People often read newspaper reports of the discovery of dinosaur fossils that date back millions of years. So Christians wonder if the Bible record is scientific. According to genealogies recorded in Genesis, the human race was created some 6,000 years ago. Over 4,000 years ago a universal flood occurred. If Genesis is not trustworthy, can we believe the Bible stories about Jesus? This is easily answered. The geological time table used by the scientific world is not dependable. In fact, it has been proved to be highly undependable. But because a more accurate time table is not available, this time-honored table is not yet discarded. It is a convenient scale for the geologists to consult, though they themselves have their doubts.
1) What basis have you for saying that the geologists themselves have their doubts?
Answer: In 1975, to check the accuracy of the traditional ages assigned to the geological column, it was arranged to drill for tertiary system rock samples in 24 localities on six continents. The samples were brought to one lab to be tested by the Rubidium-Strontium radiometric method. The youngest tertiary sample was 70 million years old, and the oldest was 33,400 million years, The "margin" of error, if we can still use that term, was 48 times! In terms of percentage, it was 4800% This proves that the time table now in use has no trustworthy basis, and the dating method itself is faulted. Yet they still use it, beause they don't have a better one. This report appeared in the American journal Science, 1976, pp. 1086-1094.
On the other hand, proof of the reliability of the Genesis record has always existed, but has been ignored by most scientists. They consider the 6000-year age for this world absurd, so they think the Genesis record is a myth. But some open-minded scholars are willing to look at scientific facts.
A German physicist Karl Ganst started in 1835 to make measurements of the earth's magnetic field. Later his work was continued by an American scientist. In 1966 Thomas Barnes of Texas State University made a computer analysis of the figures recorded over 130 years, and published his findings in 1967. The figures indicate that the magnetic field of the earth is attenuating exponentially. It will reach the zero point after 2000 years. Going back 6000 years, the strength of earth's magnetic field would be the ideal strength for reproduction. Going back 10,000 years, the curve would approach vertical, and the magnetic field would increase more than ten times, in which case cell structure would not hold together, and life would cease to exist. See Robert Becker, The Body Electric, p. 248. N.Y. Qil, William Morrow, 1985.
2) Are there facts to show how cell life is related to the magnetic field? Have scientific experiments been performed to prove such a relation?
Answer: Yes. Embryologists have sent fertilized eggs into space above the earth's magnetic field. It proved that this field is needed for proper mitosis in a fertilized cell. If the field is too weak or too strong, proper growth is hindered. This proves that the magnetic field of 6000 years ago was ideal for mitosis, it would have been too strong 10,000 years ago, and too weak 2000 years later. The Bible tells the truth: "They will perish, but You remain; and they will all grow old like a garment; like a cloak You will fold them up, and they will be changed, but You are the same, and Your years will not fail." Heb. 1:11,12.
The sedimentary rock at the bottom of river deltas can be a scale by which the time of the universal flood can be determined. Microscopic particles of matter suspended in the river waters settle to the bottom as river waters enter the sea. The yearly sedimentation is darker in the summer and lighter in the winter. Thus by counting the layers of sedimentation, geologists conclude that all river deltas are about 4000 years old. This confirms the date of the universal flood.
As for dinosaurs, evolutionists admit that if you could find human remains in the same stratum as dinosaur fossils, the whole evolutionary theory would fall to the ground. For they say that dinosaurs existed 200 million years ago, but man appeared only 3 million years ago. An American scientist Carl E. Baugh personally conducted large-scale excavations in Glen Rose, Texas. In the same geological system where he found trilobite and dinosaur fossils, he found 57 human footprints, a fossil of a human finger, and a man-made hammer with a fossilized handle. Metallurgical analysis revealed that the hammer was 96% iron, 2.6% chlorine, and 0.74% sulphur. This proved that the metallurgy of the antedeluvians had reached a higher level than modern man. For modern man cannot produce iron with 2.6% chlorine. Human footprints that measured 36 cm proved that men before the flood were 3 meters tall.
3) In the face of these facts, why don't the evolutionists admit their mistake and believe in the Bible?
Answer: Because they don't want to believe in God. Scientists like Newton and Einstein did not think it childish to believe in God. Here we cite another fact: Evolutionists say that trilobites lived 550 million years ago. In his excavation Carl Baugh found trilobite fossils with dinosaur fossils and human footprints on the same geological level. In many parts of the world there are fossil graveyards where millions of fossils of insects, fishes, dinosaurs and birds are mixed in a huge piled, indicating they were brought together by a whirlpool during the flood. In the face of these facts, Dr. Baugh made the public statement that he had been an evolutionist, but after personally excavating these fossils, he now believed the Bible record. In 1996 he gathered material to make three video tapes entitled, "Creation in Symphony,".effectively introducing the facts of creationism. See Carl Baugh, 3330 Earhart, Suite 106, Carrington, TX 75006.
Baugh tells the story of a former academician of the Soviet Academy of Sciences Dr. Wray. On October 10, 1994 he wrote a letter to Dr. Baugh, stating that he had gathered data from Genesis to calculate the age of the earth by quantum algebra, and the result came close to 6000 years. He had shown his work to fellow academicians, who saw nothing wrong in his calculations, but could not agree with his conclusion. Dr. Wray said, "I used to be an atheist, but now I believe in the God of the Bible, and Christ is my Savior."
4) I heard that in the 1920s there was a "monkey trial" in America. Please tell us what happened.
Answer: Very well. Christians in the state of Tennessee succeeded in having the state pass a law against teaching evolution in public schools. One teacher John Scopes purposely violated the law, and was sued by the students' parents, initiating the "monkey trial" of world renown. It was so called because it involved the theory that man evolved from a monkey. The attorney for the plaintiff was the eloquent William Jennings Bryan, a zealous Christian, and the attorney for the defense was the famous criminal lawyer Clarence Darrow. Bryan had Christian zeal and a persuasive delivery, but did not master enough scientific facts to give plausible answers to the questions Darrow asked. So before the public and news reporters he was a failure. But because Scopes had broken the law, he was pronounced guilty and had to pay a fine of one hundred dollars. He appealed to a higher court, which reversed the verdict.
Evolution is one way for atheists to dipense with God. Christians usually do not master enough theoretical weapons to repel the attacks of evolutionists. The state law prohibiting the teaching of evolution in public schools was repealed in 1967. The persuasive power of the evolutionary theory depends more on authoritarian affirmations by men of learning, less on scientific facts. During the debate of the "monkey trial," the defense brought a Harvard professor, Henry F. Osborne, as expert witness to prove that an ape can turn into a man. He produced a tooth that Harold Cook had dug out of the ground in Nebraska. Dr. Osborne asserted that this molar belonged to the missing link. He called it the "Nebraska man," the first American anthropoid. See Science magazine, vol 60, No. 1427, May 5, 1922 issue, p. 463. The professor declared that this tooth proves that an ape can indeed turn into a man, convincing both the reporters and the judge, who respected his great learning. Thereupon the plaintiff attorney was isolated, and backed down in defeat.
Two years later, Harold Cook, the man who had found the tooth, went back to the site to dig for the rest of the skeleton. It turned out to be the bones of a pig. See Science, vol. 66, Dec. 16, 1927 issue, No. 1720. This is a typical case of a university professor fooling the public purely on the force of his prestigious position. We commend Science magazine for being honest enough to publish the facts and explode the mythical "Nebraska man." Here is seen the superstitious respect the general public has for men of learning.
5) It is reported that a Christian scientist has discovered something important in his study of rocks, and also was called to present his studies in court. Is that so?
Answer: Yes. the state of Arkansas had a law requiring biology teachers in its schools to teach creationism as well as evolution. A group of men challenged the validity of this law, claiming that creationism is not a science, and if teachers taught creationism they would be teaching religion, which the Constitution prohibits The state invited Dr. Robert Gentry as expert defense witness to present the results of his studies of the polonium halos in granite. The half-life of radioactive polonium is less than three minutes, and the fact that polonium particles left halos in the granite proved that the granite was originally in a fluid state, but had to solidify in about three minutes in order for the halos to be preserved in the granite, even as a glass of soda water must rapidly turn into ice in order for the bubbles to be frozen in the glass.
According to the theory of evolution, the solidification of the earth's crust took 300 million years. The photographs of halos Gentry took proved that the solidification time was about 3 minutes, otherwise the halos could not be in the rock..The scientists who opposed him clung to their 300 million year argument, which was based purely on guesswork and had no supporting facts. After Gentry presented his study of the halos preserved in granite by polonium 218 radiation, the judge then turned to the scientists and asked them how they explained this phenomenon. They simply replied, "We can't explain it, it must be left for future study." In spite of this, the judge rendered a verdict in favor of the majority, and repealed the law in question.
The halos verify the words of Ps 33:6,9: "By the word of the Lord the heavens were made, and all the host of them by the breath of His mouth. . . For He spoke, and it was done, He commanded, and it stood fast."
6) Some make a compromise, saying that six days were six long periods of time. Is that tenable?
Answer: No. Genesis says that vegetation was created on the third day, insects and other animals were made on the sixth day. An interval of two days would not affect the pollination of flowers by insects. But if the delay is a million years, all vegetation would receive no pollination, and cease to exist.
There is a kind of fig tree that needs a special insect to carry its pollen to another plant. The heart of the Voodoo lilly warms up as it matures, and exudes a fragrance to attract a small beetle to crawl inside and carry pollen to another lilly. Another plant needs a special kind of ant for reproduction. That ant makes its home in the plant. Moreover, if the six days of creation were millions of years, then God's command for us to keep the seventh-day Sabbath loses all meaning.
7) Please explain how coal fields were formed, and how they are related to the flood.
Answer: The theory devised by geologists for coal formation is also based on conjecture, and defies observable facts. They say that primordial forests were submerged in water and turned into peat, then they were buried under silt, and became coal due to heat generated by high pressure. This explanation denies many facts. One known fact is that every foot of coal was pressed from 10 feet of trees. In northeast China there is a seam that is 50 meters thick. In north America a coal seam is 65 meters thick, spread over a thousand square miles. Now the question is, where in ancient times could one find forests under normal conditions with trees piled together 500 to 650 meters thick? Only a global flood as recorded in Genesis could have piled the trees in this fashion. Another known condition renders the peat-theory untenable. If a forest is slowly submerged in water and turned into coal, the roots of the trees would be coalified in situ.. That is not the case in the coal seams, where the floors are bare rock, devoid of roots. Actually, raging waters stripped all trees in hill and plain, and later, as waters receded, the trees were carried to the plains and then covered with silt by the tides. All such phenomena fit only the story of the deluge found in Genersis.
8) Do evolutionists admit they have problems they can't solve? What are the most difficult ones?
Answer: The general distribution of animal fossils is that the higher forms of life are in the later ages of the geological column. The lower forms are in the earlier systems. Creationists explain this in terms of the ecological zones where the different forms of animal life normally lived. When the flood came, most animals were buried in their respective zones. The Cambrian system was where the earliest forms of life existed, and the fossils were largely of animals which originally lived in the ocean bed. This proves that the Cambrian level marks the ocean beds at the time of the flood. The fact that no fossils of mammals and birds exist in the Cambrian rocks, does not prove that mammals and birds did not coexist with fishes, but simply that they lived in a higher ecological zone when the flood came. But evolutionists say that during the Cambrian age, mammals and birds had not yet appeared on the earth. But what they could not explain is that the forms of animal life in Cambrian rocks were of complex and variegated forms, definitely not the earliest, original forms of life in the evolutionary scheme. They cannot explain the virtual explosion of abundant forms of highly developed marine life in the Cambrian system, while no fossils of primitive life forms are found in the Precambrian system. On the other hand, these facts fit well into the creationist model. Charles Darwin confronted this challenge, and made the following confession:
"To the question of why we do not find rich fossiliferous deposits belonging to these assumed earliest periods prior to the Cambrian system, I can give no satisfactory answer. . . The case at present must remain inexplicable, and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained." C. H. Darwin, Origin of Species, pp. 309,310.
In Darwin's day the study of paleontology was in its initial stage, and it may be argued that the absence of life in the Precambrian and the sudden appearance of many complex kinds in the Cambrian were due to insufficient collecting, and that this situation would change as more people did more searching. One hundred years later Norman D. Newell, of Columbia University, made the following observation in a paper prepared for the Darwin centennial celebrations:
"A century of intensive search of fossils in the pre-Cambrian rocks has thrown very little light on this problem. Early theories that those rocks were dominantly nonmarine or that once-contained fossils have been destroyed by heat and pressure have been abandoned, because the pre-Cambrian rocks of many districts physically are very similasr to younger rocks in all respects except that they rarely contain any records whatsoever of past life." (Newell 1959)