Today’s New Reason To Believe

by Dr. Jeffrey Zweerink

Imagine working a puzzle with pieces made by machines using different scales. It’d be like attempting to fit a child’s ten-piece puzzle with the tiny pieces of a complex jigsaw puzzle. While the pictures might be the same, pieces made using a 2:1 scale would never fit with pieces made using a 3:1 scale. The Institute for Creation Research’s RATE team makes the claim that scientists using radioisotopes to date rocks are trying to assemble such a bizarre puzzle.

The RATE researchers contend that radioactive decay occurred at an accelerated rate in the past, which renders radioisotope dating techniques completely obsolete and unreliable. Scientists can test this contention by comparing radioisotope dates for rocks with corresponding dates derived from cyclical variations in Earth’s orbit and rotation axis, which change the sedimentation rate.

As reported in Science, a team of Earth scientists performed a calibration of the Ar⁴⁰/Ar³⁹ dating method using two geological formations separated by a well-determined number of variations in Earth’s orbit. The time-separation recorded by the variations in sedimentation depends on well-understood cyclical variations in Earth’s orbit. This separation is compared to the radioisotope dates obtained from each of the two geological formations. Based on the calibration, the measured age of the formation increased by just over half of a percent, which reduced the uncertainty in the age by a factor of ten.

These results provide an example where more data serve as a test of two competing models. According to the RATE model, the dates determined by the astronomical forces should not correlate with the dates derived from radioisotope measurements because the decay rates changed dramatically in the past—much like mismatched puzzle pieces. In contrast, the constant decay rates of RTB’s model (which agrees with the prevailing scientific model concerning the age of the Earth and universe) mean the dates should correlate well. For further examples showing the consistency and reliability of radioisotope dating see Roger C. Wiens’ article on the American Scientific Affiliation website.

Previously Posted on February 25th, 2008 by Hugh Ross, Ph.D.

In the December 2007 issue of Astrobiology Stanford University geophysicists Norman H. Sleep and Mark D. Zoback note that the higher tectonic activity during Earth’s early history could have played a key role in cycling critically important nutrients and energy sources for life.¹ The production of numerous small faults in the brittle primordial crust released trapped nutrients. Such faults could also release pockets of methane gas and molecular hydrogen. The methane and hydrogen could then provide crucial energy sources for nonphotosynthetic life. Finally, the production of faults could bring water to otherwise arid habitats, such as rocks far below Earth’s surface.

Faulting, generated by active and widespread tectonics, allowed a youthful Earth to support diverse and abundant life. This enhanced diversity and abundance of life quickly transformed Earth’s surface into an environment safe for advanced life. Also, the buildup of biodeposits for the support of human civilization occurred more rapidly due to active tectonics.

The more rapid preparation of Earth for humanity is critical. Without such rapid preparation, humans could not come upon the terrestrial scene before the Sun’s increasing luminosity would make their presence impossible (due to excessive heat).² Thus, yet one more reason exists to thank God for His supernatural design of Earth’s tectonics.

1. Norman H. Sleep and Mark D. Zoback, “Did Earthquakes Keep the Early Crust Habitable?” Astrobiology 7 (December, 2007): 1023-32.
2. Hugh Ross, Creation As Science (Colorado Springs: NavPress, 2006): 126-36.

by Dr. Jeffrey Zweerink

The Hebrew phrase “tōhū wābōhū” provides the first description of Earth given in Genesis 1. Many English Bible translations render this description as “formless and void (or empty)”. The Hebrew words imply that Earth’s surface was a desolate, undistinguishable ruin. Genesis 1:3 through Genesis 2:3 delineates how God transformed this wasteland into a variety of habitats teeming with life.

One critical transformation involves breaking up the formless deep to form land upon which humans will live. On the third day of the creation week, Moses, the likely author of Genesis, declares that waters below the heavens were “gathered into one place” in order to “let the dry land appear”. In RTB’s creation model, this declaration means that scientists should find that the formation of a large, permanent continental landmass occurred within a definite time window (or burst) in Earth’s history. Additionally, that time window must close before the Cambrian explosion (which occurred around 540 million years ago), when complex multicellular life appeared on Earth.

Past research on zircons revealed that most continental land dated to either 1.2, 1.9, 2.7, or 3.3 billion years ago. The clustering around these dates indicates that continental growth did occur in bursts. However, such clustering would also result from preferential preservation of crust that grew uniformly.

More recent research adds further support to the idea that continental growth occurred in bursts. For continents to grow, regions of the mantle must melt and differentiate in order to provide the additional continental material. One particularly useful way to measure the melting of mantle material is the Rhenium-Osmium radioactive decay channel. A team of scientists using this decay channel discovered that mantle melting events also clustered around 1.2, 1.9, and 2.7 billion years ago. (No materials dating older than 3 billion years were used in the study.)

The clustering of the continental ages and the mantle melting events around the same ages is extremely unlikely. Therefore, taken together, these results argue that the bulk of continent formation occurred in a time window between 3.3 and 1.2 billion years ago. Thus, these discoveries demonstrate a way the Creator could have “let the dry land appear” and add to the body of evidence supporting RTB’s creation model.