How Old is the Earth?
Is the Earth Billions of Years Old?
By Dr. Maurice Dametz

To this question, the several hundred members of the Bible-Science Association and the Creation Research Society say “NO.” The fact is, the earth cannot possibly be even 20,000 years old, and is more likely no more than 6,000 to 8,000 years old. This is a time period which fits in with Bible chronology. Of course, it does not fit in with the wild guesses of evolutionists.

Many so-called scientists are obsessed with dating. Geophysicists now say that the earth is about 4.7 billion years old. The biology textbooks and encyclopedias have been confidently saying that man evolved about a million years ago; now, since the fossil discoveries in East Africa, they are saying that man lived back as far as 3.5 million years ago.

These dates are faulty, wild and unscientific. If man had his beginning a million years ago, the earth would have become overcrowded with people.

In his book Biblical Cosmology and Modern Science, Dr. Henry Morris presents a formula on population growth. To achieve the present world population within 4,500 years only 2.4 children per family would be required, and 43 years to a generation.

To postulate that the earth’s population began one million years ago is ridiculous. The earth could not contain the people. One million years would require 28,600 generations, producing a population of 105000. Actually, not even 10100 people could be crammed into the entire known universe, certainly not onto the earth.

The geologic strata and time scale are totally unreliable in determining dates. There are ever so many places where the so-called oldest strata are on top. There are also many gaps where strata are missing.

Dr. Harold Slusher of the Institute for Creation Research points out that the influx of meteoric dust into the atmosphere of the earth and moon indicate a lifetime of only a few thousand years.

It has been determined that over 14,000,000 tons of meteoric dust settles to the surface of the earth each year. If the earth were five billion years old-as evolutionists claim-the entire globe would be covered with a layer of meteoric dust fifty-four feet deep.

The space scientists were worried about making a landing on the moon-they thought that it would be a soft landing, and treacherous, but we now know that there layer there is not 54 feet deep, but only one-eighth of an inch.

The oceans would be expected to yield vast amounts of nickel, since nickel forms a major part of meteorites. Yet the actual amount of the element found in seawater indicates an accumulation period of only a few thousand years, rather than millions and billions.

Another point is the decay of magnetism. There is now a scientific dating system which dates the earth as less than 15,000 years. Scientists have brought to light the fact that earth’s magnetism is decaying.

Dr. Thomas G. Barnes, professor of physics at the University of Texas at El Paso and a consultant to Globe Universal Sciences, Inc., points out that the earth’s magnetic field has a half-life period (the time it takes to lose half its strength) of 1,400 years. This means that 1,400 years ago the magnetic field was twice as strong as now, and so on.

The earth’s magnetic moment is at present only 37 percent as strong as it was in the days of Christ. From the magnetic field an electric current flows through the core of the earth. It uses energy and produces heat. The present energy loss is 8.13 million watts. The rate of decay is so rapid that the earth cannot be more than 15,000 years old. This is the latest scientific observation.

Robert L. Whitelaw, professor of nuclear and mechanical engineering at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, pointed out that the Carbon 14 content of the atmosphere has not, as evolutionists assume, been constant over the centuries, but rather is building up. The rate of buildup is about 20 percent over its decay rate. It is calculated that the time during which Carbon 14 has been accumulating in the atmosphere in order to reach its present level has been less than 16,000 years. Professor Whitelaw, after calculating all factors involved, has arrived at the actual date of creation, which is about 7,000 years ago.

The rock-dating methods which are most commonly used are the uranium decay and potassium-argon methods, but both of these have been proven faulty and unreliable in cases where the actual age of rock formations is known from history. In one case, lava rocks which were known to have been formed in 1800 and 1801 in Hukalai, Hawaii show an age of 160 million years by the potassium-argon method. Science magazine reports dates of 12 million to 21 million years for volcanic rocks known to be less than 200 years old. There are numerous other reports showing the unreliability of the dating methods.

The scientific “proofs” formerly used to establish an immense age for the earth, including uranium-lead, potassium-argon, and rubidium-strontium, are showing many flaws and weaknesses, while proofs for a young age are increasing.

(Published in The Sword of the Lord, June 4, 2004.)

Glad you're feeling better George.

I agree that the earth is only a few thousand years old. Sadly many of our brethren want to be up there with the big boys so they compromise the Scripture and try and get the Word to match the old earth nonsense.

I agree, the consensus tends to be around 6,000 years old. Seems rational enough to me.

Adam was created as a full grown man. Maybe He created the earth with a much older appearance? We must remember that what we see today is much different than the world Adam knew....The flood changed this world.
Yes...I agree with the biblical time line more like 6000 years or so. Do not know if it was 4004 BC man came up with that number.

Jim Norman

Brother, I have often thought of this very thing. It is an interesting idea. Not only an idea, but I would daresay that if we measured the age of the earth within days of it's inception, our finite minds would probably come up with the figures we even have today from our "scientists".

Love in Christ,

Jim

Think about this...radio carbon dating is based on an isotope of carbon's half life which they state as 5568 years and can only be used for organic matter. The problem with this is no one has been around that long to give us a direct measurement. Also under different conditions matter decays at different rates....Burried matters decays differently than matter that is on the open ground. Also pressure, and other enviromental factors are at play in this....As far as radio carbon dating is used to show the age of something i just laugh, only the Lord knows.

Instead of studying the age of rocks, we need the rock of ages!


Jim Norman

Amen to that!

Amen to that also! I read another interesting thing not too long ago on a related subject. It has been discovered that light travels more slowly in colder temperatures.As the temperature approaches that of absolute Zero loght only travels about ONE FOOT per second rather than the astronomical speed it does under conditions here on the earth.

Because of this discovery there is no way to really determine how old the heavens are and how far away various things in the heavens are. The notion that some stars and things are billions of miles away may be completely wrong. Apparently there is no accurate way to measure it any longer.

In Christ,
George

I just noticed soemthing in reading over my original ost on this subject. There is a factor that can appear confusing which was caused by the format of the forums. In the following words:

those numbers appear extremely small. They should have been shown as using the method of scientific notation. In other words the number that appears as 105000 should actually read 10 to the 5000th power. The number that reads 10100 should actually be displayed as 10 to the 100th power. There is a vast difference in those figures. However I cannot figure out if it is possible to superscript numbers on this forum. I don't believe it is.

In Christ,
George