Download Scientific Evidence for A

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
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.
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.
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.
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).
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”.
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.
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!
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.
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?
Age of the Universe
1. 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.
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.
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)
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
2H
+ 2H
3He
3He
+ 3He
+ b+
+ 1n
4He
+ 2 1H
1H
3He
+ 2H
2H
+ 3H
3He
+ 1H
(He = Helium)
4He
+ 1n
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.
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
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 T )
1/2
14N(n,g)15N (Stable)
15N(n,g)16N (Radioactive, 7.1 sec T )
1/2
16O(n,g)17O (Stable)
17O(n,g)18O (Stable)
18O(n,g)19O (Radioactive, 26.9 sec T )
1/2
19F(n,g)20F (Radioactive, 11.0 sec T )
1/2
20Ne(n,g)21Ne (Stable)
14C
b- + 14N
16N
b- + 16O
19O
b- + 19F
b- + 20Ne
20F
How are Elements Produced? - V
21Ne(n,g)22Ne
(Stable)
22Ne(n,g)23Ne (Radioactive, 37.2 sec T )
1/2
23Na(n,g)24Na (Radioactive, 15.0 hr T )
1/2
24Mg(n,g)25Mg (Stable)
25Mg(n,g)26Mg (Stable)
26Mg(n,g)27Mg (Radioactive, 9.4 min T )
1/2
27Al(n,g)28Al (Radioactive, 2.3 min T )
1/2
28Si(n,g)29Si (Stable)
29Si(n,g)30Si (Stable)
30Si(n,g)31Si (Radioactive, 2.6 hr T )
1/2
31P(n,g)32P (Stable)
32P(n,g)33P (Radioactive, 14.3 d T )
1/2
33S(n,g)34S (Stable)
34S(n,g)35S (Radioactive, 87.2 d T )
1/2
35Cl(n,g)36Cl (Radioactive, 3.01 x 105yr T )
1/2
36Ar(n,g)37Ar (Radioactive, 35.0 d T )
1/2
23Ne
24Na
b- + 23Na
b- + 24Mg
28Al
b- + 27Al
b- + 28Si
31Si
b- + 31P
27Mg
33P
b- + 33S
b- + 35Cl
36Cl
b- + 36Ar
37Ar + e37Cl
35S
How are Elements Produced? - VI
37Cl(n,g)38Cl
(Radioactive, 37.2 min T1/2)
38Ar(n,g)39Ar (Radioactive, 369 yr T )
1/2
39K(n,g)40K (Radioactive, 1.28 x 109yr T )
1/2
40Ca(n,g)41Ca (Radioactive, 1.03 x 105yr T )
1/2
41K(n,g)42K (Radioactive, 12.4 hr T )
1/2
42Ca(n,g)43Ca (Stable)
43Ca(n,g)44Ca (Stable)
44Ca(n,g)45Ca (Radioactive, 162.7 d T )
1/2
45Sc(n,g)46Sc (Radioactive, 83.8 d T )
1/2
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 T )
1/2
51V(n,g)52V (Radioactive, 3.76 min T )
1/2
52Cr(n,g)53Cr (Stable)
b- + 38Ar
39Ar
b- + 39K
40K
b- + 40Ca
41Ca + e41K
42K
b- + 42Ca
38Cl
45Ca
46Sc
51Ti
52V
b- + 45Sc
b- + 46Ti
b- + 51V
b- + 52Cr
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
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.
Known nuclides
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
1,000
1,000,000
1,000,000,000
1,000,000,000,000
0.001
0.0000001
0.0000000001
0.0000000000001
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
1 x 102
1 x 103
1 x 106
1 x 109
1 x 1012
1 x 10-3
1 x 10-6
1 x 10-9
1 x 10-12
one hundred
one thousand
one million
one billion
one trillion
one thousandth
one millionth
one billionth
one trillionth
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
T1/2 = 4.5 x 109yrs
Pb
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.
Figure 21.3: The decay of a 10.0-g
sample of strontium-90 over time.
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, T
8
Eventually forming 207Pb
1/2 = 7.04 x 10 yrs (704,000,000 yrs);
238U, T
9
206Pb
“
“
1/2 = 4.47 x 10 yrs (4,470,000,000 yrs);
232Th, T
10 yrs (14,000,000,000 yrs).
208Pb
“
“
1/2 = 1.40 x 10
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.
Natural Decay series for Uranium 238
238U
234 Th
234Pa
234U
230 Th
226Ra
222Rn
218Po
218At
214Pb
214Bi
214Po
= a decay
= b decay
238U
210 Tl
210Pb
210Bi
210
Po
-- 8 a decays and 6 b decays leaves you with --
206Hg
206Tl
206Pb
206Pb
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
Mean age =
“
“
“
“
“
“
17.0 + 7.0 “
“
17 + 3 Billion Years
The Greatest Discovery of the Century-I
1) 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.
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!
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
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.
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.
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%.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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.
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”.
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
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.
A “Just Right” Universe
Evidence for the Fine Tuning of the Universe
1. Strong Nuclear force constant
if larger: no hydrogen; nuclei essential for life would be unstable
if smaller: no elements other than hydrogen
2. 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
3. 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
4. Electromagnetic force constant
if larger: insufficient chemical bonding; elements more massive than boron
would be too unstable for fission
If smaller: insufficient chemical bonding; inadequate quantities of either
carbon or oxygen
5. Ratio of electromagnetic force constant to gravitational force constant
if larger: no stars less than 1.4 solar masses, hence short stellar life spans and
uneven stellar luminosities
if smaller: no stars more than 0.8 solar masses, hence no heavy element
production
6. Ratio of electron to proton mass
if larger: insufficient chemical bonding
if smaller: insufficient chemical bonding
7. Ratio of numbers of protons to electrons
if larger: electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing galaxy, star,
and planet formation
if smaller: electromagnetism would dominate gravity, preventing galaxy, star,
and planet formation
8. Expansion rate of the Universe
if larger: no galaxy formation
if smaller: universe would collapse prior to star formation
9. Entropy level of the Universe
if smaller: no proto-galaxy formation
if larger: no star condensation within the proto-galaxies
10. Baryon or nucleon density of the Universe
if larger: too much deuterium from big bang, hence stars burn too rapidly
if smaller: insufficient helium from big bang, hence too few heavy elements
forming
11. Velocity of light
if faster: stars would be too luminous
if slower: stars would not be luminous enough
12. Age of the Universe
if older: no solar-type stars in a stable burning phase in the right part of the
galaxy
if younger: solar-type stars in a stable burning phase would not yet have
formed
13. Initial uniformity of radiation
if smoother: stars, star clusters, and galaxies would not have formed
if coarser: universe by now would be mostly black holes and empty space
14. Fine structure constant (a number used to describe the fine structure
splitting of spectral lines)
if larger: DNA would be unable to function; no stars more than 0.7 solar
masses
if larger than 0.06: matter would be unstable in large magnetic fields
if smaller: DNA would be unable to function; no stars less than 1.8 solar
masses
15. Average distance between galaxies
if larger: insufficient gas would be infused into our galaxy to sustain star
formation over an adequate time span
if smaller: the sun’s orbit would be too radically disturbed
16. Average distance between stars
if larger: heavy element density too thin for rocky planets to form
if smaller: planetary orbits would become destabilized
17.
Decay rate of the proton
if greater: life would be exterminated by the release of radiation
if smaller: insufficient matter in the universe for life
18.
12Carbon (12C)
to 16Oxygen (16O) energy level ratio
if larger: insufficient oxygen
if smaller: insufficient carbon
19. Ground state energy level for 4Helium (4He)
if larger: insufficient carbon and oxygen
if smaller: insufficient carbon and oxygen
20. Decay rate of 8Beryllium (8Be)[ 7 x 10-17sec]
if slower: heavy element fusion would generate catastrophic explosions in
all the stars
if faster: no element production beyond beryllium and, hence, no life
chemistry possible
21. Mass excess of the neutron over the proton
[ n=1.67493 x 10-27kg, p=1.67262 x 10-27kg or n/p=1.00138]
if greater: neutron decay would leave too few neutrons to form the heavy
elements essential for life
if smaller: neutron decay would produce so many neutrons as to cause all
stars to collapse rapidly into neutron stars or black holes
22. Initial excess of nucleons over anti-nucleons
if greater: too much radiation for planets to form
if smaller: not enough matter for galaxies or stars to form
23. Polarity of the water molecule
if greater: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too great for life to exist
if smaller: heat of fusion and vaporization would be too small for life’s
existence; liquid water would become too inferior a solvent for life
chemistry to proceed; ice would not float, leading to a runaway
freeze-up
24. Supernovae eruptions
if too close: radiation would exterminate life on the planet
if too far: not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky planets
if too frequent: life on planet would be exterminated
if too infrequent: not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky
planets
if too late: life on the planet would be exterminated by radiation
if too soon: not enough heavy element ashes for the formation of rocky
planets
25. White dwarf binaries
if too few: insufficient fluorine produced for life chemistry to proceed
if too many: disruption of planetary orbits from stellar density; life on the
planet would be exterminated
if too soon: not enough heavy elements made for efficient fluorine production
if too late: fluorine made too late for incorporation in proto-planet
26.
Ratio of exotic to ordinary matter
if smaller: galaxies would not form
if larger: universe would collapse before solar type stars could form
27. Galaxy clusters
if too dense: galaxy collisions and mergers would disrupt star and planet
orbits; too much radiation
if too sparse: insufficient infusion of gas into galaxies to sustain star
formation for a long enough time period
28. Number of effective dimensions in the early universe
if smaller: quantum mechanics, gravity, and relativity could not coexist and
life would be impossible
if larger: quantum mechanics, gravity, and relativity could not coexist and
life would be impossible
29. Number of effective dimensions in the present universe
if smaller: electron, planet, and star orbits would become unstable
if larger: electron, planet, and star orbits would become unstable
30. Mass of the neutrino
if smaller: galaxy clusters, galaxies, and stars would not form
if larger: galaxy clusters and galaxies would be too dense
31. Big bang ripples
if smaller: galaxies would not form; universe expands too rapidly
if larger: galaxy clusters and galaxies would be too dense; black holes would
dominate; universe collapses too quickly
32.
Total mass density
if smaller: universe would expand too quickly for solar type stars to form
if larger: universe would expand too slowly, resulting in unstable orbits and
too much radiation
33. Space energy density
if smaller: universe would expand too slowly, resulting in unstable orbits and
too much radiation
if larger: universe would expand too quickly for solar type stars to form
34. Size of the relativistic dilation factor
if smaller: certain life-essential chemical reactions would not function
properly
if larger: certain life-essential chemical reactions would not function
properly
35.
Uncertainty magnitude in the Heisenberg uncertainty principle
if smaller: oxygen transport to body cells would be too small; certain
life-essential elements would be unstable; certain life-essential
chemical reactions would not function properly
if larger: certain life-essential elements would be unstable; certain
life-essential chemical reactions would not function properly
Scriptures of Gods Creation - I
Psalm 33:6
By the word of the Lord the heavens were made,
and by the breath of his mouth all their host.
Jer 10:12
It is He who made the earth by His power,
Who established the world by His power;
And by His understanding He has stretched out the heavens.
Is 48:13
“ Surely My hand founded the earth,
And My right hand spread out the heavens;
When I call to them, they stand together”
Scriptures of Gods Creation - II
Is 45:18
For thus says the Lord, who created the heavens
(He is the God who formed the earth and made it,
He established it and did not create it a waste place,
but formed it to be inhabited),
“I am the Lord, and there is none else.”
Jer 33:25
“Thus says the Lord, ‘If My covenant for day and night stand
not, and the fixed patterns of heaven and earth I have not
established,”
Is 40:22
It is He who sits above the vault of the earth,
And its inhabitants are like grasshoppers,
Who stretches out the heavens like a curtain
And spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.
Scriptures of Gods Creation - III
Is 40:26 - 28
Lift up your eyes on high
And see who has created these stars,
The one who leads forth their host by number,
He calls them all by name;
Because of the greatness of His might and the strength of
His power
Not one of them is missing.
Why do you say, O Jacob, and assert, O Israel,
“My way is hidden from the Lord,
And the justice due me escapes the notice of my God”
Do you not know? Have you not heard?
The Everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the
earth
Does not become weary or tired.
His understanding is inscrutable.
Protons, Neutrons, electrons and Others
Protons are the building blocks of matter, and are very long lived!
Neutrons are the combination of a proton and an electron, the
Light negatively charged particle that is around the atom. The
following are Nuclear reactions for the decay of a proton, and
Neutrons in atoms with an excess of either particle.
N
P+ + e-
P+
P+ + b- + Energy
Beta decay
N + Energy
Electron capture
N + b+ + Energy
Positron decay
A positron is an example of “Exotic” matter, or anti-matter, and
it is in a positive matter Universe!
Positron Emission Tomography (PET) – A new and
Important Tool in Imaging Research
In the technique of positron Tomography, a positron emitting isotope
Is included into a molecule that is incorporated into a chemical reaction.
The positron emitted during the decay of the isotope will analite with an
Electron and emit two 511 kev gamma rays that can then be detected,
and the location of the decaying isotope isolated accurately.
b+ + e -
Two Gamma rays at 180o
Energy
511 kev
e-
+
b+
Common Positron emitting Isotopes:
11C,
511 kev
15O,
The two gamma
rays come away
at 180o.
T1/2 = 122s ; 18F, T1/2 = 1.83 hr
T1/2= 20.3 min , 13N, T1/2 = 9.97 min , ETC
Positron Emitting Isotopes
15O
15N
+ b+ + Energy
18F
18O
+ b+ + Energy
11C
11B
+ b+ + Energy
13N
13C
+ b+ + Energy
These radioisotopes can be incorporated into glucose molecules
and injected into the blood stream leading to the brain, where the
glucose will be metabolized in the cells. The position of the
glucose tells us where the glucose molecules was! In this way,
We can obtain images of the Human Brain while it is functioning.
Glucose = C6H12O6
Positron Emission Tomograph
The Tomograph is an
instrument that is a ring
of gamma ray detectors
that react very fast to
gamma rays, and by
measuring the time each
detector receives the signal
one can locate the point of
_ 1 cm in a
origin of the gamma ray to a precision of +
human being or any other physical object, with out
any in vivo investigation. The detectors must have a
_ 250 ps per pulse.
capability of measuring up to +
Earth: The Place for Life
Evidence for the Fine-Tuning of the Galaxy-Sun-Earth-Moon
System for Life Support (4)
1. Galaxy cluster type
if too rich: galaxy collisions and mergers would disrupt solar orbit
if too sparse: insufficient infusion of gas to sustain star formation for a long
enough time
2. Galaxy size
if too large: infusion of gas and stars would disturb sun’s orbit and ignite too
many galactic eruptions
if too small: insufficient infusion of gas to sustain star formation for a long
enough time
3. Galaxy Type
if too elliptical: star formation would cease before sufficient heavy element
build-up for life chemistry
if too irregular: radiation exposure on occasion would be too severe and
heavy elements for life chemistry would not be available
4. Galaxy location
if too close to a rich galaxy cluster: galaxy would be gravitationally disrupted
if too close to very large galaxy(ies): galaxy would be gravitationally disrupted
5. Supernovae Eruptions
if too close: life on the planet would be exterminated by radiation
if too far: not enough heavy element ashes would exist for the formation of
rocky planets
if too infrequent: not enough heavy element ashes present for the formation
of rocky planets
if too frequent: life on the planet would be exterminated
if too soon: not enough heavy element ashes would exist for the formation
of rocky planets
if too late: life on the planet would be exterminated by radiation
6. White dwarf binaries
if too few: insufficient fluorine would be produced for life chemistry to
proceed
if too many: planetary orbits disrupted by stellar density; life on planet
would be exterminated
if too soon: not enough heavy elements would be made for efficient fluorine
production
if too late: fluorine would be made too late for incorporation in protoplanet
7. Proximity of solar nebula to a supernova eruption
if farther: insufficient heavy elements for life would be absorbed
if closer: nebula would be blown apart
8. Timing of solar nebula formation relative to supernova eruption
if earlier: nebula would be blown apart
if later: nebula would not absorb enough heavy elements
9. Parent star distance from center of galaxy
if farther: quantity of heavy elements would be insufficient to make rocky
planets
if closer: galactic radiation would be too great; stellar density would disturb
planetary orbits
10. Parent star distance from closest spiral arm
if too large: exposure to harmful radiation from galactic core would be too
great
11. Z-axis heights of star’s orbit
if more than one: tidal interactions would disrupt planetary orbit of life
support planet
if less than one: heat produced would be insufficient for life
12. Number of stars in the planetary system
if more than one: tidal interactions would disrupt planetary orbit of life
support planet
if less than one: heat produced would be insufficient for life
13. Parent star birth date
if more recent: star would not yet have reached stable burning phase; stellar
system would contain too many heavy elements
if less recent: stellar system would not contain enough heavy elements
14. Parent star age
if older: luminosity of star would change too quickly
if younger: luminosity of star would change too quickly
15. Parent star mass
if greater: luminosity of star would change too quickly; star would burn too
rapidly
if less: range of planet distances for life would be too narrow; tidal forces
would disrupt the life planet’s rotational period; UV radiation would
be inadequate for plants to make sugars and oxygen
16. Parent star metallicity
if too small: insufficient heavy elements for life chemistry would exist
if too large: radioactivity would be too intense for life; life would be poisoned
by heavy element concentrations
17. Parent star color
if redder: photosynthetic response would be insufficient
if bluer: photosynthetic response would be insufficient
Figure 12.3: Classification of
electromagnetic radiation
18. H3 + production
if too small: simple molecules essential to plant formation and life chemistry
would not form
if too large: planets would form at wrong time and place for life
19. Parent star luminosity relative to speciation
if increases too soon: runaway greenhouse effect would develop
if increases too late: runaway glaciation would develop
20. Planet’s surface gravity (escape velocity)
if stronger: planet’s atmosphere would retain too much ammonia and
methane
if weaker: planet’s atmosphere would lose too much water
21. Planet’s distance from parent star
if farther: planet would be too cool for a stable water cycle
if closer: planet would be too warm for a stable water cycle
22. Planet’s inclination of orbit
if too great: temperature differences on planet would be too extreme
23. Planet’s orbital eccentricity
if too great: seasonal temperature differences would be too extreme
24. Planet’s axial Tilt
if greater: surface temperature differences would be too great
if less: surface temperature differences would be too great
25. Planet’s rate of change of axial tilt
if greater: climatic changes would be too extreme; surface temperature
differences would become too extreme
26. Planet’s rotation period
if longer: diurnal temperature differences would be too great
if shorter: atmospheric wind velocities would be too great
27. Planet’s rate of change in rotation period
if longer: surface temperature range necessary for life would not be sustained
if shorter: surface temperature range necessary for life would not be sustained
28. Planet age
if too young: planet would rotate too rapidly
if too old: planet would rotate too slowly
29. Planet’s magnetic field
if stronger: electromagnetic storms would be too severe
if weaker: ozone shield would be inadequately protected from hard stellar and
solar radiation
30.
Planet’s thickness of crust
if thicker: too much oxygen would be transferred from the atmosphere to the
crust
if thinner: volcanic and tectonic activity would be too great
31. Planet’s albedo (ratio of reflected light to total amount falling on surface)
if greater: runaway glaciation would develop
if less: runaway greenhouse effect would develop
32. Planet’s asteroidal and cometary collision rate
if greater: too many species would become extinct
if less: crust would be too depleted of materials essential for life
33. Mass of body colliding with primordial Earth
if smaller: Earth’s atmosphere would be too thick; moon would be too small
if greater: Earth’s orbit and form would be too greatly disturbed
34. Timing of body colliding with primordial Earth
if earlier: Earth’s atmosphere would be too thick; moon would be too small
if later: sun would be too luminous at epoch for advanced life
Continental Flood Basalts and Extinction Events
Flood Basalts
(Myr)
Columbia River 16+1
Ethiopian
36.9+0.9
North Atlantic
59.5+1
Deccan
65.5+2.5
Madagascar
86.6+2
Rajmahal
117+1
Serra Geral
133+1
Antarctic
176+1
Karoo
190+2
Newark
201+1
Wrangellia
~225
Siberian
248+4
*
Impact evidence
*?
Extinctions
Lower/Middle Miocene
Late Eocene*
Paleocene/Eocene*?
Cretaceous/Tert.*
Cenomanian/Turon.*?
Aptian/Albian
Jurassic/Cretaceous*?
Bajocian/Bathonian*?
Pliensbachian
Triassic/Jurassic*
Ladinian/Carnian
Permian/Triassic*?
Possible impact evidence
(Myr)
14+3
36+1
57.8+1
65+1
92+1
113+4
137+7
173+3
193+3
203+2
~225
251+4
35. Collision location of body colliding with primordial Earth
if too close to grazing: insufficient debris to form large moon; inadequate
annihilation of Earth’s primordial atmosphere;
inadequate transfer of heavy elements to Earth
if too close to dead center: damage from collision would be too destructive
for future life to exist
36. Oxygen to nitrogen ratio in atmosphere
if larger: advanced life functions would proceed too quickly
if smaller: advanced life functions would proceed too slowly
37. Carbon dioxide level in atmosphere
if greater: runaway greenhouse effect would develop
if less: plants would be unable to maintain efficient photosynthesis
38. Water vapor level in Atmosphere
if greater: runaway greenhouse effect would develop
if less: rainfall would be too meager for advanced life on the land
39. Atmospheric electric discharge rate
if greater: too much fire destruction would occur
if less: too little nitrogen would be fixed in the atmosphere
The Greenhouse effect
The Electromagnetic Spectrum
Carbon Dioxide Increase in the
Atmosphere at Mauna Loa Observatory,
Hawaii
Year
CO2 Conc.
Year
CO2 Conc.
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
324.62
325.43
326.49
329.30
330.85
331.78
333.68
335.28
336.38
338.05
339.69
341.20
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
342.89
343.99
345.53
346.73
349.08
351.43
352.89
354.12
355.45
356.20
356.92
358.64
Year
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
CO2 Conc.
360.62
362.36
363.47
366.49
368.13
369.13
371.08
373.16
375.79
380
370
360
350
Series1
340
330
320
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Carbon Dioxide record at the Mauna Loa Observatory in
Hawaii 1971-2003
40. Ozone level in atmosphere
if greater: surface temperatures would be too low
if less: surface temperatures would be too high; there would be too much uv
radiation at the surface
41. Oxygen quantity in atmosphere
if greater: plants and hydrocarbons would burn up too easily
if less: advanced animals would have too little to breathe
42. Seismic activity
if greater: too many life-forms would be destroyed
if less: nutrients on ocean floors from river runoff would not be recycled to
continents through tectonics; not enough carbon dioxide would be
released from carbonates
43. Volcanic activity
if lower: insufficient amounts of carbon dioxide and water vapor would be
returned to the atmosphere; soil mineralization would become too
degraded for life
if higher: advanced life, at least, would be destroyed
44. Rate of decline in tectonic activity
if slower: advanced life could never survive on the planet
if faster: advanced life could never survive on the planet
UVA
UVB
The absorption spectra for Ozone and Molecular
Oxygen. The region that is absorbed by molecular
Oxygen and Ozone are referred to as the UVA (100-240 nm)
and the UVB (240-360 nm) region of the electromagnetic
Spectrum and are referred to as ionizing radiation.
UVA
UVB
Visible
Plot of wavelength verses intensity
of in coming solar radiation.
UVA and UVB are known as ionizing
radiation and will destroy molecules!
Stratospheric Chemical reactions
leading to Ozone Depletion - I
Normal Ozone production in the stratosphere and its absorption
of Ultra violet. Ozone is made when Ultra Violet Light (UVA) is
absorbed by molecular oxygen to create two oxygen atoms. If
these oxygen atoms collide with molecular oxygen they react to
form Ozone. The Ozone formed will absorb Ultra Violet light in the
UVB wavelengths, thus absorbing most of the short wavelength
UV light, which is also called ionizing radiation, and will destroy
biological molecules.
O2
hn
O + O2
O3
hn
l=hn = 170-190 nm (UVA)
2O
O3
O2 + O
l = hn = 200-300 nm (UVB)
Stratospheric Chemical reactions
leading to Ozone Depletion - II
In 1971 Dr. Harold Johnson A professor at the University of
California at Berkeley, calculated that the Nitrogen oxides
produced by the Jet engines of the then proposed Super Sonic
Transports (SST’s) would destroy much of the Ozone layer that
protects us on the Earth’s surface from Ultra Violet light
(both UVA ad UVB). The reactions he proposed are:
N2 + O2
2 NO
NO + O3
NO2 + O2
=This symbol indicated heat energy
This reaction is very fast!
Adding these last two reactions
NO2 + O
NO + O2
together and canceling out similar
reactants gives the catalytic reaction!
O3 + O
2 O2 This reaction shows Ozone destruction!
The results of this research stopped the US from making an SST!
Chlorofluorocarbons (Freon’s)
Freon-11 CF2Cl2
:
Freon-12 CFCl3
Stratospheric Reaction Chemistry:
CF2Cl2
Cl . + O3
ClO + O
O3 + O
hn
CF2Cl. + Cl .
O2 + ClO
O2 + Cl .
2 O2
Catalytic Ozone destruction
Ozone Levels over Antarctica, The Antarctic Ozone Hole
The Ozone Hole
over Antarctica
Ozone and ClO
45. Rate of decline in volcanic activity
if slower: advanced life could never survive on the planet
if faster: advanced life could never survive on the planet
46. Oceans-to-continents ratio
if greater: diversity and complexity of life-forms would be limited
if smaller: diversity and complexity of life-forms would be limited
47. Rate of change in oceans-to-continents ratio
if smaller: advanced life would lack the needed land mass area
if greater: advanced life would be destroyed by radical changes
48. Global distribution of continents (for Earth)
if too much in the southern hemisphere: seasonal differences would be too
severe for advanced life
49. Frequency and extent of ice ages
if smaller: insufficient fertile, wide, and well-watered valleys produced for
diverse and advanced life forms; insufficient mineral
concentrations occur for diverse and advanced life
if greater: planet inevitably experiences runaway freezing
Volcanic Activity - I
Volcanoes Usually produce large quantities of Sulfur Dioxide.
This SO2 reacts to form acids which cause acid rain, which can
cause rocks to weather (break down), these acids also have
deleterious effects on vegetation.
SO2(g) + H2O(L)
2 SO2(g) + O2(g)
SO3(g) + H2O(L)
H2SO3(aq) Sulfurous acid (A weak acid)
2 SO3(g)
H2SO4(aq) Sulfuric acid (A strong acid)
Volcanoes also produce ash, along with the sulfuric acid, will form
aerosols (particles) in the atmosphere that will reflect sunlight back
into space, cooling the atmosphere.
Volcanic Activity - II
The chemistry of volcanoes is such that many volcanoes also
release Hydrochloric acid (HCl) or Hydrofluoric acid (HF) in large
concentrations. For example the Hawaiian Volcanoes such as
Kilauea, can release tons of HCl per hour during major eruptions.
These acids have a huge impact on the dissolution of rocks and
the releasing of many metals essential for life into the environment.
Hot spot volcanic activity is a unique type that has had a great
Impact on life forms on Earth, and has been going on for millions
of years. Chains of Islands such as the Hawaiian Islands are
formed by Hot spot volcanism. These volcanoes also produce a
unique chemical signature, as they contain elements found in the
core of the earth such as Iridium, Platinum, Osmium and Rhenium,
Very rare on the surface of the earth.
50. Soil mineralization
if too nutrient poor: diversity and complexity of life-forms would be limited
if too nutrient rich: diversity and complexity of life-forms would be limited
51. Gravitational interaction with a moon
if greater: tidal effects on the oceans, atmosphere, and rotational period
would be too severe
if less: orbital obliquity changes would cause climatic instabilities;
movement of nutrients and life from the oceans to the continents
and vice versa would be insufficient; magnetic field would be too
weak
52. Jupiter distance
if greater: too many asteroid and comet collisions would occur on Earth
if less: Earth’s orbit would become unstable
53. Jupiter mass
if greater: Earth’s orbit would become unstable
if less: too many asteroid and comet collisions would occur on Earth
54. Drift in major planet distances
if greater: Earth’s orbit would become unstable
if less: too many asteroid and comet collisions would occur on Earth
55. Major planet eccentricities
if greater: orbit of life supportable planet would be pulled out of life support
zone
56. Major planet orbital instabilities
if greater: orbit of life supportable planet would be pulled out of life support
zone
57. Atmospheric pressure
if too small: liquid water would evaporate too easily and condense too
infrequently
if too large: liquid water would not evaporate easily enough for land life;
insufficient sunlight would reach planetary surface; insufficient
UV radiation would reach planetary surface
58: Atmospheric transparency
if smaller: insufficient range of wavelengths of solar radiation would reach
planetary surface
if greater: too broad a range of wavelengths of solar radiation would reach
planetary surface
UVA
UVB
Visible
Plot of wavelength verses intensity
of in coming solar radiation.
UVA and UVB are known as ionizing
radiation and will destroy molecules!
59. Chlorine quantity in atmosphere
if smaller: erosion rates, acidity of rivers, lakes, and soils, and certain
metabolic rates would be insufficient for most life forms
if larger: erosion rates, acidity of rivers, lakes, and soils, and certain
metabolic rates would be too high for most life forms
60. Iron quantity in oceans and soils
if smaller: quantity and diversity of life would be too limited for support of
advanced life; if very small, no life would be possible
if larger: iron poisoning of at least advanced life would result
61. Tropospheric ozone quantity
if smaller: insufficient cleaning of biochemical smogs would result
if larger: respiratory failure of advanced animals, reduced crop yields, and
destruction of ozone-sensitive species would result
62. Stratospheric ozone quantity
if smaller: too much UV radiation would reach planet’s surface causing skin
cancers and reduced plant growth
if larger: too little uv radiation would reach planet’s surface causing reduced
plant growth
63. Mesospheric ozone quantity
if smaller: circulation and chemistry of mesospheric gases so disturbed as to
upset relative abundances of life essential gases in lower
atmosphere
if greater: circulation and chemistry of mesospheric gases so disturbed as to
upset relative abundances of life essential gases in lower
atmosphere
64. Quantity and extent of forest and grass fires
if smaller: growth inhibitors in the soils would accumulate; soil nitrification
would be insufficient; insufficient charcoal production for
adequate soil water retention and absorption of certain growth
inhibitors
if greater: too many plant and animal life forms would be destroyed
65. Quantity of soil sulfur
if smaller: plants would become deficient in certain proteins and die
if larger: plants would die from sulfur toxins; acidity of water and soil would
become too great for life; nitrogen cycle would be disturbed
66. Biomass to comet infall ratio
if smaller: greenhouse gases accumulate, triggering runaway surface
temperature increase
if larger: greenhouse gases decline, triggering a runaway freezing
Expected Population Growth in Adam’s Lifetime!
According to Genesis 5, life spans from Adam to Noah
averaged 912 years. The population table is based upon the
following assumptions:
Life span = 900 years,
first child comes at age forty,
childbearing years = 600 yrs,
one child every four years during
child bearing years.
Archeological evidence from the pre-flood era provides no
indication that the pre-flood population ever became this large.
Infant mortality and disease could be the reasons that the
population stayed small.
Adam’s
Age
0
40
80
120
160
200
240
280
320
360
400
440
480
520
560
600
640
680
720
760
Reproducing
Couples
1
1
6
21
71
247
852
2,942
10,167
35,113
121,292
418,980
1,447,245
4,999,176
17,268,444
59,649,613
206,045,003
711,732,063
2,459,504,388
8,492,300,000
Children
Born
0
10
30
100
352
1,210
4,180
14,450
49,892
172,358
595,378
2,056,530
7,103,862
24,538,536
84,762,338
292,790,780
1,011,374,120
3,493,544,650
12,067,585,000
41,685,303,000
Total
Population
2
12
42
142
494
1,704
5,884
20,334
70,226
242,584
837,962
2,894,492
9,998,364
34,536,930
119,299,368
412,090,500
1,423,465,830
4,917,014,660
16,984,600,000
58,669,903,000
The Flood – Global or Regional
If the Flood covered the entire earth to a depth of the highest
mountains, Mt. Everest (5.5 miles), the volume of water would be
approximately 1.1 x 109 mi3 this is about 3 times the volume of the
world’s oceans. Or approximately 730 ft of rain water per day
(6.0 inches of rain per minute) would have had to fall for the
40 days and 40 nights as indicated in Genesis 7! The places
Named in Genesis 1-9 are only around Mesopotamia so could it
have been a regional flood?
The failure of Man kind to spread though out the entire world
as God directed man Kind to do in Genesis 1:28 “ Be fruitful and
Multiply, and fill the earth” brought certain changes. In Genesis 9:7
God repeats the command to multiply and fill the earth. In
Genesis 1-9 the text mentions place-names only in Mesopotamia.
Beginning in Genesis 10, we encounter names beyond
Mesopotamia, indicating that Man kind was finally beginning to
spread out over the earth.
The Flood - I
1) Biblical phrases such as “under the entire heavens” and
“the face of the earth” must be interpreted in the writer’s
(and most readers’) context, as true where these terms are
used elsewhere in Scripture.
2) The extent and spread of human population and, thus, of sin’s
impact was limited, not global. In fact, God rebuked the human
race for its failure to spread out over the globe.
3) Genesis mentions no geographical place-names beyond
Greater Mesopotamia until chapter ten.
4) Earth’s water quantity supports a regional rather than global
Flood. The floodwaters came from Earth’s underground and
atmospheric resources, which are plentiful but inadequate to
cover the globe.
The Flood - II
5) Mountain ranges and ocean basins cannot erode in forty days
nor build up in eleven months, as would be required by one
explanation of a global Flood, without leaving evidence easily
visible today.
6) Not even an ark of steel armor plate could survive the rigors of
a Flood gone global in forty days nor of the devastating effects
of tens of thousands of feet of erosion in forty days and similar
uplift within a year’s time.
7) The creatures earmarked for rescue included only Noah,
Noah’s family, and birds and mammals that had significant
contact with humanity.
The Flood - III
8) Genesis 7 does not claim that water stood above the highest
mountains; rather, it says that an enormous deluge fell upon
or ran over or covered the highest hills visible to Noah.
9) Genesis 8:4 records that the ark landed in the mountains
(or hills) of Ararat, not specifically on top of Mount Ararat
itself. The designated area encompasses more than one
hundred thousand square miles.
10) Olive leaves do not grow at high altitudes, nor could they
survive a global Flood.
11) The water of a global Flood could not recede in less than a
year.
The Flood - IV
12) A strong wind (Genesis 8:1) would be useful for dissipating a
regional but not a global Flood.
13) Earth cannot possibly support at one time the half-billion or
more species of life the fossil record documents, which would
be required according to the global flood theory.
14) A recent global Flood cannot account for Earth’s enormous
deposits of kerogen, topsoil, limestone, marble, and fossil fuels.
15) Petroleum products were available before the Flood for Noah’s
use in sealing the ark (Genesis 6:14).
The Flood - V
16) The million-plus animal species on Earth today could not have
evolved in just a few thousand years from the thirty thousand
species-maximum- the ark could have carried.
17) No viable scientific evidence has ever been found for a recent,
global Flood.
The Church and Science
For many years there has been a growing split between
“Science, and Scientists” and the “Church”, which for many years
was the catholic church. It probably started with the Greek
Philosopher Aristotle, who believed that every thing revolved
around the earth. During this early time, science was the “Church”,
and all scientists were part of the “Church”, and supported by the
Church.
When the astronomer Copernicus brought forth the idea that the
earth revolved around the sun, and the earth was not the center
of the Universe, there was a break between the Church and
Modern science. I believe the split has it’s roots in this time period.
With the advent of “Modern” science, we now have the “Big
Bang”, or beginning of everything, and the expanding Universe.
Beginning in 1966, George Ellis, Stephen Hawkings, and Rodger
Penrose affirmed that any expanding universe governed by general
relativity and which also contains at least some matter and energy
must possess a singular origin in the finite past.
Reactions of Magnesium Metal
Magnesium metal burning in Air!
2 Mg(s) + O2(g)
2 MgO(s) + Energy
Magnesium metal Burning with Carbon dioxide!
Mg(s) + CO2(g)
MgO(s) + CO(g) + Energy
Magnesium Metal Burning with Dry Ice! (Solid Carbon Dioxide)
3 Mg(s) + CO2(s)
2 MgO(s) + MgC(s) + Energy
Biological Life – Extinction & Speciation
According to the fossil record, at least a half-billion to a
Billion new species of life arose between the Cambrian
Explosion (about 543 million years ago) and the arrival of
human beings (about 30,000 to 50,000 years ago). This
averages about one or two or more new species per year.
Since the coming of humans, however, the rate of new
species discovery has dropped to virtual zero! According to
Biologists Paul and Ann Ehrlich, “The production of a new
animal species in nature has yet to be documented.” In other
words, God rested form his creating on the seventh day,
which we are still in!
The extinction rate has remained constant at about one
species per year during normal conditions, and more during
years of environmental stress.
Figure 4.1: A space-filling model
of the water molecule.
The Hexagonal Structure of Ice
Ice Structure with open holes giving
Ice a density less than water it’s self.
The delicate 6 point snow flake
reflects the hexagonal structure.
3 Important Building Blocks
of Nucleic Acids
• 1) A pentose sugar–In RNA the sugar is
ribose, and in DNA it is deoxyribose, in which
one hydroxy group has been replaced by a
hydrogen.
• 2) A nitrogen containing organic base:
– Adenine
– Guanine
– Thymine
– Cytosine
– Uracil
• 3) A phosphate linkage derived from
phosphoric acid
Pentoses
DNA
RNA
Bases found
in
DNA
and
RNA
Adenosine reaction
Figure 22.37:
Nucleic acid chain
Figure 22.38: DNA double helix
The Spontaneous Formation of Life
During the 1970’s there was a very intense effort in the Chemical
Sciences to show that life could be formed spontaneously from
Chemicals assumed to be present on the primitive earth.
Ammonia, methane, and water vapor were placed into containers
along with different other things and sparked to simulate lighting,
and then look for primitive amino acids the building blocks of life.
NH3 + CH4 + H2O + Energy
Amino acids
[ H2NCH2COOH, Glycine]
Only simple amino acids were formed, and a few simple
combinations of amino acids were formed after many years and
hundreds of millions of research funds had been expended!
Odds of Making DNA
What are the odds of making just one strand of DNA out of
Random nucleotide combinations? This demonstration was made
by Michael Heart in 1982 to show how improbable life formation
was, even given the building blocks necessary to form DNA.
400 positions where any one of four nucleotide residues will do,
and at each of 100 other positions where either of two
nucleotide residues would be effective, leaving only 100
positions where the exactly correct nucleotide residue must be
present. (This is a very optimistic set of circumstances!)
For this to occur, the odds are 1:1090, in 10 billion years, the
chance of forming such a strand spontaneously would be 10-90
times 1060, or 10-30 for each of 100 different specific genes to be
formed spontaneously (in 10 billion years) the probability is
(10-30)100 = 10-3000 for them to be in close proximity it is worse!!
The Complexity of Biological life
The complexity of DNA and Biological molecules precludes that
they could have been put together by chance!
DNA and genes are so compact that all of the DNA and genes in
a person’s body would fit into a cube the size of an ice cube!
If all of the DNA in a person’s body were unraveled, and joined
end to end, the strand would reach from the earth to the
Sun and back more than 400 times!
The DNA in a single cell is estimated to contain instructions, that
if written out would fill a thousand 600 page books.
Another book stated that all of the information stored in all of the
books of the library of Congress could be stored in just one
strand of a person’s DNA!
Damage to DNA, RNA, or Genes
Damage to genetic material occurs from Radiation (x-rays,
gamma-rays, Ultraviolet light, etc) or from Chemical mutagens.
It involves the Destruction of the molecule, or the change it’s
properties such as structure, polarity, or ionization.
Damage to DNA, or genetic material in the cells occurs all of
The time, and the body has mechanisms to repair these damaged
molecules, or to replace them with undamaged ones. The
damaged molecules are recycled in to new ones, or ejected from
the body in our waste. When a cell or genetic material is not
capable of replication, or carrying on its function, it is recycled or
removed from the body. Thousands of cells and molecules
containing genetic information are destroyed each day in a normal
human being. We are obviously wonderfully made, and designed
to survive in difficult times and circumstances.
DNA and Dates for Common Ancestors
Studies on the DNA of modern Humans have given us some
information on the dates for Adam and Eve versus Noah.
A 1995 study revealed a date for the common ancestor of human
males as: between 35,000 and 47,000 B.C.
Mitochondrial DNA yields the common ancestor of all women
between a few thousand and tens of thousands of years earlier.
Of the eight people on Noah’s ark, the four men were blood
related to Noah, but the four women were not, and Eve would be
the most recent common ancestor for them.
The difference in the two biochemical dates roughly fits the time
frame suggested by the Genesis 5 genealogy.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - I
1. Existence and temperature of the cosmic background
radiation: Ralph Alpher and Robert Herman calculated in 1948
that cooling from a big bang creation event would yield a faint
cosmic background radiation with a current temperature of
roughly 5o Kelvin (-455oF). In 1965 Arno Penzias and Robert
Wilson detected a cosmic background radiation and determined
that its temperature was about 3o Kelvin (-457oF).
2. Black body character of the cosmic background radiation:
Deviations between the spectrum of the cosmic background
radiation and the spectrum expected from a perfect radiator
measured to be less than 0.03% over the entire range of
observed wavelengths. The only possible explanation for such
an extremely close fit is that the entire universe must have
expanded from an infinitely or nearly infinitely hot and compact
beginning.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - II
3. Cooling rate of the cosmic background radiation: According
to the big bang, the older, and hence more expanded, the
universe becomes, the cooler will be the cosmic background
radiation. Measurements of the cosmic background radiation at
distances so great that we are looking back to when the universe
was just a half, a quarter, or an eighth of its present age show
temperature measurements that are hotter than the present
2.726oK by exactly the amount that the big bang theory would
predict.
4. Temperature uniformity of cosmic background: The
temperature of the cosmic background radiation varies by no
more than one part in ten thousand from one direction in the
heavens to any other. Such high uniformity only can be
explained if the background radiation arises from an extremely
hot primordial creation event.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - III
5. Ratio of photons to baryons in the universe: The ratio of
photons to baryons (protons and neutrons) in the universe
exceeds 100,000,000 to 1. This proved the universe is so
extremely entropic (efficient in radiating heat and light) the only
possible explanation is that the entire universe must be rapidly
exploding from an infinitely or near infinitely hot, dense state.
6. Temperature fluctuations in the cosmic background
radiation: For galaxies and galaxy clusters to form out of a big
bang creation event temperature fluctuations in maps of the
cosmic background radiation should measure at a level of about
one part in a hundred thousand. The predicted fluctuations were
detected at the expected level.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - IV
7. Power spectrum of the temperature fluctuations in the
cosmic background radiation: For the big bang universe with
a geometry suitable for the formation of stars and planets
capable of supporting physical life, the temperature fluctuations
in the cosmic background radiation will peak at an angular
resolution close to one degree with a few much smaller spikes at
at other resolutions. In other words, the power spectrum graph
will look like a bell curve with a few sub-peaks to the side of the
main peak. The Boomerang balloon experiment in April 2000
confirmed this big bang prediction.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - V
8. Cosmic expansion rate: A big bang creation event implies a
universal expansion o the universe from a beginning several
billion years ago. The most careful measurements of the
velocities of galaxies establish that such a cosmic expansion
has been proceeding for the past 14.9 billion years, a cosmic
age measure that is consistent with all other cosmic age
measurements.
9. Stable orbits of stars and planets: Our universe manifests
stable orbits of planets about stars and stars about the nuclei
of galaxies. Such stable orbits are physically impossible unless
the universe is comprised of three very large and rapidly
expanding dimensions of space.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - VI
10. Existence of life and humans: Life and humans require a
stable solar-type star. However: If the universe cools down too
slowly, galaxies would trap radiation so effectively as to prevent
any fragmentation into stars. If the universe cools too rapidly,
no galaxies or stars will ever condense out of the cosmic gas.
If the universe expands too slowly, the universe will collapse
before solar-type stars reach their stable burning phase. If it
expands too rapidly, no galaxies or stars will ever condense
from the general expansion.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - VII
11. Abundance of helium in the universe: According to the big
bang, almost exactly one-forth the first four minutes
following the cosmic creation event. Stellar burning provides
the only other possible source of helium. Therefore,
astronomers can test the big bang by measuring the helium
abundance in gas clouds and galaxies where little or no star
burning has taken place. When they do this they determine a
primordial helium abundance = 0.2489 +/- 0.0015, a nearly
perfect fit with what the big bang predicts.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - VIII
12. Abundance of deuterium (heavy hydrogen) in the universe:
Only the big bang can produce deuterium. Stars, on the other
hand, destroy deuterium. By measuring the deuterium
abundance in gas clouds and galaxies where little or no star
burning has occurred, astronomers can not only prove that we
live in a big bang universe but also determine what kind of big
bang the universe manifests. The measured results are
consistent with the same kind of big bang demonstrated by all
the other big bang tests.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - IX
13. Abundance of lithium in the universe: Only the big bang can
produce lithium. Stars destroy lithium. By measuring the lithium
abundance in gas clouds and galaxies where little or no star
burning has occurred, astronomers cannot only prove that we
live in a big bang universe but also determine what kind of big
bang the universe manifests. The measured results are
consistent with the same kind of big bang demonstrated by all
the other big bang tests.
14. Evidences for general relativity: Recent measurements now
elevate the theory of general relativity to the most exhaustively
tested and best proven principle in all of physics. The solution
to the equations of general relativity demonstrate that the
universe must be expanding from a beginning in the finite past.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - X
15. Space-time theorem of general relativity: A mathematical
theorem proven by Stephen hawking and Roger Penrose in
1970 establishes that if the universe contains mass, and if its
dynamics are governed by general relativity, then time itself
must be finite and must have been created when the universe
was created. Also, there must exist a CAUSE responsible for
bringing the universe (which must be expanding) into
existence independent of matter, energy, and all ten of the
cosmic space-time dimensions.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XI
16. Space energy density measurements: Albert Einstein and
Arthur Eddington both developed cosmological models without
a big bang by altering the theory of relativity to include a
cosmic space energy density term (a.k.a. the cosmological
constant) and assigning a particular value to that term.
Recently, astronomers determined that indeed a cosmic space
energy term does exist. Its value, however, proves that
Einstein’s and Eddingion’s models are incorrect. The measured
value actually increases the evidence for the big bang in that it
establishes the universe will continue to expand to an ever
increasing rate.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XII
17. Ten-dimensional creation calculation: A team led by Andrew
Strominger demonstrated that only in a universe framed in ten
space-time dimensions where six of the ten dimensions stop
expanding when the universe is a 10 millionth of a trillionth of a
trillionth of a trillionth of a second old is it possible to have
gravity and quantum mechanics coexist. This demonstration
also successfully predicted both special and general relativity
and solved a number of outstanding problems in both particle
physics and black hole physics. It implies that the big bang and
the laws of physics are valid all the way back to the creation
event itself.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XIII
18. Steller ages: According to the big bang theory, different types
of stars will form at different epochs after creation. The colors
and surface temperatures of stars tells astronomers how long
they have been burning. These measured burning times are
consistent with the big bang. They also are consistent with all
other methods for measuring the time back to the cosmic
creation event.
19. Galaxy ages: According to the big bang theory, nearly all the
galaxies in the universe will form early in its history within
about a 4-billion year window of time. Indeed, astronomers
measure the galaxies to have the predicted ages.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XIV
20. Decrease in galaxy crowding: The big bang predicts that
galaxies will spread farther and farther apart from one another
as the universe expands. Hubble Space Telescope images
show that the farther away in the cosmos one looks (and,
because of light’s finite velocity, the farther back in time) the
more crowded together are the galaxies. In fact, looking back
to when the universe was but a third of its present age, the
Space Telescope images reveal galaxies so tightly packed
together that they literally are ripping spiral arms away from
one another.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XV
21. Photo album history of the universe: Since the big bang
predicts that nearly all the galaxies will form at about the same
time, and since galaxies change their appearance significantly
as they age, images of portions of the universe at progressively
greater and greater distances (and, because of light’s finite
velocity, farther and farther back in time) should show dramatic
changes in the appearances of the galaxies. Hubble Space
Telescope images verify the predicted changes in the
appearances of galaxies.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XVI
22. Ratio of ordinary matter to exotic matter: In the big bang
universe, for the galaxies and stars to form and develop so that
a site suitable for the support of physical life will be possible,
the cosmos must exhibit a ratio of exotic matter (matter that
does not interact well with radiation) to ordinary matter (matter
that strongly interacts with radiation) that measures roughly five
or six to one. Recent measurements reveal just such a ratio
for the universe.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XVII
23. Abundance of beryllium and boron in elderly stars: Long
before the first stars can possibly form, the big bang fire-ball
during the first few minutes after the creation event will
generate tiny amounts of boron and beryllium if, and only if, the
universe contains a significant amount of exotic matter.
Astronomers have confirmed that primordial boron and
beryllium exists in the amounts predicted by the big bang
theory and their measurements of the amount of exotic matter.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XVIII
24. Numbers of Population I, II, and III stars: The big bang
predicts that as the universe expands it will produce three
distinct populations of stars. At its current age the big bang also
predicts that astronomers should see certain specific numbers
and masses of the three different populations. Astronomers do
indeed see the predicted numbers and masses of stars for the
three different populations.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XIX
25. Population, locations, and types of black holes and
neutron stars: A big bang universe of the type that makes
possible a site suitable for the support of physical life will after
many billions of years of star burning produce a relatively
small population of stellar mass black holes and a somewhat
larger population of neutron stars in virtually every galaxy.
Large galaxies are expected to produce supermassive
(exceeding a million solar masses) black holes in their central
cores. Astronomers, indeed, observe the predicted
populations, locations, and types of black holes and neutron
stars.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XX
26. Dispersion of star clusters and galaxy clusters: The big
bang predicts that as the universe expands different types of
star clusters and galaxy clusters will disperse at specific rates
that will increase with time. It also predicts that the densest
star clusters will not disperse. However, the orbital velocities of
their stars about the cluster’s center will “evolve” toward a
predictable randomized condition known as virialization. The
virial times depend on the cluster mass and size and on the
individual masses of the stars. Astronomers observe the
dispersal rates and virial times predicted by the big bang.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XXI
27. Number and type of space-time dimensions: A big bang
universe of the type that makes possible a site suitable for the
support of physical life must begin within ten rapidly expanding
space-time dimensions. At about 10-43 seconds (about a ten
millionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second) after the
creation event six of the ten dimensions must cease expanding
while the other four continue to expand at a rapid rate. Several
experiments and calculations confirm that we live in such a
universe.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XXII
28. Masses and flavors of neutrinos: All currently viable big
bang models require that the dominant form of matter in the
universe be a form of exotic matter called “cold dark matter”.
Astronomers and physicists already know that neutrinos are
very plentiful in the universe and that they are “cold” and “dark”.
Recent experiments establish that neutrinos oscillate (that is,
transform) from one flavor or type to another (the three
neutrino flavors are electron, muon, and tau). This oscillation
implies that a neutrino particle must have a mass between a
few billionths and a millionth of an electron mass. Such a
range of masses for the neutrino satisfies the requirement for
the viable big bang models.
Scientific Evidence for A
“Big Bang” Creation Event - XXIII
29. Populations and types of fundamental particles: In the big
bang the rapid cooling of the universe from a near infinitely
high temperature and a near infinitely dense state will generate
a zoo of different fundamental particles of predictable
properties and predictable populations. Particle accelerator
experiments which duplicate the temperature and density
conditions of the early universe have verified all the types and
populations of particles predicted within the energy limits of the
particle accelerators.
30 Cosmic density of protons and neutrons: Four independent
methods for determining the density of protons and neutrons in
the universe establish that the density measured is the same as
what the big bang predicts for a universe that contains the stars
and planets necessary for life.
The Star Declaring the Birth of Jesus
The star declaring the birth of Jesus was most assuredly a
super Novae explosion!