(1) Science Confirms The Bible (Ken Ham Speaks to Teens):
Learn about DNA as evidence for the infinite God, the basics of genetics and natural selection as they relate to biblical “kinds,” the origin of so-called races, the truth about Cain’s wife, evidence for the worldwide Flood, the actual time of the Ice Age, literal vs. figurative creation days, the origin of death, dating methods, and more.
(2) Astronomy Reveals 6,000 Year Old Earth – Dr. Jason Lisle
Dr Harwood exposes the consequences for the Gospel of the view that God used evolution to create, a view that he once subscribed to. Far from being a convenient solution to the origins dilemma, theistic evolution directly undermines the Gospel message. The creation account is the foundation stone of the Gospel so the issue really is ‘all about Jesus’. This talk powerfully confronts theistic evolution.
From creation.com:
“Carbon-14 is an unstable form of carbon that decays into nitrogen 14 at a measured rate-and this forms the basis of carbon-14 dating. In 2003 a group of researchers performed an unusual test on 10 coal samples obtained from Pennsylvania State University. The researchers wanted to see if carbon-14 could be detected in the coal samples. This test might be considered ‘unusual’ because carbon-14 decays relatively fast, and should not be detectable after a maximum of 90,000 years. Yet the coal samples tested came from strata allegedly ranging in age from 37 million to 318 million years. The laboratory results were clear: all of the 10 coal samples contained carbon-14; and similar amounts. This seriously undermines the evolutionary dates for the rock strata containing the coal, because the presence of carbon-14 affirms that the coal samples cannot be millions of years old. The results fit nicely with the coal forming from vegetation that was buried in Noah’s Flood.”
“Real science, which is a Believer’s true friend, just delivered ANOTHER MAJOR BLOW to the religious belief of Darwinian evolutionism! Until 2016, the inability for life to begin on its own had always been a thorn-in-the-side to Darwinism. Then Harvard biologist and Nobel Laureate Jack Szostak announced he’d proven RNA could replicate itself; thus life could have arisen from chemicals. Though hailed by Darwinists as their conquering hero, he’s now had to retract his claims, saying he was blinded by his BELIEFS. Meanwhile, the Law of Biogenesis holds that life can only come from life, leaving ‘In the beginning God created’ as the only viable explanation for our existence.” – Russ Miller
”Definitely embarrassing:” Nobel Laureate retracts non-reproducible paper in Nature journal
Original source here including the links provided in the article)
Without millions and billions of years, evolutionary history completely falls apart. Here are just a few of many credible evidences from various branches of science that tell of a world much younger than evolutionists claim.
Evidence 1 Geology: Radiocarbon in Diamonds
Far from proving evolution, carbon-14 dating actually provides some of the strongest evidence for creation and a young earth. Radiocarbon (carbon-14) cannot remain naturally in substances for millions of years because it decays relatively rapidly. For this reason, it can only be used to obtain “ages” in the range of tens of thousands of years.
Scientists from the RATE (Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth) project examined diamonds that evolutionists consider to be 1–2 billion years old and related to the earth’s early history. Diamonds are the hardest known substance and extremely resistant to contamination through chemical exchange.
Yet the RATE scientists discovered significant detectable levels of radiocarbon in these diamonds, dating them at around 55,000 years—a far cry from the evolutionary billions!
For more information, see Radiocarbon in Diamonds Confirmed. To learn more about diamonds and their formation, read this article by Dr. Andrew Snelling.
Evidence 2 Astronomy: Recession of the Moon
The gravitational pull of the moon creates a “tidal bulge” on earth that causes the moon to spiral outwards very slowly. Because of this effect, the moon would have been closer to the earth in the past. Based on gravitational forces and the current rate of recession, we can calculate how much the moon has moved away over time.
If the earth is only 6,000 years old, there’s no problem, because in that time the moon would have only moved about 800 feet (250 m). But most astronomy books teach that the moon is over four billion years old, which poses a major dilemma—less than 1.5 billion years ago the moon would have been touching the earth!
For more information, see Lunar Recession (based on this article) as well as The Age of the Universe, Part 2. We also recommend Video on Demand: Our Created Moon.
Evidence 3 Geology: Earth’s Decaying Magnetic Field
Like other planets, the earth has a magnetic field that is decaying quite rapidly. We are now able to measure the rate at which the magnetic energy is being depleted and develop models to explain the data.
Secular scientists invented a “dynamo model” of the earth’s core to explain how the field could have lasted over such a long period of time, but this model fails to adequately explain the data for the rapid decay and the rapid reversals that it has undergone in the past. (It also cannot account for the magnetic fields of other planets, such as Neptune and Mercury.)
However, the creationist model (based on the Genesis Flood) effectively and simply explains the data in regard to the earth’s magnetic field, providing striking evidence that the earth is only thousands of years old—and not billions.
For more information, see The Earth’s Magnetic Field and the Age of the Earth and section two of The Age of the Universe, Part 2.
Evidence 4 Biology: Dinosaur Soft Tissue
In recent years, there have been many findings of “wondrously preserved” biological materials in supposedly ancient rock layers and fossils. One such discovery that has left evolutionists scrambling is a fossilized Tyrannosaurus rex femur with flexible connective tissue, branching blood vessels, and even intact cells!
According to evolutionists, these dinosaur tissues are more than 65 million years old, but laboratory studies have shown that there is no known way—and likely none possible—for biological material to last more than thousands of years.
Could it be that evolutionists are completely wrong about how recently these dinosaurs lived?
To learn more, see “Ostrich-Osaurus” Discovery? and The Scrambling Continues. We also recommend the article Fossilized Biomaterials Must Be Young by Brian Thomas of ICR.
Evidence 5 Anthropology: Human Population Growth
It’s amazing what basic mathematics can show us about the age of the earth. We can calculate the years of human existence with the population doubling every 150 years (a very conservative figure) to get an estimate of what the world’s population should be after any given period of time.
A biblical age of the earth (about 6,000 years) is consistent with the numbers yielded by such a calculation. In contrast, even a conservative evolutionary age of 50,000 years comes out to a staggering, impossibly high figure of 10 to the 99th power—greater than the number of atoms in the universe!
Clearly, the claim that humans have inhabited the earth for tens of thousands of years is absurd!
For a better look at these calculations, see Billions of People in Thousands of Years?
Evidence 6 Geology: Tightly Folded Rock Strata
When solid rock is bent, it normally cracks and breaks. Rock can only bend without fracturing when it is softened by extreme heating (which causes re-crystalization) or when the sediments have not yet fully hardened.
There are numerous locations around the world (including the famous Grand Canyon) where we observe massive sections of strata that have been tightly folded, without evidence of the sediments being heated.
This is a major problem for evolutionists who believe these rock layers were laid down gradually over vast eons of time, forming the geologic record. However, it makes perfect sense to creationists who believe these layers were formed rapidly in the global, catastrophic Flood described in Genesis.
To find out more, see Rock Layers Folded, Not Fractured.
Does the age of the earth really matter?
While each of these evidences reveals reasons why the earth cannot be billions of years old, the real issue is not the age of the earth. Instead, the real issue is authority. God’s infallible Word must be our ultimate authority, not the unstable foundation of human reasoning. Are we trying to fit our interpretations of the world (e.g., evolution) into Scripture, or will we simply let God speak for Himself through His Word?
If we can’t trust the first chapters of Genesis, why should we believe when Scripture says that faith in Jesus Christ as the only way of salvation? (Romans 10:9; Acts 4:12; John 14:6)
But when we take Scripture as written, it’s clear that the earth can’t be more than a few thousand years old—and from a biblical worldview, the scientific evidence agrees!
A Christian’s belief in millions of years totally contradicts the clear teaching of Scripture. Here are just three examples:
Thorns. Fossil thorns are found in rock layers that secularists believe to be hundreds of millions of years old, so supposedly they existed millions of years before man. However, the Bible makes it clear that thorns came into existence after the curse: “Then to Adam He said, ‘Because . . . you have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you, saying, “You shall not eat of it”: Cursed is the ground for your sake. . . . Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you’” (Genesis 3:17–18).
Disease. The fossil remains of animals, said by evolutionists to be millions of years old, show evidence of diseases (like cancer, brain tumors, and arthritis). Thus such diseases supposedly existed millions of years before sin. Yet Scripture teaches that after God finished creating everything and placed man at the pinnacle of creation, He described the creation as “very good” (Genesis 1:31). Certainly calling cancer and brain tumors “very good” does not fit with Scripture and the character of God.
Diet. The Bible clearly teaches in Genesis 1:29–30 that Adam and Eve and the animals were all vegetarian before sin entered the world. However, we find fossils with lots of evidence showing that animals were eating each other—supposedly millions of years before man and thus before sin.
-Ken Ham, Answers in Genesis
Article by Tim Challies (original source here)
When it comes to the age of the universe, Christians find themselves in a bit of a conundrum. At least, those Christians do who hold to a traditional interpretation of the first two chapters of Genesis—an interpretation that leads them to believe the universe is something less than the billions of years indicated by contemporary understandings of the scientific data. Those, like me, who hold to a six-day understanding of creation have to face this question: Why does the universe look so old? Why does it look older than it actually is? This is a question Dr. Albert Mohler took on at a Ligonier Ministries conference several years ago and his response was (and remains) helpful to me.
Before I comment on his answer, I want to point out that all Christians, no matter their interpretation of the opening chapters of Scripture, have difficult questions to face as they attempt to strike harmony between Scripture and science or, better, between God’s book of special revelation and God’s book of natural revelation. Those who believe the universe is ancient have to grapple with the existence of death before the fall, for example, or why the creation account is so clearly laid out as if it all takes place in six literal days. It is not only young earth creationists who have to admit the existence of difficult questions.
As Dr. Mohler considers the age of the universe he tells why he is drawn to the six-day view: “In our effort to be most faithful to the scriptures and most accountable to the grand narrative of the gospel, an understanding of creation in terms of 24-hour calendar days and a young earth entails far fewer complications, far fewer theological problems, and actually is the most straightforward and uncomplicated reading of the text as we come to understand God telling us how the universe came to be and what it means and why it matters.”
But why, then, if the universe is so young, does it look so old? His first answer is this:
The universe looks old because the Creator made it whole.
Accordingly to a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2, God did not create a universe that began in an infant or primordial state before maturing over billions of years, but a universe that actually began in a state of maturity. When it was still young it already looked mature because this was God’s design. Indeed, this was the case with the first human being. “When he made Adam, Adam was not a fetus; Adam was a man; he had the appearance of a man. By our understanding that would’ve required time for Adam to get old but not by the sovereign creative power of God.” Adam and Eve were created whole, mature, grown up, and were placed in a garden that was also whole, mature, and grown up. “The garden was not merely seeds; it was a fertile, fecund, mature garden. The Genesis account clearly claims that God creates and makes things whole.” There is our first answer, that the universe looks old because God created it to look old. This was design, not deception, just as was the case for Adam, the human being who had no history, no parents, no infancy, no childhood.
The second answer is this: The universe looks old because it bears the effects of sin. Sin is an evil intruder into the world and one that brought about God’s judgment. This judgment was expressed in the catastrophe of the great worldwide flood and in a million lesser catastrophes since. These catastrophes have marked, stained, and scarred all that God created. We bear the effects of sin in our tired eyes, wrinkled skin, and aching bones, and in equivalent ways the earth is marked and marred by sin. Paul says in Romans 8 that the world is groaning, “And in its groaning it does look old. It gives us empirical evidence of the reality of sin.” The universe looks old rather than young to display the evidence and consequences of sin, for once we see this we are but a short distance from considering the joy, necessity, and beauty of redemption. A suffering world is crying out for the deliverance that will come.
To my mind these are compelling answers, though they are admittedly somewhat speculative in that neither one can appeal directly to chapter or verse. I will give the final word to Dr. Mohler: “At the end of the day, if I’m asked the question ‘why does the universe look so old?’ I’m simply left with the reality that the universe is telling the story of the glory of God. Why does it look so old? Well that, in terms of any more elaborate answer, is known only to the Ancient of Days. And that is where we are left.”