Written By Thomas Perez. November 3, 2019 at 3:39PM. Copyright 2019.
The field of science that has probably been most effectively used by skeptics in attempting to discredit the Bible is geology, “the study of the Earth.” The analysis of the Earth’s structure, especially the rocks that lie in the upper part of the Earth’s crust, with their fossil contents, have been built into a rather elaborate naturalistic view of the origin and history of the Earth – an origin and history vastly different from what is recorded in the Bible.
The aspect of geology most important to Biblical studies is the historical aspect. That is, “historical” geologists profess to be able to decipher the supposed long evolutionary history of the Earth and its inhabitants from their study of the Earth’s sedimentary crust and the fossils contained therein. Since this speculative history explicitly contradicts the very first chapters of the Bible, we first need to consider in some detail the actual Biblical and scientific evidences related to Earth’s history. The science of geology became uniformly known as “Historical geology” – a combining of the two; history and geology.
Historical geology is relatively a new field of academics. The basic structure of modern historical geology was worked out over a hundred years ago by men who really had no experience, training or university education within the two fields (geology and history) at all.
The men involved in the creation of “historical geology” were James Hutton (an agriculturalist with medical training), John Playfair (a mathematician), William Smith (a surveyor), Charles Lyell (a lawyer), Georges Cuvier (a comparative anatomist), Charles Darwin (a divinity student and naturalist), Robert Chambers (a journalist), William Buckland (a theologian), Roderick Murchison (a soldier and a gentleman of leisure), Adam Sedgwick (who when seeking election to the chair of geology at Cambridge, boasted that he knew nothing of geology), Hugh Miller (a stonemason), John Fleming (a zoologist), and others of like assortment.
“Geology involves methods and knowledge from biology, chemistry, physics and mathematics.” But the creator of geological history (Hutton) had no qualifications in the feild of geology whatsoever. In reference to Charles Darwin, “Darwin received his BA from Christ’s College, Cambridge, but the undergraduate degrees awarded by Oxford and Cambridge weren’t then specialized by field. He didn’t have a degree “in” zoology, botany, or geology because no British university graduate of that era did.”
“Lyell and his three-volume Principles of Geology had a lasting influence on the geologic community and public at large, who eventually accepted uniformitarianism and millionfold age for the Earth.” http://opengeology.org/textbook/1-understanding-science/#14_Foundations_of_Modern_Geology
Uniformitarianism is a geological doctrine. Thus, it assumes that geological processes are essentially unchanged today from those of the unobservable past, and that there have been no cataclysmic events in Earth’s history.
Similarly, “uniformitarianism is a theory based on the work of James Hutton and made popular by Charles Lyell in the 19 century. This theory states that the forces and processes observable at earth’s surface are the same that have shaped earth’s landscape throughout natural history.”
“The Earth sculpting processes alluded to above are the processes of erosion, deposition, compaction and uplift. Although these processes are constant, they occur at extremely slow rates.”
“The theory also states that these processes have occurred at constant rates throughout natural history. James Hutton explains this idea in his book entitled Theory of the Earth, “… we find no vestige of a beginning – no prospect of an end.” Hutton was the first scientist to conclude that the age of the Earth must be so incredibly old that the mind can’t begin to estimate its length.”
“Lyell’s theory of uniformitarianism would eventually coincide with plutonism as the foundation of modern geology. Uniformitarianism is also the first theory to predict deep time in western science. Deep time is the idea that Earth history is so deep that a person can’t possibly conceive the amount of time that has passed on planet earth. This further proved that the earth could not be a few thousand years old, as believed by theologian scientists.”
However, on the opposite side of uniformitarianism was catastrophism. “Catastrophism was a theory developed by Georges Cuvier based on paleontological evidence in the Paris Basin. Cuvier was there when he observed something peculiar about the fossil record. Instead of finding a continuous succession of fossils, Cuvier noticed several gaps where all evidence of life would disappear and then abruptly reappear again after a notable amount of time. Cuvier recognized these gaps in the fossil succession as mass extinction events. This led Cuvier to develop a theory called catastrophism. Catastrophism states that natural history has been punctuated by catastrophic events that altered that way life developed and rocks were deposited.”
“Although Cuvier hypothesized that the flooding of lowland areas could have been the cause of mass extinctions, he never really explained any force that could cause the flooding to occur in the first place. Therefore, an implication of Cuvier’s theory is that the forces acting on the earth must have changed periodically throughout earth’s history. Because Cuvier never identified these forces, many individuals believed these extinctions could have been the result of biblical floods or acts of god.”
“An avid supporter of catastrophism was Abraham Werner, the leading geologist of the 18th century. As we have seen before, Werner was the most influential supporter of neptunism, a theory stating that most of the rocks observable at earth’s surface were once precipitated out of a vast ocean. Therefore, Werner used catastrophism as evidence to prove that the earth had experienced mass floods throughout geologic history. However, both catastrophism and neptunism would eventually be discarded during the 19th century.”
For more information, see… https://www.uniformitarianism.net/
The accepted norm is that of the uniformalist. But that may no longer be the case. As mentioned in my article entitled ‘Part 1 of 27: Dinosaurs Did Not Exist,’ we found out that there is evidence for catastrophism after all. “…a new study casts doubt on their usefulness. This discovery fundamentally alters the way we view the diversity of life through time. It shows that both the preservation of rock and the preservation of fossils were probably driven by external environmental factors like climate change and sea level. This better explains the similarities between the rock and fossil records, as both responding to the same external factors” as opposed to the internal forces from within. (Emphasis T. Perez).
Recent reports coinciding with catastrophism can be found in various articles. USA Today, the New York Times and Science Mag, to name a few, reported recent discoveries that confirms what Science Daily reported prior.
“66 million years ago, in what’s now North Dakota, a group of animals died together, only a few minutes after a huge asteroid smashed into the Earth near present-day Mexico. Scientists Friday announced the discovery of the jumbled, fossilized remains of the animals, all killed when a tsunami-like wave and a torrent of rocks, sand and glass buried them alive.”…“We’ve understood that bad things happened right after the impact, but nobody’s found this kind of smoking-gun evidence,” said David Burnham, a study co-author and geologist at the University of Kansas in a statement. “People have said, ‘We get that this blast killed the dinosaurs, but why don’t we have dead bodies everywhere?’ Well, now we have bodies. They’re not dinosaurs, but I think those will eventually be found, too.”
A “paper describes how tektites, raining into the water, clogged the gills of fish, which were then killed by surges of water. The water could have traveled up from the Gulf of Mexico through an inland sea that cut through North America at the time. But the authors argue for another, more likely explanation: That cataclysmic waves from the impact — which produced the equivalent of a magnitude 10 or 11 earthquake — sloshed water out of distant lakes and seas and up their connected river channels.”
However, “I hope this is all legit—I’m just not 100% convinced yet,” says Thomas Tobin, a geologist at the University of Alabama in Tuscaloosa. Tobin says the PNAS paper is densely packed with detail from paleontology, sedimentology, geochemistry, and more. “No one is an expert on all of those subjects,” he says, so it’s going to take a few months for the research community to digest the findings and evaluate whether they support such extraordinary conclusions.”
What Tobin is referring to is the geological history as it pertains to paleontology; its dating in support of their Earth ages, and not necessarily catastrophism. As we can tell, a catastrophic event did take place. But in reference to connecting an apocalyptic event with that of the extinction of all alleged dinosaurs by an enormous asteroid that crashed into the Earth 66 million years ago is another question entirely, regardless of the Tektites found.
Tektites are small black glassy object, many of which are found over certain areas of the earth’s surface, believed to have been formed as molten debris in meteorite impacts and scattered widely through the air.
“Tektites are natural glass objects primarily composed of silica. Tektites found on Earth are formed by large asteroidal or cometary impact with the Earth. Energy from the impact melts terrestrial rock and ejects it into the upper reaches of the atmosphere. A few minutes later tektites rain down. The final morphologies are largely dependent on the distance from the source crater and the degree of terrestrial weathering/etching…Meteorites come from space, tektites come from the Earth.”
The Bible records that the fountains of the great deep broke. The Hebrew word for “Mayan” (mah-yawn) means, springs of water, a well. If the fountains erupted as described in the Scriptures, then it would of been akin to that of a volcanic eruption. Perhaps that is what it was in isolated pockets of Earth, as its effects rippled across the then known world causing the fountains of the deep to burst.
“Volcanic eruptions can cause earthquakes, fast floods, mud slides, and rock falls. Lava can travel very far and burn, bury, or damage anything in its path, including people, houses, and trees. The large amount of dust and ash can cause roofs to fall, makes it hard to breathe, and is normally very smelly.” “Volcanic eruptions can result in additional threats to health, such as floods, mudslides, power outages, drinking water contamination, and wildfires.”
Question: Per-chance, Is there water under lines of volcanic points on Earth? The answer to that question is, “yes.” They are called submarine volcanoes. “Submarine volcanoes are underwater vents or fissures in the Earth’s surface from which magma can erupt…Although most submarine volcanoes are located in the depths of seas and oceans, some also exist in shallow water, and these can discharge material into the atmosphere during an eruption.” (Wiki).
Moreover, “The most productive volcanic systems on Earth are hidden under an average of 8,500 feet (2,600 m) of water. Beneath the oceans a global system of mid-ocean ridges produces an estimated 75% of the annual output of magma.” The following picture illustrates volcanic areas on Earth seen in red. You will also note that the red area can be found below the 60th parallel toward the South (as illustrated on a flat Earth). The ringed ice wall as discussed in my flat Earth articles, “chapters 15 and 16: To Flatten or Not To Flatten elaborates on this more. “That is a lot of water…”
Question: Are tektites found in deep sea volcanos? The answer to that question is “yes.” “Microtektites have been found so far only in deep-sea sediments, probably because of the difficulty of distinguishing them in the more abundant and coarser land sediments. They are distinguished from volcanic ash by their rounded shapes and composition, which is identical with that of the large tektites.”
An international team of scientists led by Graham Pearson, Canada Excellence Research Chair in Arctic Resources at the U of A, has discovered the first-ever sample of a mineral called ringwoodite. Analysis of the mineral shows it contains a significant amount of water — 1.5 per cent of its weight — a finding that confirms scientific theories about vast volumes of water trapped 410 to 660 kilometres beneath Earth’s surface, between the upper and lower mantle.
“This sample really provides extremely strong confirmation that there are local wet spots deep in the Earth in this area,” said Pearson, a professor in the Faculty of Science, whose findings were published March 13 in Nature. “That particular zone in the Earth, the transition zone, might have as much water as all the world’s oceans put together.”
Ringwoodite is a form of the mineral peridot, believed to exist in large quantities under high pressures in the transition zone. Ringwoodite has been found in meteorites but, until now, no terrestrial sample has ever been unearthed because scientists haven’t been able to conduct fieldwork at extreme depths.”
Gaines Johnson, a Christian geologist and author explains this occurrence from a scientific standpoint: https://www.kjvbible.org/geysers.html
If the Biblical account of the Noahic flood is literal as the Bible claims then these submarine volcanic eruptions were similar to geysers, except only on a grandiose scale. The following GIF is from the 2016 movie “Noah.” Note the geyser effect in the film…
Moreover, the topic concerning “the fountains of the deep” as described in the Bible, which is often mocked and ridiculed have actually been discovered. Many geologists praise the discovery, others are skeptical. See the following link for more information on this discovery…
From what we have read thus far, everything seems to fall into place concerning the Biblical narrative. But what of the dating process concerning the fossils found in these deposits?
Are radiometric dating techniques used realiabe and accurate?
According to mainstream science, it is. They claim radiometric dating is a very accurate way to date the Earth. We know it is accurate because radiometric dating is based on the radioactive decay of unstable isotopes. For example, the element uranium exists as one of several isotopes, some of which are very unstable.
How accurate is fossil dating? According to mainstream science, it is accurate to within a few thousand years. With modern, extremely precise, methods, error bars are often only 1% or so. Conclusion: The strict rules of the scientific method ensure the accuracy of fossil dating.
But let us be clever. We must ask ourselves two basic questions first before we can proceed with any validity to the methods used to date sediments and fossils. Question number 1 – What techniques do they use to date a layer of Earth and fossils? And question number 2 – Are there any limits to dating techniques? Answer: Yes, and all of them have date limits. All methods of dating have their limits. Radiometric dating methods are based upon different isotopes; Potassium-40, Argon-40, Nitrogen-14, Rubidium-87, lead-206, Strontium-87, carbon 14, and uranium. All of these isotopes have date limits.
Does Potassium 14 have a date limit?
Answer: Yes. At 100,000 years, only 0.0053% of the potassium-40 in a rock would have decayed to argon-40, pushing the limits of present detection devices. Eventually, potassium-argon dating may be able to provide dates as recent as 20,000 years before present.
Does Nitrogen 14 have a date limit?
Answer: Yes. Over time, the carbon-14 decays into nitrogen-14; half will do so after about 5,730 years (this is the isotope’s half-life). Radiocarbon dating works well for some archaeological finds, but it has limitations: it can be used to date only organic materials less than about 60,000 years old.
Does Rubidium 87 have a date limit?
Answer: Yes. The utility of the rubidium-strontium isotope system results from the fact that Rb-87 (one of two naturally occurring isotopes of rubidium) decays to Sr-87 with a half-life of 49.23 billion years. Some cite 48.8.
Does Lead 206 have a date limit?
Answer: Uncertain, but it would seem so. That is according to science, “Radiometric dating is largely done on rock that has formed from solidified lava…But I don’t know how they can be sure how much lead zircons accept.” “…Both radium and lead are daughter products of uranium.”
Does uranium dating have limits?
Answer: Yes. Uranium–thorium dating has an upper age limit of somewhat over 500,000 years, defined by the half-life of thorium-230, the precision with which one can measure the thorium-230/uranium-234 ratio in a sample, and the accuracy to which one knows the half-lives of thorium-230 and uranium-234.
Does radio metric dating have any limits in practical uses?
Answer: Yes. Radiometric dating is a very useful tool for dating geological materials but it does have limits: The material being dated must have measurable amounts of the parent and/or the daughter isotopes. Radiometric dating is not very useful for determining the age of sedimentary rocks.
Does carbon 14 have a dating limit?
Answer: Yes. The practical upper limit is about 50,000 years, because so little C-14 remains after almost 9 half-lives that it may be hard to detect and obtain an accurate reading, regardless of the size of the sample.
There are other isotopes that have a date limit of larger proportions. See picture below…
So basically we are only dealing with dates ranging from 50,000 to 106 billion years when it comes to isotopes; no more and no less. The science involved in reference to the study and dating of various “geological histories” with its applied applications in regards to “date placements” of the fossil record seems to be a complete fallacy. “Some of the isotopes used for this purpose are uranium-238, uranium-235 and potassium-40, each of which has a half-life of more than a million years. Unfortunately, these elements don’t exist in dinosaur fossils themselves. Each of them typically exists in igneous rock, or rock made from cooled magma.”
The point? Although the rock may be old by billions of years, the alleged dinosaur fossils found encased upon those rocks may not be. It is highly probable that they are not, since the elements nescessary to support the theory of old dinosaur epochs (ages) are not found within these fossils – the elements do not exist.
Within theological circles there are 5 views pertaining to creation and the age of the Earth.
1. Allegorical Interpretations: Many early Church historians treated certain elements found in the book of Genesis as allegorical. Such Church fathers included; Origen and others of the Alexandrian school of thought, Gregory of Nazianzus, and Irenaeus. Irenaeus saw Adam, Eve, and the serpent pointing to the death of Jesus (Against the Heresies 2nd cent). Later Augustine of Hippo suggested that the Biblical text should not be interpreted literally as found in Augustine’s “The Literal Interpretation of Genesis” (early fifth century, AD). We also have Philo and Maimonides who viewed the creation story as an account which actually refers to spiritual symbolic concepts. However, in opposition of an allegorical approach, we have St Basil, Zohar, and the more recent; fundamental literalists.
2. The Frame Work Theory: This theory involves theistic evolution. Geological ages are literally true and Genesis is seen as merely a literary framework. God creates and sits back and allows the process of evolution and natural selection to take place and shape the entire biological, ecological, and cosmological elements to “change” in favor of its better matrix. Religious Liberals hold this view.
3. The Day Age Theory: This theory involves progressive creation. Geological ages occurred during the six day creation. Neo-Evangelicals hold to this view.
4. The Gap Theory: This theory involves irrelevant creation. Geological ages occurred before the six day creation. Record of extinct life prior to supposed pre Adamic cataclysm. Pietistic Fundamentalists hold this view.
5. The Literalist Theory: This theory involves special creation. A literal interpretation of Genesis. Geologic ages are merely taxonomic. Genesis days are literally true. Biblical theists hold to this view.