Hi, Mike —
I watched the film concerning the
correct age of the Earth. It had
many interesting facts (yes, facts) in it. In addition, I would point
out to you the cave carving shown
by the photograph in Buried
Alive.
The evidence for dinosaurs coexisting
with man seems to be growing (we
now have at least two possible pieces).
I cannot speak to the claims about
the colorful spots in the granite.
You would need to consult an Earth
scientist or a geologist. My entire
training in Earth science consisted
of nuclear fall-out rates (when I
was a chemical officer in the Army).
As for the logical fallacies in the
film, I will address them: please
remember that many of these are used
by the evolutionists as well — but
they still remain logical fallacies!
- Just because coal can be created
in a few thousand years does not
mean that all coal was created
in a few thousand years.
- The same is true for granite.
- If the entire Earth were suffering
massive volcanic blowout, where
are all the magma concentrations?
- Also, how did the inhabitants
survive the dust-filled air (the
film never mentioned it!) and
the extreme cold due to loss of
sun for an estimated 450 years?
(I told you, I did learn about
fallout due to explosions.)
- If all the animals on Earth (not
just those in a particular region) moved out from
Mt. Ararat:
- Why are there snakes in
the Americas?
<If a land-bridge
was formed during an Ice
age, the snakes would
be unable to cross since
they are cold-blooded. Ditto, for
all other reptiles and amphibians.>
- Why are tigers found only
in Asia?
<They are warm-blooded,
so they should have been
able to cross a land bridge
much easier than the snakes.>
- Why are kangaroos and other
marsupials found only on
the Australian continent?
<There is not one piece of
evidence that these animals
ever existed anywhere else.>
- If they did not evolve there (or get created there since
a world-wide flood would
have knocked them off as
well), why are they only
in Australia?
- Why were dodo birds only
on the South Pacific Islands?
- Many other cases can be
cited, but why bother?
I
think you can see the
problems with an all-encompassing,
world-wide flood.
- If the coal and oil were created
very recently, carbon-14 dating
should be possible on them. C-14
dating seems to be reasonably
accurate as follows, according
to the CRC Press Handbook of Chemistry
and Physics. (You can trust this
book as much as anything of this
world; as for the after-life,
it is strangely quiet.)
Carbon 14 has a half-life of 5,730
years. This means that, effectively,
one should be able to date any
stationary carbon-containing products
up to about four to five times
that length. After five half-lives,
the product is assumed to be essentially
gone.
The math works as follows:
- half
of the Carbon-14 would be gone
after 5,730 years.
- After 11,460
years, 3/4ths would be gone.
- After
17,190 years, 7/8ths would be gone,
and so on.
- After five periods
of time, it is usually considered
to be essentially gone, 31/32nds of the stuff would have decayed.
Up through the period in question,
however, one should be able to
date carbon-containing products
which are no longer exchanging
carbon. It is important to note
that as we breathe, we are constantly
exhaling carbon; we ingest new
carbon as we eat. Thus, one has
to die before the carbon exchange
ceases. Then, the ratio of Carbon-14
to the rest of the Carbon will
start to decrease.
To sum up , if the flood caused all
of the coal to be produced some 6,000+
years ago, a very large portion of
coal should easily be carbon-dated.
The film did not address this point.
The film, as I said, does present
some facts. Especially true, are
that both coal and oil can be created
much faster than what is being proposed by the
entrenched establishment. Again,
I caution you to remember that coal
does not have to be created quickly
and that it could then sit for an
unspecified amount of time.
Thus, the conclusions, although not
incorrect theories (scientifically),
are, never the less, not proven.
In addition, any good theory (and
there are painfully few out there) addresses as many pieces of data
as have been previously documented.
The film fails to address many other
pieces of data that have been reported
in the literature.
In summary, the film raises interesting
possibilities and suggests rethinking
about the entrenched establishment's
point of view. It does not, however,
mount a crushing blow, or even a
devastating challenge, to the establishment.
It shows that the establishment simply
has not done all of its homework.
God bless you,
Robert Coutinho
|