Evidence for a Young Earth?

.
..

22 responses to “Evidence for a Young Earth?

  1. I’ve always wondered how carbon dating works. It kind of makes me wonder what time even means. It seems that our accepted definition of time is just the measurement of deterioration/decay, not the measurement of the dance of the sun and the moon, which is what I think it’s supposed to be. The Book of Genesis says that the earth was created in 6 days, and since this preceded sin and death (deterioration), perhaps time could have been something completely different than it is now. Everything we perceive is known through human interpretation, that is it say, through the senses and measurement of the human body. Our world is defined by our bodies, and sometimes through instruments like glasses, guitars, and telescopes. For example, we see trees, plants, and build buildings that are all relative to our limbs, our hands, our fingers. How big is a leaf? It’s the size of an…hmmm, an ear! Without a body you could not know the breadth, width, height and depth of the world. You would be unable to relate to creation. So, if disproportionate instruments are chaotically governing our minds, how valid is the information received through these unnatural extensions? How can we make sense of billions of years? We cannot.

    Furthermore, the theory of evolution and a 4.5 billion year old earth is directly opposed to the heart of the Christian faith. We know that “the wages of sin is death”, but if all these basic life forms had to die in order to produce our first human parents, how could this statement be true? Death came after sin – it’s not the other way around. For the Christian who reads this, what is more valid? Modern science or the eternal Word of God? What is respectable science now will be the joke of tomorrow. Look at Eugenics, for example…respectable then, completely ridiculous now.

  2. I enjoyed the second video most, but what I liked most about the video was how it questioned society thoughts. It always takes courage to look at a norm in a different view. With all the evidence such as the earth is 6 billion and growth rate 2% I can agree there is activity on the earth but I am not sure If this actually means the earth is young.

  3. Nathalie S Gallardo

    Honestly I really enjoyed the second video in particular but it may because I am a believe in the bible but I also found it really interesting that there is research to back up the possibility that the earth is younger. New discoveries happen everyday so the possibility of the earth being younger is very real.

  4. The first video was more interesting in my opinion compared to the second one. In the middle and towards then end when the second video begins to use proof of what they are talking about I was more inclined. The pace of erosion and decomposition on fossils and the grand canyon were big pieces in these scientists discovery’s. Also the way oil came across and the how long things occurred caught my attention. I think the second video gave a different approach, it definitely brings religion to the table. As I read through other students comments I found Richard Hollenbeck’s statement valuable. He says,
    “As far as the young earth being a “new theory,” one only needs to look into the book of Genesis in the Bible to see that there is nothing “new” about this “theory.”

  5. The scientific evidence that this video gives proves the earth is young, but i feel this “new evidence” only backs up what the bible already says. It just makes it a little more believable to one who is not a believer when its backed by scientist “Theory.”

  6. The scientific evidence that this video gives proves the earth is young, but i feel this “new evidence” only backs up what the bible already says. It just makes it a little more believble to one who is not a believer when its backed by scientist “Theory.”

  7. Even though both videos were very interesting to watch, I didn’t feel like they gave enough evidence to prove what they were claiming. Ill always read that the earth is billions of years old and the dinosaurs lived and got extinct a few millions years. I mean with the evidence of the dinosaur fossils they have found proving to be millions of years old, i find very hard to believe this new theory. I would have to research more on topic before deciding anything on this topic.

  8. Although both videos were great, I liked the second one most. I found the evidence in the first one to be quite informational when it concerned the granite, uranium and rock. The whole process of oil and the formation of the grand canyon were great facts. I liked the insight about the grand canyon when it related the example of watery pressure to the dam. The second video is really excellent and it offered information that got me thinking. The population discussion when it talked about how the figures don’t add up to the age of the earth which was quite influential on my path of discovery. What about the salt in the ocean? The most pivotal part of the film was the discussion of dinosaurs. How is it that evidence shows drawings of dinosaurs when supposedly we existed after the fact? It suggests that dinosaurs might have lived alongside humans. The second video offered a lot of food for thought.

  9. I enjoyed watching these videos because they were very informative. The evidence that was brought in to prove that the earth is young and not old is was done in a very scientific manner. We are more technologically advanced in this day and age that I don’t think that we can dismiss this theory because there is sufficient evidence to suggest the earth is new. There were clay figurines and drawings and carvings of these dinosaurs…or dragons when Beowulf and St. George were around, if they did not see these creatures with their own eyes then how are the pictures so accurate? There was other evidence given by Dr. Marc Surtees , the salt in the ocean, radiometric dating, carbon-14, and the helium in zircon crystals and this is all MEASURED DATA. The part that I found most interesting was about The Faint Sun Paradox. The Dr. states that if the sun has evolved then it is almost 40% brighter than it would have been 4.5 billion years ago. And if the earth is 4.5 billion years old, then it would have been a block of ice and there would be no possible way for life to evolve on earth. The sun would have been much colder. Well, all that’s needed is to keep an open mind, look at the facts, and not dismiss theories and the evidence so quickly. These videos have definitely given me a new perspective about how young really could be. Very insightful.

  10. I am a bit of a skeptic because the second video started to sound more like intelligent design with the evidence of the Bible. But I listened and there is fairly enough amount of evidence to prove that the new earth theory. And I would like to research more on this before I decide whether to believe this theory.

  11. My mind isn’t changed about the ads of the earth. It has already been established that the earth is roughly 4.6 billion years old. I really don’t know why these scientists want to prove the truth as being wrong. I know this concept is mainly religious based, but it’s just silly to me.

  12. This is my second time watching these videos. I am astonished every time. I believe that it is amazing that scientist continue to ask questions. These said questions make our knowledge that more advanced.

  13. After watching these two films, I took in the understanding that as man continues to evolve so does his desire and ability to learn. This also includes inventing new technology to help answer age old questions that has lead to many disputes. If we can except the discoveries and inventions of our past, current and future luxuries created by scientists and engineers, then we should be able to except or at least invite the ideas of ever changing theories of
    evolution that have come these same scientists and engineers. Keep in mind that in both films the Bible was used to confirm these theories and was not picked apart to dis-spell it.

  14. William J. Gonzales

    First i would like to give thanks to Richard Hollenbeck for providing us with these two videos. I unlike all the other students who have commented on this subject so far have enjoyed these two videos. I feel that scientists have provided an adequate amount of evidence to prove that the earth is young. I really do no understand why people wouldn’t be moved by this because i would. It got me thinking about the evidence they were bringing forward. I strongly agree with Dr. Richard V Gentry hypothesis/evidence that he came up with. I saw how the Glen Canyon Dam (in the video) how it was damaged by the pressure of the water and gave some evidences of how the Grand Canyon or other canyons could have been formed by the pressure of water(Cavitation). Then there was the Dr. Marc Suretees who provide even more excellent evidence towards the age of the earth. The one bit of evidence that he provided was of history. He talked about how people back in times of B.C and A.D how they were drawing or creating dinosaurs; which comes to the idea of dinosaurs still alive in that time. Besides that he talked about how the salt and the helium on the earth have age that is younger that what the scientists said the earth was. so i really do not see how other students on here can say they do not believe in a younger earth.

  15. The Young Earth Theory seems like it would fancy the religious view of the world better but even with that thought (and I am a Christian) I can’t fully say I believe it. I’ve always been taught that the Earth was extremely old. This new theory does have some good evidence but I would probably need to research a bit more to come to a conclusion.

  16. Katarina Ponomaroff

    Although this video is filled with information and even some evidence, my belief that this world (planet) is very old has not changed. There has been way too much evidence to prove that this world is ancient that these men did not change my belief one bit. There theory is okay, but definitely not effective enough to cause my beliefs to change. I appreciate the time scientists put into the whole complex process of a new theory.

    • Katarina Ponomaroff writes,

      “There has been way too much evidence to prove that this world is ancient that these men did not change my belief one bit. There theory is okay, but definitely not effective enough to cause my beliefs to change. I appreciate the time scientists put into the whole complex process of a new theory”

      In the name of “full disclosure,” I happen to agree with the young earth thinking. I have no faith the so-called “evidence” for an old earth. As far as the young earth being a “new theory,” one only needs to look into the book of Genesis in the Bible to see that there is nothing “new” about this “theory.”

      🙂

  17. I think the earth is pretty young when it comes to be a inhabitable planet. I am a frequent sci-fi viewer and whenever they show alien planets it seems like all over their planets natural resources have been depleted.

  18. I not very familiar with any of the material presented in these videos so I found it interesting to watch. Scientist try to prove everything with their theories and try to make people who are uneducated on these topics agree with them. I’m not too sure on my stance on if Earth is young or old but I know that they need more evidence on these topics to prove that the Earth is young.

  19. Elise G. Richardson

    I still believe that the earth is extremely old, just because the scientists could re create coal, but other then that small part of evidence, scientist would need numerous more evidence to try and prove the “youthful” age of earth.

  20. These videos have not changed my mind of thinking the earth is really old. They have good evidence with the coal to back up their claims but, they do not have much more evidence than that.

  21. After watching these two videos I don’t feel like my belief about the Earth being really old has changed. I almost question why scientist are looking to prove what we have all held to be sufficiently true false. I know that it is apart of science to prove things to be false and test different theories but the proof they have does not seem exactly right. Yes they recreated coal bit there is no way that we know it is the exact same make up of coal. The only thing that they could say is that it like the same. I just feel like the thing about all the graves was a little out there as well. I’m nt sure if we’ll ever know how old the earth is but I don’t think that these men were right at all.

Leave a Reply