Young-earth "proof" #25: The current population of Earth (5.5 billion) could easily be generated from 8 people in less than 4000 years. If the earth were really billions of years old, the human population would have gone through the roof! 25. Yes, and by the same reasoning 8 germs could populate every cubic inch of […]

Dr. Hovind: It only takes one proof of a young earth to decide between CREATION and EVOLUTION. This magic bullet mentality, the tendency to rely on a single, isolated argument to win all the chips, has gotten creationists into more trouble than possibly anything else. Unfortunately, Mother Nature does not bestow a little, gold ribbon […]

Young-earth "proof" #17: Erosion rates limit Niagara Falls to an age of less than 10,000 years. Therefore, the earth is young. 17. If Dr. Hovind is right, then the Niagara Falls are less than 10,000 years old. What of it? Since when does the age of the Niagara Falls have anything to do with the […]

Young-earth "proof" #5: The Moon is receding a few inches each year. Less than a million years ago the Moon would have been so close that the tides would have drowned everyone twice a day. Less than 2 or 3 million years ago the Moon would have been inside the Roche limit* and, thus, destroyed. […]

Young-earth "proof" #6: The Moon contains considerable quantities of U-236 and Th-230, both of which are shortlived isotopes that would have expired long ago if the Moon were 4.5 billion years old. Thorium-230 is an intermediate decay product of uranium-238 which has a half-life of about 4.468 billion years (Strahler, 1987, p.131). Thus, it will […]

Young-earth "proof" #2: Given the rate at which cosmic dust accumulates, 4.5 billion years would have produced a layer on the moon much deeper than observed. By implication, the earth is also young. The most amazing thing about the cosmic dust argument is that it is still being used! It has coasted along on obsolete […]

Young-earth "proof" #13: If we divide the amount of various minerals in the ocean by their influx rate we get only a few thousand years of accumulation. Therefore, the earth is young. 13. In the case of aluminum we "get" only 100 years! In the case of sodium we "get" 260 million years. Where Dr. […]

Young-earth "proof" #4: There are no fossil meteorites in the geologic record. If the latter were laid down over billions of years we would expect to find at least a few fossil meteorites in the geologic strata. Therefore, the geologic record was deposited rapidly. Meteorites are hard enough to find on the surface of the […]

Young-earth "proof" #11: Since the earth’s magnetic field is decaying at an exponential rate, its strength would have been unrealistically high 25,000 years ago. Thus, Earth is less than 25,000 years old. 11. Dr. Hovind is almost certainly talking about Barnes’s magnetic field argument (1973) or some echo of it. Henry Morris, himself, once praised […]

Young-earth "proof" #12: The volume of lava on earth divided by its rate of efflux yields only a few million years. The earth is not billions of years old. 12. At present, when mountain ranges are actively being built up, the output of magma is almost certainly much higher than usual. There may have been […]

Young-earth "proof" #10: Jupiter and Saturn are cooling off rather rapidly. Since they still give off internal heat, they cannot be billions of years old. 10. Jupiter is not cooling off that rapidly! Based on the fact that Jupiter is radiating twice as much energy as it receives from the Sun, and given its mass […]

Young-earth "proof" #28: The oldest historical records go back less than 6000 years. 28. What does the age of the oldest known historical records have to do with the age of the earth? If, in fact, they go back 6000 years, what of it? Records couldn’t be kept until writing was invented. Of course, we […]

Young-earth "proof" #14: The amount of helium in the atmosphere divided by its formation rate on Earth gives only 175,000 years. 14. The age of 175,000 years is a little steep for creationist purposes, so Dr. Hovind informs us that "God must have started the earth with some." Heaven forbid that the earth should be […]

Young-earth "proof" #30: Many ancient cultures have stories of an original creation in the recent past. This is because the earth really is young. 30. The ultimate origin of things, according to many creation legends, traces back into the mists of time to which no specific date can be affixed. The Australian aborigine, for example, […]

Young-earth "proof" #26: The oldest coral reef is about 4200 years old. 26. What does the age of a coral reef have to do with the age of the earth? If, in fact, the oldest coral reef is 4200 years old, so what? There is no argument here for a young earth, but such a […]

Young-earth "proof" #15: Continents are eroding at a rate which would bring them to sea level in less than 14 million years. Inasmuch as the continents are anything but flat, the earth cannot be billions of years old. (27.5 x 10^9 tons sediment/year are lost to the oceans by erosion; the present mass of the […]

Young-earth "proof" #3: The existence of short-period comets means that the universe is less than 10,000 years old. Comets and meteoroids only last from 10,000-15,000 years before they are blown apart by the solar wind. In his debate with Dr. Hilpman, Dr. Hovind stated that comets lasted 10,000-15,000 years before being blown apart by the […]

Young-earth "proof" #29: The dates in the Bible add up to about 6000 years. 29. The biblical figure, unfortunately, is based on patriarchal life spans to which no right-thinking person could subscribe. You have to be pretty deep into biblical infallibility before you can make yourself believe that individuals once lived upwards of 900 years! […]

Specific Creationist Arguments Dave E. Matson It only takes one proof of a young earth to decide the issue. The Sun is Shrinking! Cosmic Dust Accumulation on the Moon and Earth Comet Burnout Meteorites, Fossil Craters and Geologic Strata The Moon is Receding and it Could Only Have Been So Close U-236 and Th-230, Both […]

I will round out this work with some miscellaneous arguments which, with one exception, are from Dr. Hovind’s notebook. Dr. Hovind (A): If the universe is not billions of years old, then we need not bother with the other arguments supporting evolution. A . The presently accepted history of evolution on Earth would be in […]

Hovind (G4): Polystrata fossils, missing layers, layers out of order, misplaced fossils, and layers in reverse order all invalidate the geologic column. G4. None of these charges amount to a hill of discarded beans. We can’t examine every claim that has been made, but we can look at a few examples. a) Polystrata fossils. By […]

Dr. Hovind (G3): The fictitious geologic column (invented in the 1800’s to discredit the Bible) does not exist anywhere in the world except in textbooks. G3. Oh, sure, those early creationists invented the geologic column to discredit the Bible! That just makes loads of sense, doesn’t it? Is it possible that Dr. Hovind, who taught […]

Dr. Hovind (G1): The assumption that the geologic column is a base from which to calibrate the C-14 dates is not wise. G1. With a halflife of only 5730 years, carbon-14 dating has nothing to do with dating the geological ages! Whether by sloppiness or gross ignorance, Dr. Hovind is confusing the carbon-14 "clock" with […]

Dr. Hovind (G2): The entire geologic column is based on the assumption that evolution is true. G2. If Dr. Hovind would take the trouble to do a little reading from something other than creationist publications he would not make such an outrageous statement. I believe he has confused the use of index fossils with evolution. […]

Dr. Hovind (G5): The assumed age of a sample will dictate which radiometric dating method is used. One method will only give results for a young age; another will only give results for a very old age. Thus, the assumed age of a sample dictates the method which, in turn, gives the assumed age! G5. […]

It is a Poor Base for Calibrating C-14 Dating It is Based On the Assumption that Evolution is True It is a Fictitious Invention to Discredit the Bible It is Invalidated by Out Of Place Fossils and Strata The Assumed Age of a Sample Dictates the Method Used

How Good Are Those Young-Earth Arguments? Copyright Statement   Copyright © 1995 Dave E. Matson. Copies of this paper may be made and sold by Edward T. Babinski, the National Center for Science Education, and all other groups who are battling the attempts by "scientific" creationists to adversely affect the quality of science education. All […]

Dr. Hovind (R1): The atmospheric C-14 is presently only 1/3 of the way to an equilibrium value which will be reached in 30,000 years. This nullifies the carbon-14 method as well as demonstrating that the earth is less than 10,000 years old. The above is offered as a simple fact of research. Knowing how faulty […]

  Dr. Hovind (R3): The initial C-14 content cannot be known. Different parts of the same sample often yield different ratios of C-14/C-12. Various living samples give very different ratios. With at least one notable exception on the books, plants and animals get their carbon-14 from the atmosphere. Plants take it in directly, and animals […]

Dr. Hovind (R6): The shape of the curve of the line is based on too few real measurements to be reliable. It’s not clear to me what Dr. Hovind is talking about. If he is referring to the carbon-14 decay curve then he has demonstrated, once again, his ignorance of radiometric dating. The decay curve […]