Welcome to Science, Scripture, and Salvation, a radio ministry of the Institute for Creation Research. In this program, we want to encourage you in your Christian faith by showing how scientific evidence supports the Bible, particularly the Genesis account. The book of Genesis lays the foundation for all matters addressed in the rest of the Bible. The nature of God, His sovereignty in creation, man's purpose, sin, marriage, family, and why we need a Savior are all introduced and explained in Genesis. When we see that the first and most foundational book of the Bible can be trusted in all matters, including science, it builds confidence in the rest of the inspired word all the way to Revelation.
On today's show, we'll get some insights from Brian Thomas, science writer with the Institute for Creation Research. Here's Brian Thomas. Here at the Institute for Creation Research, we have a collection of scientists who stand for the Bible. not just secular or weak notions of the Bible, but we stand for what the Bible straightforwardly and in many cases literally says, especially when it comes to Genesis.
So we have Ph D scientists who believe the earth is only thousands of years old. Because that's what the record in Genesis puts. Plus the rest of the Bible adds up. to show for the age of the world. But of course, how can that be?
So many secular scientists insist that the world is Billions of years old. that the universe is billions of years old.
So what we do at the Institute is we investigate the issue. We investigate the science behind insistence on billions and millions of years. And we also are willing Because of our acceptance of the biblical record, And God, who's the author of that record ultimately. uh we're willing to investigate scientific evidence that lines up with the biblical young age of the world at thousands of years.
So we're a minority voice for sure. But what we do is we explore We investigate And we explain scientific evidence that supports Biblical creation. By biblical creation, we mean the timing of creation as specified in Scripture. Exodus 20, verse 11. For in six days the Lord May the heavens, the earth, the sea, and everything that's in them.
Seventh day he rested.
So we believe that's true, and we believe there's science to back that up.
So when our secular colleagues come at us and say, How could you possibly believe in that? That's so unscientific.
Well, we ask them questions like, What do you mean by scientific? Have you heard of the evidence, the scientific evidence that supports recent creation? Most people have never heard of it.
So, what I'd like to do over the next few episodes of our program is to explain some of the science behind recent creation. One reason why this is important has to do with the rest of the Bible. In fact, it has to do with Exodus twenty verse eleven that I just quoted If we don't have just thousands of years, but instead if we have millions of years of earth history, then guess what happens as a consequence? We end up destroying the basis for a seven day work week. which is embedded.
Written by God's own hand in the Ten Commandments.
So when we say millions of years, not just thousands, What we lead to then is a rejection or an undermining of the Ten Commandments because what did God say? In that commandment he said, Six days you shall labor, and the seventh you shall rest.
so that you can remember that I made the heavens and the earth in six days. And I ceased on the seventh. And that's a day of rest, a day that we're supposed to think about The power and the creative act of God in making the world and making the first man, Adam, during that week.
Well, if we say, oh, the six days weren't the right time span, God got that wrong, then we open the door to saying God got the rest of it wrong.
Well, let's investigate some of the scientific evidence that supports recent creation, but first, The most often asked question, I think, is radioisotope dating. That shows that Earth's rocks are ancient, millions of years old. There's no way around it.
Well, I'm not trying to get around it, but I do want to point out actual data. The data that show, for example, When we date using radioisotope techniques a rock of known age, a rock that we saw or somebody saw. watched it form, For example, a lava flow. We watch it form. When it's molten, the molten state of that lava is supposed to If the radioisotope dating method works, it's supposed to zero the age, so that at the moment when that rock solidifies, that's when the radioisotope clock is supposed to start ticking.
Well, if this process works properly... Then we should be able to collect a rock, many rock samples of known age where we watched the lava harden. And then we should be able to send off these samples to labs, who can then detect how much radioisotope decay has occurred since that rock was emplaced. And then we should be able to measure the radioisotope age against the actual observed calendar age. And what should we find?
We should find a general agreement, a general match. Of course we don't at all.
So, if we see rocks of known age and the radioisotope dating doesn't work for them. Then why on earth would I have confidence that we get quality radioisotope dates for rocks of unknown age? I have some specific examples. Consider, for example, the Kilauea. basalt.
Emplaced in Hawaii, it solidified in nineteen fifty nine. Its radioisotope dage is 8.5 plus or minus 6.8 million years. Granted, the error bars Bring that down to within a million years, But it's just way off. It's kind of a joke, really. How bad these are.
An 800-year-old rock recorded in someone's journal in Auckland, New Zealand, called the Rangitoto Basalt, dated at 0.15 plus or minus 0.47 million years.
Now that's 150,000 years old for an 800-year-old rock. These are wrong. this radioisotope dating system Doesn't work. We're going to take a short break. Stay with us.
Dinosaurs are fascinating creatures. Seeing their fossils inspires a sense of awe and wonder that sparks the imagination. We're learning more about them all the time, but many questions still remain. Are dinosaurs really millions of years old? Did they live at the same time as humans?
How do they fit with the Bible? And why are they extinct today? The Institute for Creation Research addresses these questions and more in their full color and easy-to-read book, Guide to Dinosaurs. Guide to Dinosaurs delves into the history of dinosaurs, fossil discoveries, dinosaur kinds, and what the Bible has to say about these mysterious creatures. It serves as a helpful resource for parents and kids alike.
Order your copy of Guide to Dinosaurs from the Institute for Creation Research by calling 800-628-7640 or visiting icr.org. That's 800-628-764000. Welcome back to Science, Scripture, and Salvation, a radio ministry of the Institute for Creation Research. Here's Brian Thomas. The Institute for Creation Research spearheaded an amazing research program called Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth, in which our scientists, in combination with some associates, investigated the processes Going on.
in radioisotope dating in detail.
So RAIT was the name of the team. And in the final report, of the rate project. doctor Russell Humphreys reported that Helium diffusion from zircons In a particular borehole, where they extracted rock from New Mexico, Gave an age of the earth of 6,000 plus or minus 2,000 years. Of course, this is in incredible agreement with what the Bible says. Is this reliable?
What's a zircon? Zircon is a small crystal. It's found within one of the Minerals in granite.
So they dug a borehole, they extracted granite from deep beneath the earth, then our team was able to access that granite. Pull out some of the zircons and check out the helium diffusion rate.
So, helium is a small atom and it will diffuse out of a crystal, even out of a tightly formed. crystalline lattice structure. Called zircon. And what we found is that these zircons are packed, still loaded with helium. That's significant because helium is Is one of the byproducts of radioisotope decay.
So, as a heavy element decays, it puts off helium atoms. Where are they going to go?
Well, they're supposed to go into the nearby crystals of zircon and then right on out, because they're so small. we can measure the rate at which they should flow through these crystals, And they should be completely gone.
Well, almost completely gone. But instead, they're loaded. With helium. How much helium? Oh, about six thousand years' worth of helium.
Remarkable confirmation of recent creation. Not too long ago Ken Ham and Bill Nye had a big debate. One of the strikes that Bill Nye tried to lay against biblical creationists during the debate. He was taking the opposing view, the atheistic evolutionary view. Was that ice cores prove the earth is older than the Bible suggests?
And he asserted that the way you measure ice cores is by looking at layers. And there's little tiny layers that correspond to annual ice deposits.
So every year you've got a new little layer of ice. And all you have to do, he asserted in the debate, was to look at the number of layers. And you can count that there are thousands, hundreds of thousands of these layers, indicating the Earth must be hundreds of thousands of years old. At the Institute for Creation Research, we get down to the bottom of the issue and we investigate the technical reports that describe how scientists actually count the ages for these ice caps and ice cores that they've extracted from these ice caps. They do not do it by just counting layers.
Bill Nye was wrong. What they do is they use a model, and they use something called glacial flow models, because the layers just get too thin and they start to get smooshed at great depth. The lower you go in the ice, the more smashed these layers get. And so you end up with just having to estimate. How long do we think it will have taken in order to accumulate this many layers?
Actually, they go by feet or meters or inches. They go by depth, not by layer counting. One group. assigned an age of eighty five thousand years to a two thousand eight hundred meter depth. in a particular ice core called SpecMap.
But other investigators thought, well, that's just not old enough.
So they took the same ice core, another team. took the same ice core, reinvestigated it, And they found, ah, we found a lot more little layers. And lo and behold, we have the magic number that we needed all along. We needed 25,000 more years, and we found them.
So they're doing this backwards. This is backwards science. They're not counting the layers and getting the ages from it. The data, These published reports actually show that they assign ages according to their own expectations. The model Is an evolutionary model that needs these ages, and then they go and backfill the model with the appropriate number of layers that they need.
In any case, the ice age would have deposited many more layers per year than we have today. And even today, one storm can deposit multiple layers.
So the layers do not necessarily. correlate to years. We have perfect comfort at the Institute looking at these evidences and sort of. Seeing how well the earth, the young earth, matches. Biblical record.
Thank you for joining us on Science, Scripture, and Salvation, a radio ministry of the Institute for Creation Research. That's all the time we have for our program today, but we would love to connect with you through our website at icr.org. For over 45 years, ICR has equipped believers with evidence of the Bible's accuracy and authority by showing how science supports the Genesis creation account. Our scientists research the evidence for creation and communicate their findings through books, articles, DVD series, and conferences. Please visit our website at icr.org for more information about the latest scientific discoveries, to subscribe to our free magazine and devotional, and to locate our next creation conference at a venue near you.
All of this and more at icr.org. If you've enjoyed this podcast, subscribe to Science, Scripture, and Salvation on iTunes. Also, do us a favor and rate and review the show so that more listeners can find us. Thanks for listening and God bless.
