Transcription
So far, you've given us four scientific reasons why the earth is really young. So we talked first about carbon dating carbon. I asked you that one first. Second one we talked about dinosaur bones, tissue. Yes.
The soft tissue. Tissue. Tissue, DNA and things like that. Radiometric, dating in general is number three. And then four, we talked about the rock layers. The rock layer. Being flat and bent.
Okay, give us something that's not quite so scientific.
Alright, we get asked this question a lot. How can there be 8 billion people in the world if we started off with Adam and Eve? And that sounds impossible.
Yes it does.
Until you apply the math, all you have to do is
We constantly hear that the Earth is millions and billions of years old. But Dr. Robert Carter, your scientist, that's not what you say. You say, the science actually tells us otherwise. And today you're going to give us five scientific evidences that the earth is actually young.
Okay, we can do that. Where would you like to start?
Well, I often hear about carbon dating. Oh.
Yes. Carbon dating. Actually one of my favorite topics, I wrote a long article on creation.com called How Carbon Dating Works. I'm actually involved in a carbon dating workshop. We meet twice a year, some high powered people who, you know, run carbon dating labs and archeologists and physicists talking about this and how we can answer these questions from a biblical perspective. But really simply, really simply,
Alright, so hang on just a second. You're, you're sorry to interrupt you, but you, you say that they're biblical answers as opposed
Absolutely.
As opposed to what science says this.
Yes. But what I get to say now is, thank you Mr. Revolutionist for inventing carbon dating. That's ours. Go play with something else.
Go on.
That's how strong I am about this. But carbon dating specifically, not all the other radiometric dating techniques, they have different answers. But this one, we cannot find any carbon source in the world. It has zero carbon 14. That means they can't be millions of years old. 'cause carbon 14 breaks down really quickly.
How
Quickly.
The half life is just over 5,000 years. So after 5,000 years, you have half as much as you did before. But there's not a lot of carbon 14 it, it's formed in the atmosphere very slowly from cosmic rays. There's always a just a little teeny bit. So as plants photosynthesize, they soak in the carbon. As we eat the plants, we soak up the carbon, it becomes part of our bodies. But if you bury something in the ground, it's cut off from any source of carbon 14. It just decays. But we find carbon 14 in coal.
So, but if it was really old, it shouldn't. If it was millions of years old, there
Should be zero. Now, if
It was even a half a million,
The theoretical maximum is about 70 or 80,000 years. And there'll be nothing left. We find it in coal. In fact, all different coals throughout the entire fossil record from they say 30 million year old coals, the 300 million year old coals have the same amount of carbon 14. Oh, it's contamination. They say, well, there are ways to get around contamination. Carbon dating labs know how to do that. We find carbon 14 in diamonds that they claim are a billion years old. You can't contaminate a diamond. It's a crystal. So where's carbon coming from? Carbon 14 coming from, we find carbon 14 in dinosaur bones, consistently about the same amount of dinosaur bone carbon 14 in dinosaur bones. So we know these things are not millions of years old. Now, one of those forms of carbon might be, you know, contamination groundwater leaching of uranium or something. But not all of them. And consistently all of them are giving us about the same answer as telling us the world is not millions of years old. That's a carbon 14 story.
Okay, so you, you mentioned the dinosaur bones. Yes. So I've heard that there's actually been soft tissue found in dinosaur bones.
Yes. And that is a great second indicator of the youthfulness of the fossil records. Specifically there, there's two types of soft tissue we might see. One might be like the petrification of something soft. There was even Charles Darwin, he wrote, I think an origin species, no organism, holy soft can be preserved. So you would never expect to find a fossil jellyfish.
Right.
Which there have been. Oh, we find tons of them. We find fossil raindrops, plants, insects, flowers, lots of things. Or fossilized. That shouldn't be, if Dar in Darwin's mind slow and gradual. Right. Something dies and sinks to the bottom is very slowly buried. Well then nothing soft is gonna remain only the hard parts. We find tons of remains of petrified soft parts. But then there's the other type of soft part, the non petrified type. And that's the stuff that really should not be there. Starting off in about 10 or 15 years ago. Now there's a large tyrannosaurus wreck they found in Montana. And they wanted to fly out the leg bone. They had hired a helicopter, but helicopter couldn't pick up the leg. Bone was too heavy, so they cut it in half.
Ooh.
Yeah. World class specimen. They cut in half. And then they, one of the scientists there who's now very famous, sampled the inside of the bone, took it back to the lab, decalcified it using something I've used in a lab when I working on corals to get rid of the skeleton so I could study the tissue.
Okay.
She did that with the bones of the dinosaur and was left with soft, flexible tissue. And that wasn't a one off. We've now found soft tissue in multiple dinosaur bones. We know now that there was reports going back, at least in the 1960s where sciences reporting similar things, different places in the world, different types of dinosaurs. OSAs, OSAs, tyrannosaurs. Yeah. These things are not petrified. They had the soft parts haven't been replaced with rock. They're still flexible. Sometimes they still stink. You can sometimes, some examples you can squeeze the blood cells out of, out of blood vessel.
So they're still visible blood cells in there.
Yes. And bone cells and blood vessels and fibrous tissue from the skin that hasn't completely decayed yet is actually shocking. Now, there are ways maybe of helping preserve things over a long time. You know, you put your meat in the freezer, right? Sure. You don't leave it on the counter because it preserves it better. But even frozen things like that don't last millions of years. And we've been studying this for over a hundred years. That, that the study of the breakdown of things over time, it's called tomy. This is a well-known part of science. We pretty much know how long it takes these things to break down. And this is shocking, everyone. 'cause even me, I think these things are buried during Noah's flood. That was 4,500 years ago. That's, that's a long
Time that to find carbon.
No, I wouldn't expect to find an anything I have to 4,500 years. I expect it all to be decayed away. But if I'm incredulous, what's the evolutionist answer to this? I mean, I'm surprised. So maybe I was overestimating how fast things break down. Okay, fine. Twist my arm. They can last 4,500 years. But 70 million, that's a whole nother ball of wax. So we find soft tissue, we find blood vessels, skin, there's even evidence of DNA and that's my field. Now I'm a geneticist. Right? There should not be DNA it, it should have broken down a long, long, long, long time ago. DN is a really fragile molecule, much more fragile than the proteins in our skin.
Okay.
So and so, and there's evidence of it being there.
Let me just ask you, maybe this is a, a sidebar question. Okay. That you, as you were talking about being a geneticist and there's DNA in there. So how far are we from Jurassic Park? And, and
Great question. I would refer people to an article I wrote for Creation Magazine. It's now on creation.com. Mammoth clones coming to a zoo near you with a question mark. Okay. And I was talking about the, the cloning of a wooly mammoth that this lab is trying to do that they're not gonna be able to do it.
Why not?
Because of wooly mammoth genome that we sequences in pieces is broken down. They can sequence the little pieces and compare it to elephants. So we find out mammoths are more similar to a Asian elephant than African elephant. That's really interesting. But they don't have a complete genome. The chromosomes are
Now
Little pieces.
They can't do it now. But that doesn't mean that they couldn't find more examples or
Manufacture it in a machine.
Ooh. How does that happen?
Well, they have DNA writing machines. You can, you can write DNA make DNA, but the problem is chromosomes are, I mean, tens and hundreds of millions of base pairs long. So we don't have the technology. But what they're gonna do is they're gonna try to genetically engineer an elephant and make it look like a wooly mammoth. Just like the reports this week. Now, by the time this video comes out, it'll be a couple weeks, maybe a couple of months old reports this week of them resurrecting the dire wolf an extinct species. But they didn't, they took a wolf and they genetically modified its genome to make it more like a dire wolf with the big, big wolf that went extinct a long time ago. That's not the same thing as a Jurassic Park. That's not cloning a a a species. It's just a species already exists.
Alright. So there's been information lost.
Absolutely.
They're not going to evolve you. They can't clone this elephant to look like a wooly mammoth. And then it couldn't eventually evolve into a wooly
Mammoth.
No, they're gonna, they're gonna actually say that's the gene that makes it hairy. That's the gene that makes a big tusk. That's the gene that makes the head look a little funny. Change those letters and those genes and try to get a female elephant to, to, to bear a, a mammoth baby. And boom, oh, we got a wooly mammoth. But it's not really, so Jurassic Park is even worse because dinosaur DNA, it's there we can see it with, with antibodies and we can see it with DNA stains, but we're not able to sequence it yet because the DNA's broken in such tiny little pieces that you can't sequence it. Or if you did sequence it, you have, you know, five or six letters in a row. What does that even mean? You need a long piece of DNA before we know what it is. So that's the issue with a Jurassic Park-like scenario.
All right, Dr. Carter, you've given us a couple of scientific examples of, of why the earth is actually young. We've talked about carbon dating, we've talked about the soft tissue and dinosaur bones.
Okay.
So give us a third.
How about radiometric dating in general?
Okay.
Now most people look at that and say, oh, that proves the earth is billions of years old. Mm. Not so fast. There's many different radiometric dating techniques. Each one of them, carbon dating being one, has a different answer, different assumptions, different applications. But when we do real world testing of radiometric dating, it often fails. Like for example, some enterprising creationists went to Mount St. Helens in Washington state. They exploded in 1980. So I was in fifth grade and I remember it, I remember it quite clearly, living in New York, the weird skies from the ash in the atmosphere. But they went and sampled the lava dome that formed after the, after the eruption. So it was formed after 1980. And they used a potassium argon method works like this. You have lava, there's argon, which is a gas.
Right?
And this potassium force, so potassium 40 breaks down into Argonne 40. The assumption was while the rock is liquid, all the argonne is gonna boil off. And when it hardens, Argonne will be building up inside that, but only from the breakdown of potassium. And so they, so
It should have had a, according to their
Should be zero.
Okay.
Yeah. It should have no argon. They sampled it, [two] million years old.
Really?
Based on the rate of breakdown of potassium 40. And how much was there? How much Argonne? Oh, it looks like it's about [two] million or more years old. Same thing in Hawaii. I think the lava flow from 1950 several in New Zealand, three historical lava flows at one of the big volcanoes that have gone off since Europeans settled there. So we know those days of lava flows and they all date to millions of years.
So were these like blind tests that, that
Send these samples? Yeah, send the sample to the laboratory. Don't tell 'em where it came from necessarily. And here's it. The machine gives you a ratio. It measures how much of this and how much of that. That's good science. But the ratio is wrong if the thing is only a few to a couple hundred years old because the Argonne doesn't boil off outta the rocks, it's there. So we have to ask the question how much Argonne is in rocks primordially. And we look at a rock that, you know, might have a, a lot of argonne in it. How do we know that that wasn't in there when the rock formed? We can't know.
If you're enjoying this interview so far. You might be interested to know that we also produce the world's most widely read magazine on the creation evolution controversy creation magazine. It's packed with beautifully illustrated articles showing how real science supports the Bible. It's designed for the whole family and is a great tool for strengthening your faith. Subscribe now to receive four issues a year. Follow the link in the description.
Okay. So you've got me thinking about back to middle school science. Yes. And what we think about is science. Yes. It is observable. It is repeatable. Fantastic. So and so tell me, where's the breakdown in the science then? If you're doing these tests and you're getting these invalid results, or maybe that's not the right term for
Invalid. No, no. You're, you're thinking correctly. The science is sound as in the machine. You put the sample in, it goes bing, and you're done. And you have a number. There's the number that we can test the accuracy of the machine. We can repeat the experiments. It gives us the same number. The machines are really good. It's the assumptions behind it that are wrong. The assumption that this thing is millions of years old, or the assumption of all the argonne comes outta potassium 40. We don't know that it's an assumption. So when we ground truth it, the radiometric dating test usually fail.
What do you mean by ground truthing?
We, we go to a place where we know how old it is. 'cause we saw it happen.
Okay. So
Sample it and it, it fails. That happens a lot. And that's one of the achilles heels of radiometric dating. So even radiometric dating does not prove the Earth's millions of years old. And a lot of tests show it's not.
So how would we ever know what is accurate and what is not?
We can assume that like, like carbon dating specifically the machine, those machines that accelerated mass spectrometers are down to such a level. We can almost measure single atoms. It is unbelievable. But it's in a ratio of carbon 13 to carbon 14 to carbon 12. But it's so close, we can almost measure single atoms. Those machines are amazing. They're precise, they're wonderful, beautiful, amazing things. But that does not tell us how old the sample is. It only tells us the ratio of the different forms of carbon in the sample. You have to assume a lot about his history in order to assess how old it is.
Okay. That's a a lot to think about here. A lot
To think about. Yes.
Lot to think about. So if we're talking about your having rocks tested, okay, that makes me think about just rocks in general. And particularly the Grand Canyon where one can look, we see all these rock layers and surely that's evidence of millions of years.
Right. Okay. So that would bring us to point number four. Why the earth cannot be millions of years old. Just look at Grand Canyon. Look at those layers, those beautiful flat layers laid down one upon another, like a stack of pancakes. It's really funny though, because most of the time in that wall of Grand Canyon is in the gaps between the layers where the evolutionary saying that, that these rocks were above the ocean subject to the atmosphere and erosion. And then the ocean came back and laid down the shale or laid down this limestone. But there might be a 30 million year gap in there with no evidence of erosion. Meaning there wasn't 30 million years, or there would've been canyons and all sorts of things in the, that flat layer that should have been eroded. So if most of the evidence of time is in the gaps and the gaps show no evidence of time, the millions of years isn't true, a better solution is that these things are laid down during Noah's flood, one upon another, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. And actually the time is not there. Just like the rocks tell us.
So were the rocks formed quickly?
Yes. The rocks are formed quickly, laid down quickly, one upon another. During the flood year.
What might a quickly formed rock look like?
Well, it might look like a sandstone, specifically. A lot of the sandstones in Grand Canyon, when you look at the angle at which the, the, there's the cross bedding, they call it these, these diagonal lines in the rocks that's formed from water flowing over sand and piling it up. And it makes these mounds underwater. And the mounds stack up on top of each other at a certain angle. If it happens in air, the angle is steeper and water, they're shallower. And they all the indications of these sandstones that are laid down under water.
So they're
Quickly.
Quickly. So they're, they're not necessarily straight. They can be,
Well the, the sand piles up like that, but then it's cut off. And another thing is laid on top of it. It's cut off by the water changing direction, A new giant tidal wave coming through or something like that. And now we have maybe a, a limestone being laid down. And limestone tends to have horizontal layers, not sandy sort of angular layers. All the, all tons of things in the fossil record in geology showing us that things are young. I would really recommend people if they're interested in that. Dig in a little more. Just go to creation.com, type in science zone limestone or type in bent layers.
Okay. Tell us what those are.
If rocks are hard, which we'd expect them to get very hard over billions of years. Right. You can't bend them, they'd snap they fault. Right. They break Right. But we see areas of, of multi stacked rocks with different layers, different different colors. And they're bent like taffy, they're twisted. They, they, they, they, they can fold back on themselves. They, it's crazy. All the bending in the rocks.
How did that happen?
Well, they had to bend while they're still soft. And the only way for them to be soft when they bent is if they were laid down quickly and then bent before they hardened. So the flat layers that we see and the flat layers that have been bent and twisted around, like they were still soft, are those things are bow telling us that the rock record is not millions of years old. 'cause if this rock is laid down millions of years before this rock, and they're both bent together as if they were still soft, there's no millions of years.
Okay. Speaking of the rocks, I wanna talk about some really big rocks. And that would be the Rocky Mountains.
Yes.
Okay. So they are significantly taller at higher than the Appalachian Mountains.
Yes.
So how do you explain the disparity between the two?
Well, it's really kind of funny because in the evolutionary model, the Rockies, the Andes, the Alps, the Himalayas, other mountain chains in the, the, in the southeast Asia are all geologically very young. How do you know that the dinosaurs would never have seen those mountains?
What, what do you mean?
The, the, after the dinosaurs died out and the evolutionary model, millions of years later, these mountains started forming. They're actually very young mountains and they're sharp. They're, their peaks are very jagged still. Right. They're not rounded down. These are late flood mountains. The, the mountains started coming up and helping to drain the flood orders off the continents.
What do you mean by light flood?
Well, during the flood year we would
Have, and it was a a year, it
Was a year. No was on the arc for a year, not 40 days for a year. During that year, mountains formed. In fact, the Bible says mountains rose. Well, those rising in the mountains helped drain off, the, the water. And once the mountain rises above the water, there's not much erosion left. You have rain and lightning and wind freezing and thawing. But you don't have massive water squashing around eroding the rocks down. These rocks are really young. Even the evolutionary model. They're really young. So we get to ask the question, how come the earth started building mountains? All of a sudden, all the major mountain changes in the world, except a few exceptions are really young. The Appalachians being an exception, they're really rounded, they're really eroded. Those that was an early flood year mountain chain that rose up and got significantly eroded
Because there was a significant amount of
Water. Because there's still a significant amount of water on the earth. Yes.
So if the Appalachian are
Older.
Older, right. And the Rockies are younger, then there's
A, we're talking six months.
That's a significant amount of water to erode.
Yes. And Noah's flood gives us that. Noah's flood gives us a recipe of rapid buildup of sediments and massive erosion of those sediments. The evolutionary model really doesn't do that. I think we have a better explanation of the rock record and the fossil record than the evolutionist does. Given Noah's flood.
So far you've given us four scientific categories, reasons why the earth is really young. So we talk first about carbon dating. Carbon dating. I you that one first.
Yes.
Second one we talked about dinosaur bones and tissue. And
Soft tissue. Tissue tissue, DNA
And things like that. Tissue. And the, the, we
Talked third radiometric dating in general is number three.
Right. And then four, we talked about the rock layers. The rock layers
Being flat and bent. Okay.
Okay. Give us something that's not quite so scientific.
Alright, let's, let's do something really easy. Okay. Can you multiply by two?
Yes, I can.
Okay, great. Let's multiply by two. Many times we get asked this question a lot. How can there be 8 billion people in the world? If we started off with Adam Eve?
Right.
I mean, 6,000 years ago, that's not a long time. It's even worse than that because 1600 years after Adam and Eve, we had Noah's flood and the whole earth was reduced to eight people only.
So we've gone from eight to 8 billion.
And we've gone from, actually, we've gone from six to 8 billion because no, and his wife don't count sham, ham and jth. They're three wives. They're the founders of the modern human population. That was only 4,500 years ago.
So we've gotten from six,
Six people
Billion to eight plus billion.
Billion. And that sounds impossible.
Yes, it does.
Until you apply the math, all you have to do is double the population every 150 years, which is ridiculously slow. Human populations grow a lot faster than that. If at the flood there are six people, 150 years later, there's 12.
And my guess is there were more than that.
I'm guessing a lot more than that. 150 years. Yeah.
So this is kind of like compounding interest.
Exactly. In fact, it's the same exact mathematical formula as compounding interest. The, the formula for population growth.
Okay.
So from six to 12, say 300 years after the flood, there's 24 people. We're running outta time, aren't we?
Yes.
450 years. There's 48 people. How do we get to eight? Well, you just keep on doubling it every time. And you'll arrive at something around the modern population in 4,500 years. Easily. We have to actually explain
How come, how, how far back were we? That it was 4 billion that we doubled?
Oh, I don't know, 1960s.
So relatively something
Like that.
So relatively recent.
Yeah, because it's, it's an exponential growth rate. And so it just keeps on doubling and doubling and doubling. The only way to only have 8 billion people is we have to kill off a lot of people during this time.
To only have 8 billion.
The only, there should be a lot more than 8 billion people.
Well, we've had some wars, we've had famines, we we've had
Some families and
Disease pandemics.
Yeah. Those three things have kept the population way down. In fact, demographers have estimated that if there wasn't a World War I or World War ii, there would be as many people in Europe as are in China.
Really?
Yeah.
Well, I mean
Because of, you know, war slowdown population growth.
Sure.
So it's really easy to get that number of people starting with an Adam and Eve starting with a Noah and his family. Really easy. We actually have to slow down the population growth to keep it low till we only have 8 billion people. Let's look at the evolutionary model.
Okay.
They say there's like a a million early humans floating around the world for a couple of hundred thousand years.
All right, so hang on. You said early humans? Yes.
So after humans evolve in Africa,
Okay.
We start spreading out in Africa, like, you know, 300,000 years ago. We spread out maybe 30,000 years or so ago. But it's
Not
In the evolutionary model. In the evolutionary model. So we have a population bottleneck where humans evolve and then we start growing. And it's about a million-ish people. That's their estimate. It could be up or down, it doesn't matter. Give a million people with an average population generation time of about 30 years. 'cause modern females can have children from about 15 to about 45, but not so much on the edges. The average is actually about 30 for the modern world. So assume that every 30 years you have another million dead bodies for 300,000 years.
That's a lot of
Dead bodies. Where are the dead bodies? Where are the graveyards? Where the, where are the, the campgrounds? Where the, the stone flakes that people made? Where are, are the buildings that they built? Where's all the evidence of all of these people that have LA over hundreds of thousands of years? They're not there. Archeology, we do find evidence of early people. Yeah. Little, you know, Flint nappings in a pile or a, you know, a, a little village or something like that. But they're very few and far between as if those billions of people never existed because the earth is not nearly as old as the evolutionists want us to believe.
So you've given us several reasons. You've given us five good reasons why the earth is really young and there's science to back that up, right?
Yes.
And so you've mentioned creation.com, but we also have this resource evolutions Achilles heels, this DVD that
We're
One of my favorites. One of your favorites. Tell us a little bit about it.
Well, we identified multiple areas of science that are fatal flaws in evolutionary theory. That's what an an Achilles heel is. It's a fatal flaw in something that looks like it's impervious to attack. And we identified them in all these different areas and we got multiple CMI scientists. And for the, the documentary we made, we took people from the outside also. And so it was like nerdy kind of Christian creation scientist person. We asked them one question, they're all PhD scientists also. We said, okay, Mr. Scientist, tell us what evolution cannot answer in your area of expertise.
Okay.
And that's it. And man, they told us the most incredible things. We call them evolutions, Achilles es, heels, heels. And then we had non-scientists review this many times to make it understandable. And then we released it. And one of the best selling things we've ever, we've ever made. Very powerful. We had so many comments and so many testimonials of people being encouraged through that.
And because this is such a great resource, we're going to make it available as a free stream.
Awesome.
Look in the description.
Okay.
Thank you so much Dr. Carter for being here and giving us some great reasons that the earth really is young.
You're welcome.