years. They concluded that geological processes provide evidences for a young earth and not for an old earth. Reply: The problem lies in the assumption that all geological processes either take place gradually at relatively uniform (i.e., constant) rates or rapidly at rates pulsed by major catastrophes. The young-earth versus old-earth debate is pictured in this context as a battle between the principles of uniformitarianism and the principles of catastrophism, with one significant twist. Catastrophism as defined by geologists refers to the formation of geologic structures through a variety of catastrophes occurring at different times. Young-earth creationists define catastrophism as the formation of all Earth’s major geologic structures by a single catastrophic event, namely the Genesis flood, occurring

44. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - IX during a ten-and-a-half-month period five to fifteen thousand years ago. The use of the Mount Saint Helens exemplifies the “either-or” fallacy (that is, it sets up an unfounded dilemma). Geology reflects the operation of both slow and rapid processes. Some geological features can only be explained by gradual processes over millions of years, such as: coral atolls, anthracite coal and certain conglomerate and metamorphic layers. In the case of coral atolls, scientists can measure the daily accumulation of band-like deposits over millions of years. From these deposits they can make many determinations, including the rate of slowing of the earth’s rotation period. Such deposits establish that the earth’s rotation period has been slowing down at exactly the same rate over the last 400 million years.

45. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - X Sample Evidence H: Since computer models of the spiral structure of galaxies show that the spiral collapses after two or three rotations, spiral galaxies must be much younger than astronomers claim. Isaac Newton’s laws of motion enable us to calculate with considerable precision the dynamics of large rotating systems of stars. When Kevin Prendergast made such calculations twenty-five years ago, he discovered that a large system of stars will establish a spiral structure only in a few rotations and that after two or three more rotations the structure will collapse into a sphere or an ellipsoid. Since we know that galaxies take only a few hundred million years to rotate, the existence of a significant number of spiral galaxies in the universe today, according to certain young-universe creationists, proves they cannot be as old as the 9 to 15 billion years that astronomers claim. Instead, they must be less than 2 billion years old. If they are less than 2 billion years old, then astronomers cannot be trusted in their age calculations, and perhaps the universe is only thousands of years old. Reply: The argument based upon evidence H overlooks the continuing research by Prendergast and others. In the years following his initial computer modeling efforts, Prendergast discovered that ongoing star formation stabilizes the spiral structure. Specifically, he demonstrated that as long as new stars continue to form at a significant

46. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - XI rate within a galaxy, the spiral structure will be maintained. But as soon as star formation ceases, the spiral structure will collapse within the next two or three rotations. Prendergast’s discovery beautifully dovetails with astronomers’ observations of galaxies. In spherical and ellipsoidal galaxies, astronomers see no evidence of ongoing star formation, whereas in the spiral galaxies such evidence is abundant. And, the farther away astronomers look (that is, the farther back in time they see), the more spiral galaxies they observe. Since spiral galaxies still exist, the universe cannot be any older than about 25 billion years. Because only 6% of the galaxies near our own are spirals, the universe cannot be any younger than about 12 billion years.

47. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - XII Sample Evidence I: Trails of “human” footprints alongside, and sometimes crossing over, trails of dinosaur prints prove that dinosaurs were contemporary with humans. The observation of a few footprints that appear to be human prints alongside a great many prints that were clearly made by dinosaurs has been interpreted by many young-earth creationists as proof that dinosaurs and men lived together. This fact would imply that the geological strata in which the prints were found could not have been deposited tens of millions of years ago but only in the last few thousand years. Therefore the dinosaurs and the strata of the earth are not relics from the past but have existed only for about ten thousand years. Reply: The first assumption that must be addressed is that prints in close proximity necessarily establish contemporaneous existence. This fact is false. The earth’s strata can be disturbed and redisturbed by events occurring at different times, especially in a river bed like that at Glen Rose, Texas, where most of the “human” footprints have been found. But this faulty assumption is not the main defect of the argument from evidence I. The more serious problem lies in the identification of the prints as human. There are reasons to believe that these “human” prints were made by dinosaurs, their size, shape, features, etc. All indicate that these tracks were made by small dinosaurs, not “humans”.

48. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - XIII Sample Evidence J: Since a comet’s average lifespan is only a couple of thousand years, given the rather limited supply of comets, their present existence proves the solar system cannot be any older than a few thousand years. Comets orbiting the solar system, such as Halley’s comet, are reported to disintegrate in about two thousand years on the average. Every time a comet swings close by the sun, the heat and light of the sun boil away a significant portion of the comet’s mass. After a few dozen revolutions, none of the comet remains. Since comets are observed orbiting the sun, the solar system must be only a few thousand years old. Reply: Estimates cited in evidence J for the average lifespan of a comets date back to the 1970s. At that time no space-based measurements of comets were available, and what data did exist was weighted heavily by easy-to-see comets. The easiest comets to see are those that pass closest to the sun, and these comets suffer the most rapid disintegration. Hence, estimates previous to 1980 of the average lifespans for comets have since proven to be far too low. In 1986 five space craft visited Halley’s comet and made the first accurate measurements of both its mass and its rate of disintegration. Astronomers determined that Halley’s comet is massive enough to survive at least another 500 revolutions around the sun. With observations of Halley’s comet going back to 240 BC, and knowing that it passes the sun every seventy-six years, we can calculate

49. Is There Scientific Evidence for a Young Universe? - IVX the approximate minimum lifespan for this comet at 40,000+ years. Halley’s comet is unusual in that it has such a short period of revolution. Much more typical are comets such as Kohoutek, which comes around the sun every 80,000 years, or Pons-Brooks and Griggs-Mellish, every 3,000,000 years. Five hundred revolutions for these comets would yield lifespans of 40 million and 1.5 billion years respectively.

50. A “Just Right” Universe Evidence for the Fine Tuning of the Universe • Strong Nuclear force constant • if larger: no hydrogen; nuclei essential for life would be unstable • if smaller: no elements other than hydrogen • Weak Nuclear force constant • if larger: too much hydrogen converted to helium in big bang, hence too much • heavy element material made by star burning; no expulsion of heavy • elements from stars • if smaller: too little helium produced from big bang, hence too little heavy • element material made by star burning; no expulsion of heavy • elements from stars • Gravitational force constant • if larger: stars would be too hot and would burn up too quickly and too • unevenly • if smaller: stars would remain so cool that nuclear fusion would never ignite, • hence no heavy element production