Genesis tells us God created the water covered Earth, Light, Sky, Dry Land and Plants in only three days. Then He made the Sun, Moon, and Stars. The fifth day saw the creation of Fish and Birds. Finally, on the sixth day. God created the Animals and Man.
Yet, some say, “Six days? Really? Nobody but those hardcore religious nuts believe that. Those folks are ignorant of all the modern-day science and all of the real facts. Didn't they learn anything in school or don't they even watch the Science Channel?”
Yes, most of us have been exposed to those taunts and false theories about the earth's creation and even sometimes the violently aggressive disbelief of God's Creation of our Earth and Universe. Public schools, Universities, and media coverage have used their combined efforts to embed disbelief in the very first book of the Bible. Christians and Jews alike are portrayed as uneducated and 'unenlightened' morons compared to “those in the know”.
Let's review some of the science and evidence “those in the know” chose to ignore.
Have you read about or heard the story of the Lost Squadron's as it could, amazingly, correlate to Creation evidence? No, I'm not speaking of Flight 19 when five Grumman torpedo bombers that disappeared within the Bermuda Triangle in 1945. In that case, because definitive physical evidence has yet to be found, all sort of theories abound.
No, the Lost Squadron of this lesson revolves around a plane named “Glacier Girl.” (You may wish to Google her so you can offer pictures of the physical evidence to your audience.) She was one of six P-38 fighters and two B-17 bombers forced to make emergency landings on a Greenland ice field. Glacier Girl is a powerful story that discredits many scientists that expounded theories that thick layers of ice and snow must take millions of years to form and our recent, man-made, global warming is a terrible threat to our very existence.
On 15 July 1942, the flight of eight War-birds, with a combined crew of 25, took off from an Air Base in Maine headed for the United Kingdom but flew into unexpected terrible weather. What followed was a harrowing and life-threatening landing of the entire squadron on a remote ice cap. Fortunately for all, the entire lost crew was rescued and returned safely back to base after spending several days on the barren, inhospitable ice.
However, Glacier Girl along with the other planes was eventually buried under more than 260 feet of snow and ice that had built up quickly within a span of time measured by only a few decades. The first plane of the lost squadron was found in 1988, and another was salvaged in 1992. Glacier Girl has been fully restored and flew again for the first time in 2002.
This propaganda of ‘slow and gradual’ of how such things are (were) formed is so ingrained in our society today that it came as a shock to people when they read Glacier Girl was under 268 feet of snow and ice. In fact, shallow ice was exactly what the salvage team expected. After all, since the planes had been there only a few decades, then the ice should only be a few feet deep. They believed the planes would only be under a very thin sheet of ice.
You see, all the scientific misbeliefs and theories usually taught as 'Facts' had nothing to do with actual evidence but were assumptions made about the past – used to interpret the evidence revealed in the present. However, Glacier Girl is only the tip of the iceberg of evidence that contradicts this pervasive 'slow and gradual growth' propaganda about many aspects of earth's history.
Most Evolutionists believe the ice on both of the earth's poles took thousands, if not millions of years to form. Even among themselves, they often purport different timelines to support their own particular theory. They are quick to disregard the present day physical evidence and the valid viewpoints of believers in God's six-day Creation. But is that not precisely the correct viewpoint to be made! Based on factual dates and comprehensive evidence! Many scientists mistakenly believe it took hundreds of thousands of years to build up the huge ice sheets that exist today. But if planes can be buried under that much snow and solid ice in only five decades, clearly there is sufficient time to form the thick ice sheets we see today well within the time-frame of documented biblical history.
Let's shine the spotlight on just a few of the most glaring mistakes reported as facts within the scientific communities.
As a High School student in the early sixties, I was taught that stalactites and stalagmites took a hundred years to grow a single inch. The Lincoln Memorial, constructed in 1911, yet as early as 1940, when you were allowed to see the underneath foundation and utility spaces, people observed stalactites of three to five feet hanging from the ceiling.
Another modern scientific mistake was the Steady State Theory model developed in 1948 by Fred Hoyle, Thomas Gold, and others which suggested the universe is always expanding but maintaining a constant average density, matter being continuously created to form new stars and galaxies at the same rate that old ones become unobservable. When Hoyle learned of a conflicting theory that suggested the universe began in a single, powerful event, he dubbed it "the Big Bang," and dismissed the idea, remaining loyal to the Steady State Model.
The Steady State Theory was highly regarded and taught as a principle fact for about 15 years. Once proved wrong, because of more modern methods of measuring, another scientist said, 'Hoyle's' blunder was not in proposing this theory, his mistake was that once the evidence overwhelmingly accumulated against his model became provable, he didn't accept it. He just kept trying to invent ways to keep the Steady State Model relevant.' Hoyle never relented, even when most of the physics community eventually came to embrace the Big Bang Theory. The Big Bang Theory, by the way, is not inconsistent with God creating the Universe except, possibly in the 'scientific' concept of the 'measured' timeline.
Okay, if truth be told, the Big Bang Theory and our belief that 'God Created the Earth' do not conflict. Then to determine the timeline age of the earth could be made by straightforward, scientific measurements. After all, scientists have shown, by the many layers of rock cores drilled or cutaways of hillsides, that it took millions of years for these layers to build up. No pun intended but what more solid proof does anyone need to know other than these hard rock core samples prove the earth is millions if not billions of years old? Have they proven this or have they not?
Igneous rock is formed relatively quickly through the cooling and solidification of magma or lava. Metamorphic rocks are the result of great heat and pressure over thousands of years that change existing rocks into new rocks. Scientists say great thicknesses of sedimentary rocks are formed, over millions of years, when solid materials carried by wind and water accumulate in layers and then are compressed by overlying deposits, once again, over more millions of years.
This indoctrination of ‘millions of years’ is based on assumptions going beyond the evidence. Great thicknesses could conceivably be produced either by small amounts of sediment in water over long periods, or large amounts of sediment settling over short periods. Different human biases can result in different interpretations of the same data fields, in this case, the rock layers. In all cases, it boils down to assumptive decisions, not scientific ones, based on a particular person's preferred interpretation.
Because sedimentation is normally seen to occur slowly today, most scientists assume that it must have always occurred slowly. If so, then the rock layers must have formed over vast ages. The philosophy that processes have always occurred at approximately constant rates, that the present is the key to the past, is not based on hard facts but more assumptions. And if their word on the matter is not enough to convince you, then they can pull out reports of 'scientific' measurements to prove their point of view.
Whether stone materials are Sedimentary, Igneous or Metamorphic, one of the 'scientific proofs' is radiometric dating. Some elements undergo radioactive decay and produce or change into other elements. By measuring the quantities of radioactive elements and the elements they decay into, geologists believe they can determine how much time has elapsed since the rock was formed.
However, this time-dating ‘determination’ is an interpretation based on assumptions. Each element usually has several different forms, or isotopes, which have different masses. Also, there are other possible interpretations, based on other assumptions like initial and subsequent mass, initial and subsequent pressure, initial and subsequent temperature variables, that radioactive decay is constant over time, and you must also assume that the rocks being analyzed have not been altered by either geological or chemical interactions. The latter is a huge assumption because potassium and uranium, both common parent elements, are easily dissolved and leached out by water as does the gaseous element argon which is produced by potassium decay.
True in today’s science labs, radioactive decay sample rates measured by radiohalo analysis seem constant but they are not now subjected historical heat or pressure. However, decay rates have been tested and measured for only for a few decades, so who can be absolutely positive that they were constant over the alleged billions of years. Physicist Dr Russell Humphreys suggests that decay rates were faster during creation week but remained constant since that point in time.
So it is easy to see, with all the possible assumptions previously mentioned, that even the scientist can't agree among themselves on important geological creation matters. In fact, there are recent examples where modern-day dating methods give ‘dates’ that are wrong for rocks of known historical age. One example is rock from a lava dome at Mount St Helen's volcano. Although we know the rock was formed during the eruption in 1986, the rock was ‘dated’ by the potassium-argon (K-Ar) method as being 350,000 years old.
Another example is the ‘dating’ of different, modern, lava flows in New Zealand. The ‘dates’ ranged from 270,000 to 3.5 million years—but the lava flows erupted in 1949, in 1954, and in 1975! If known dates can be exaggerated to such extremes, then why should we trust the 'scientifically' tested dates for rocks of unknown age?
We could go deeper into other scientific theories and errors in assumptive testing but I think the point is reasonably well established that the 'guess work' on the age of the earth is subject to wide-ranging assumptions and scientific speculations. So what physical proof might we present today supporting the 6000 year biblical age of the earth?
Let's examine some Polystrate Fossils. “What are Polystrate Fossils”, you might reasonably ask? You may wish to Google Polystrate trees so you can offer pictures of the physical evidence to your audience.) The word "Polystrate" was coined to describe a fossil which is encased within multiple rock layers. These fossils offer wonderful evidence that anyone can actually see, touch, and smell and invalidates the commonly held theories of slow, gradual accumulations of sediment.
In the ruins of an old coal mine operation, Polystrate tree fossils could be seen embedded in the many, distinct rock layers exposed along the face of the Cliff. There, absolutely preserved, were massive tree fossils. These trees are called 'lycopods' and are specimens much larger than anything that currently grows.
But there are a few things that make them significant. Besides the excellent preservation, even down to the texture of the leaflet pods along the trunk, the first thing that stands out is the fact that these trees are fossilized in the upright position! The second and most significant feature is the fact that these trees can be seen extending through multiple layers of rock stratification!
If a secular geologist saw the same horizontal layers of stratification without the vertical tree fossils, they would tell you that each layer was laid down slowly over time, taking several million years of gradual deposits and massive pressure as sediment turned to stone.
But wait! How could these trees stand upright under all that pressure for millions of years while sediment slowly builds up around the trunk, preserving it from decay? There is only one way to explain what is seen here and at similar sites all around the world – a massive but relatively quick event – like a flood. In other words a catastrophe.
Even most atheistic or jaded geologists must admit that this evidence is overwhelming. A tree simply could not remain upright for the millions of years time frames suggested by evolutionary theory time-frames.
The event needed to produce these fossilized trees is documented in the Bible. The great flood in Noah’s day would have uprooted lessor vegetation, reshaped the continents, and buried a vast number of animals and plants extremely quickly underneath thousands of differing layers of sediment. With some these fossilized trees, their root structure can be seen while in other instances it appears as if the treetops may have snapped off forcefully. Again, this is in concert with an account of a massive, earth-covering flood as described in the book of Genesis.
What about other scientific tests? Doesn’t carbon-14 dating disprove the Bible? Carbon-14 (C-14) dating is used to date things that were once alive and is supposed to allow dating of objects up to 60,000 years old because after that length of time the C-14 becomes negligible. If modern readings and assigned dates of let's say “coal” were factual, they would discredit the biblical account of a young earth of about 6,000 years but they don't. While a plant or animal is living, C-14 is constantly resupplied as oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon dioxide so each living thing should have roughly the same ratio of radioactive C-14 to normal C-12.
When an organism dies, it no longer replenishes Carbon-14. The decay process begins. Assuming that the rate of decay and assuming the starting amount of C-14 is known, this decay process is measured. However, the ratios of carbon isotopes are not constant and are affected by the strength of the earth’s magnetic field and the amount of plant and animal matter in the immediate area. The plants and animals buried all at once in the recent Flood could account for a large change in the ratios and demonstrate the false assumption of carbon equilibrium.
To further discredit the scientific findings of different scientific groups all we have to do is google “What is coal made of?” The answer is: “Coal is made from the residue of trees and plants from millions of years ago through the combined effects of pressure and heat. It is a sedimentary, organic and combustible rock composed mainly of carbon, oxygen and hydrogen.” So coal was once living plants. Coal and even supposedly older diamonds said by scientific groups to be millions to billions of years old. Yet, if these items were just 100,000 years old there should be no detectable Carbon-14 present. But there is!
Ten samples from U.S. coal beds, conventionally dated scientifically at 40 million to 320 million years old, were only found to contain Carbon-14 readings equivalent to 48,000–50,000 years. Quite a huge difference, wouldn't you say? These facts alone point to the age of the earth being much younger than evolutionary scientists would suggest.
New capabilities are found using Radiometric Dating. Many people find the subject of radiometric dating too technical or too hard to try to understand. Let me keep this as simple as possible.
Until recent years, creation scientists, who believed in God's Creation of the earth, haven't had the necessary resources to explore radiometric dating in detail. That has changed and important discoveries are being made that support the creation event.
When molten granite hardens, it captures radioactive elements in place. The most common radioactive element in granite is Uranium-238. This element is locked in tiny zircons within the granite. As part of the decay process, helium is produced. While U-238 stays within the zircon for a long period of time, all the helium escapes the zircon within a few thousand years.
When creation scientists studied core samples, they made interesting discoveries. Granite samples were taken from a mile below the earth, which, according to assumptively inflated evolutionary years, were 1.5 billion years old. The helium still locked in the samples was studied as well as the rate at which the helium diffused from the rock. They concluded that the helium in the rock was 100,000 times more plentiful than it should have been if the rocks were really 1.5 billion years old. They concluded that their findings were consistent with an Earth created only about 6,000 years ago.
So everyone one has choices. Do you want to believe the earth's creation timeline as one of the several contradicting scientific theories? Or do you place your faith in the Bible?
With the first choice, your faith is in the hands of man's assumptions, equations, suppositions, and theories that are complicated to us common people. Like radiohalo analysis, potassium decay, carbon-14 testing, Steady State and Big Bang Theories that are not Biblically based.
By placing your faith in the Bible you have the unerring Word of God and the testimonies of Jesus Christ himself. Plus, for those weak in pure faith, you could do a little traveling and actually touch Polystrate Fossils with your own fingers and really see them with your own eyes. Yes, God created our earth in six, 24 hour days! Really! Okay, but how long was a 'day' back then?
I personally believe, God does not want you to question the length of the individual Days of Creation. Some do when they read “Psalm 90:4: A thousand years in your (God's) sight are like a day that has just gone by, or like a watch in the night.” Many, if not most, believe that verse is a simile, a figure of speech involving the comparison of something with a different thing to make a description with a more vivid impact. The base word 'Yom' is generally spoken to mean 'day' as in 24-hours.
Although most Christians believe that the Creation days are 24-hours in length, it is apparent some biblical and internet scholars reading Genesis 1 believe that the days mentioned could be of longer lengths. They propose the 'day' was not 24 hours. I, respectfully, disagree.
God told us the exact length of each day by dividing days into light and dark, daytime and nighttime. In Exodus 20:11, He said that in "six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them and rested on the seventh day." God tells the people, "remember" and "keep" the Sabbath at the end of a week with normal weekdays as known to Moses and his people, i.e., a 24 hour day. God anchors the length of the present days to the reality of the past days of creation. God has set the pattern for the work week and a specified day of rest. The "days" then are the same kind of days that people would have readily known and we know today.
However, since it has no bearing on my salvation, if you want to say six “God days” instead of just six days (literally), go for it!
Yes, God created this earth in just six days! Really!
