Participants:
Series Code: EI
Program Code: EI190009S
|
00:36 Welcome back to, Evolution Impossible.
00:39 I am Dr. Sven string, and we are exploring 00:41 Darwin's theory of evolution and considering whether the evidence 00:45 supports his idea. 00:47 For our discussion today, I have Justin Torossian with us. 00:51 Thank you for being here. 00:52 Harley Southwell, good to have you back on the set with us. 00:55 And of course, Jeandré Roux. Good to have you here as well. 00:59 And of course, we have our very own resident scientist, 01:02 Dr. John Ashton. 01:03 Good to have you here as well. 01:05 Now, John, we've been really glad how patient 01:08 and accommodating you've been for all of our questions. 01:11 So thank you very much for that. 01:13 One of the big things that evolution needs is time, 01:17 and lots of it. 01:19 That's why Charles Darwin was so intrigued and attracted 01:22 to Charles Lyell's hypothesis that geology 01:25 points to long ages. 01:28 But do geological processes really lead us to an old earth? 01:33 That's the topic for today's discussion. 01:36 And this is a topic that you, Harley, have explored yourself. 01:40 So you have parents who are talking to you 01:43 about a young earth. 01:45 But then you also are learning about 01:47 old earth hypothesis as well. 01:50 So share with us, what was your journey like in this area? 01:52 In high school I took an elective in earth 01:56 and environmental science, because it's something 01:58 I'm always interesting in studying terrain 02:00 and rocks, and things like that. 02:02 And so, as I was studying through that, obviously 02:04 you encounter radiometric dating, long earth, erosion, 02:07 fossils, and all those ideas as well. 02:10 And so it was something that I had to really sit down 02:12 and decide, you know, what am I going to believe for myself. 02:15 Is it something that's just going to be what I believe 02:18 my parents have taught me, or what the scientists are saying? 02:23 And I really studied it out myself and came to my own 02:26 personal conclusion, which is that the earth is young. 02:30 And I was happy with believing in that after reading 02:33 a wide variety of literature and a lot of articles. 02:37 And Harley, that's a very surprising conclusion to draw 02:40 considering the science and what scientists tell us. 02:43 So, John, we want to know, is there any evidence 02:47 for what Harley is talking about? 02:49 Within the earth, is there any evidence for a 02:52 young age for the earth? 02:55 Well yeah, sure, if we want to look for that. 02:57 I guess initially, though, why people look at an old earth 03:01 is probably on the basis of radiometric dating. 03:03 So we're told that the earth is 4.5 billion years old, 03:06 for a start, and the continents formed, you know, 03:10 2.5 billion years ago, 3 billion years ago, this sort of thing. 03:13 So this seed is planted at a fairly early age. 03:16 So I guess that underpins it. 03:17 So when we say, "Well, what is the evidence for 03:20 a young earth and for a young solar system?" 03:22 Well, this is probably a little bit outside our topic. 03:25 But one classic area is the strength of the 03:28 earth's magnetic field. 03:30 And so we know that the earth's magnetic field 03:32 has been decaying. 03:34 It's decaying exponentially. 03:36 We know it has decayed about 10% in the last 150 years, 03:39 so we have quite accurate measurements 03:41 of the earth's magnetic field. 03:43 Now if we go back in history to millions of years, 03:47 that earth's magnetic field is going to be so strong 03:50 that the temperature on the earth would not permit life, 03:52 at that time anyway. 03:54 So there are a lot of... 03:55 ~ What about these ideas about the reversals and the polarity 03:58 with the magnetic field? 04:00 How does that play into that magnetic field of the earth? 04:04 Right. So these reversals in crystals, in magnetic crystals 04:08 that are observed in lava, sure, these reversals 04:11 that have occurred there, they are very characteristic 04:15 of probably the time when the mountain ranges were pushed up, 04:17 because obviously it was some violent disruption 04:20 of the surface of the earth. 04:22 And in a way, it sort of fits in with George Dodwell's, 04:25 you know, observations that have been recorded, 04:29 that maybe it gives some substance to them. 04:31 I'm not sure. I'm not going to go down that track. 04:34 But obviously it fits that. 04:35 During the flood there was a major catastrophic event, 04:38 and the earth was probably violently shaken in some way, 04:42 and that resulted, as we know, the mountain ranges pushed up. 04:45 And at the time, obviously the core and whatever is responsible 04:49 for the earth's magnetic field, the dynamo effect, 04:52 was also reversed at that time. 04:54 But all these things again, I think, you know, 04:57 point to the fact that there are examples that 05:00 the earth must be young. 05:02 There's other examples too out in the solar system 05:04 that our solar system itself must be young. 05:07 And that's on the basis of the temperature that we measure 05:10 in some of the, now that we've reached the outer 05:13 regions of the solar system, 05:15 looking at some of the moons that are around some of these 05:18 outer planets like Uranus and Neptune. 05:19 I can't remember them exactly off the cuff. 05:22 But we know that some of them still have, you know, 05:25 molten lava, they're very much higher temperature 05:28 than they should be if they were really millions of years, 05:31 billions of years old, like the solar system is supposed to be. 05:34 So there's so much evidence everywhere we look. 05:36 Even within the solar system it points to the earth 05:38 being very young and the solar system being very young itself. 05:41 ~ That's amazing. 05:42 And you also mentioned in this chapter in your book 05:45 that there's evidence in the surface of the earth 05:48 in terms of the sedimentary layers and erosion rates. 05:52 So can you walk us through that concept as well? 05:57 Well look, erosion rates, in my view, are the death knell 06:01 to the long age hypothesis. 06:04 Because if we look at the, if we take, say, the classic example 06:10 especially in American textbooks, most of us 06:14 have seen pictures of the Grand Canyon, 06:15 and we see those sediments that are 1.5 kilometers deep 06:19 or thereabouts over there, and we say, well look, 06:24 for this amount of material to be eroded away, 06:28 it's taken really slow over a really long period of time. 06:32 Well actually, let's have a look at the data. 06:34 Geographers have collected data on the amount of material 06:38 carried by the Colorado River at the present time. 06:42 And we know that it's roughly, the whole area, 06:47 that whole plateau there in Arizona is eroding away 06:53 at about 100 millimeters per 1000 years. 06:57 Now that doesn't sound like much. 06:58 A hundred millimeters, four inches, a thousand years; 07:01 that's not much. 07:02 But hang on. 07:04 That means that if it's 1.5 kilometers high, 07:08 you know, in 15 to 20 million years 07:10 the whole lot should have eroded away. 07:13 That is, the whole countryside should have eroded away 07:19 in that time. 07:20 And we know this from geography data from around the world. 07:23 The average rate that geographers use for erosion 07:26 of the continents, and some are much higher, 07:28 particularly in high rainfall areas, is about 07:30 60 millimeters per thousand years. 07:34 As I said, it doesn't sound like much, 07:36 but when you consider the average height of the 07:39 U.S. continent is only about 650 meters, 07:42 what it means is that the continents are going to erode 07:45 away in less than 10 million years. 07:48 And so, if the continents can erode away in less 07:51 than 10 million years, how can these sediments be 07:54 hundreds of millions of years old? 07:56 How can the continents be billions of years old? 07:59 It just doesn't fit. 08:00 And that's data that we measure today, 08:03 reproducible, reported in the secular scientific journals 08:07 from geographers all over the world, similar values. 08:10 You can get tables of the erosion rates 08:12 that are occurring. 08:13 Got a lot of accurate data on this now. 08:16 The surface of the earth, if it was really hundreds of millions 08:19 of years old, would have eroded away. 08:21 It wouldn't be there. 08:23 And so, this is a powerful death knell to these dating. 08:25 Now this raises an important question. 08:28 Because we radiometrically date all these ages, 08:32 it raises serious questions about radiometric dating 08:35 that we can talk about some time. 08:36 But this is a very, very important area that we look at, 08:41 the rate of erosion of these materials 08:44 as something we can measure. 08:45 Now the other thing that we can look at too 08:47 is the rate at which sediments are being deposited in the sea, 08:50 and this sort of thing. 08:51 ~ So erosion would mean that it's going from the land 08:54 being eroded into the sea, yeah? 08:56 Yes. 08:58 So one of the things we can say is, well, I think the top 09:00 layer there at the Grand Canyon, using the Grand Canyon 09:03 as an example, is about, I think the top sediments 09:07 are dated at about, you know, 200 million years, 09:10 or something like that. 09:12 So one of the arguments is, well maybe there were 09:14 other sediments on top. 09:16 Well if the erosion rate, if you work it out, 09:18 the sediments would have to be about, you know, three times 09:22 the height of Mount Everest on top again 09:25 to provide enough overburden to erode away to last that long. 09:29 You know, so we get into all these ridiculous scenarios 09:33 if we try to have that the continents are really 09:36 thousands of millions of years old. 09:38 It just doesn't work on the base of erosion rates. 09:41 But there's more. 09:42 Because we know in the past the rainfall was much higher 09:45 than it is today. 09:46 There was a lot of dense vegetation. 09:48 So how do we know that the rainfall was higher? 09:50 Because we have the remains of vegetation 09:54 and this sort of thing, and forest and this sort of thing, 09:56 that lived in these areas in the past. 09:58 And all over the world. 10:00 Before we get too far into the sedimentary layers 10:04 and erosion, I just want to go back to what you said before 10:08 about the young universe and young earth. 10:12 Is there any evidence that the universe and the earth 10:15 were created at different times, so the earth is maybe 10:18 younger or so? 10:20 Because we've got all these stars that are 10:22 millions of light years away. 10:24 How do we see those lights 10:26 if they were created at the same time? 10:29 What are your thoughts? 10:30 ~ Right, okay. 10:32 Well this raises a question that probably deserves 10:35 another whole session on. 10:38 But very quickly, we need to understand about time. 10:43 And there are a number of factors that affect time. 10:46 So as a satellite, if we have the satellites around the earth, 10:51 as they travel around the earth, because they travel fast, 10:57 time slows down on those satellites. Right? 11:01 So I forget, off the cuff, how far it slows down. 11:05 It's probably about 5 or 6 microseconds per day 11:08 that the time... 11:10 So if we had an atomic clock, it uses the same rate of decay 11:14 as radiometric dating. 11:16 So if we had an atomic clock on that satellite, 11:19 it would slow down and be running slower 11:21 compared to an earth clock by about 5 microseconds per day. 11:25 But on the other hand, it's a lot further away from 11:28 the earth's gravitational field. 11:29 Now gravitational fields slow down time. 11:35 So that means that now our satellite clocks are running 11:38 faster due to the fact that they're further away up there. 11:44 ~ And so, they actually run faster. 11:46 Typical communication satellites like you use, say, on your GPS 11:49 and so forth will run something like about 40 microseconds 11:53 per day faster because it's out there. 11:57 So in actual fact engineers, again, do these corrections 12:02 and they correct; they subtract the 5 or 6 from the 40, 12:06 and they correct by about whatever it is, 35. 12:09 You know, I'm running from memory here, 12:10 but it's roughly these sort of figures. 12:13 And if they didn't correct for those sort of values, 12:17 your GPS would accumulate errors of about 400 meters per day. 12:22 ~ You'd be lost without engineers. 12:24 Literally, literally. 12:27 But one of the things we need to understand is, 12:29 a lot of people don't understand a lot about time. 12:33 Now, when we talk about, again, if God created 12:37 the universe, and the universe was expanded out 12:43 from where the earth is. 12:44 So we talk about the earth was created, and then it talks about 12:47 the stars were created. 12:49 Now I know for a lot of listeners, this is going to 12:50 blow your mind because you're not taught about these things. 12:53 But this is the real science. 12:55 This is real theoretical science. 12:56 If we look at how the earth, the Bible talks about how 13:01 God stretched out the heavens. 13:03 So if there's an intense gravitational field here, 13:06 clocks on earth here are going to be very slow. 13:10 Whereas, as God is stretching it out here, 13:13 those clocks are running, relative to earth time, 13:16 very, very fast. 13:18 And so, this is one of the problems. 13:20 The other thing where people don't realize 13:23 is that when we talk about the speed of light, 13:27 and these stars are millions of light years away, 13:30 we're talking about the two-way speed of light. 13:34 Because no one, it's impossible for us 13:37 to measure the one-way speed of light. 13:40 We don't know what the one-way speed of light is. 13:43 And this is the problem of synchronicity. 13:47 And so, we work on the, it is the two-way speed of light, 13:53 the average of the two-way speed of light that we work on. 13:56 It is theoretically possible, it doesn't violate 13:59 any laws of physics for light to reach us 14:01 instantaneously from the stars. 14:04 And to me, this will help... 14:06 See, what happens is, there's the Reichenbach equation 14:09 of synchronicity; and Einstein just happened to choose 14:13 the epsilon value of point five. 14:15 And it was a random choice. 14:16 It wasn't based on any scientific evidence. 14:19 It was just a random choice. 14:20 And the epsilon value can theoretically range 14:23 anywhere from 0 to 1. 14:25 If we choose the value 1, which is a logical one, 14:27 we have instantaneous light travel. 14:31 That's pretty cool. 14:32 And this makes a lot of sense. 14:33 And I've always wondered this, even before I really 14:36 got involved in creation research, you know, 14:38 as I was studying physics at the university years ago. 14:41 The thing is that, why are we seeing astronomical events 14:47 taking place on our timescale? 14:50 It's always fascinated me. 14:52 It's as if it's all set up for us to observe 14:55 on our timescale. 14:57 And why would God create things where we're looking at 14:59 billions of years in the past? 15:01 It creates a whole lot of problems, 15:04 you know, in terms of timescales. 15:06 ~ Is it possible, though, like God created the universe 15:10 a long time ago and has, like, a lot of fun with that? 15:14 And then also later on He decides, "Oh, there's 15:16 another little spot over here. 15:17 I'm going to create something more." 15:18 And He finds, like, a little empty crusty rock. 15:21 And just like, "Oh yeah, I'll make this into, 15:22 it's nothing, so I'll make it into something." 15:25 Is that another possible theory that would kind of fit with... 15:28 ~ Well, how could we know? 15:29 The problem with that is, it doesn't really fit 15:31 with the Bible account. 15:33 And you can have any sort of other theories. 15:35 So John Wheeler got his PhD. in the early 50's 15:38 for the multi-verse theory, the multi-universe theory. 15:41 So you can have all sorts of theories. 15:44 We come back to what can we know. 15:48 And so, there's a number of things that we can know. 15:50 How can we know the past? 15:53 We can only know the past if there was some observer 15:57 that can tell us the past, or there was some observer 15:59 that made a record of the past. 16:03 Time is a very interesting thing, as I said. 16:05 You know, time is affected by so many things. 16:07 And this whole concept of our understanding of time 16:10 is one that, you know, we can talk about perhaps 16:12 in a later session in a bit more detail. 16:15 But sure, you can have that scenario. 16:18 And that's as far as it goes. 16:20 But in terms of data, we have a Bible record 16:24 where we know the Bible account fits 16:27 accurately historically. 16:29 And also, the Bible has prophecies in where 16:31 God reveals that He knows the future. 16:33 Now this is a very important aspect that we can 16:35 discuss some time too. 16:37 And on this basis, it gives us reason to trust the Bible. 16:42 Or if we have a look at it, we can say, well, what's the 16:44 probability that the Bible is true or not true? 16:48 So the Bible is either true or it's not true. 16:51 And so, we can look at the probability. 16:53 Now when we look at it, the historical evidence lines up. 16:56 When we look at the prophetic evidence, it lines up. 16:59 There's about 750 prophecies listed in the encyclopedia 17:03 of Bible prophecy that was published by 17:06 Princeton University Press. 17:09 When we look at this sort of data, 17:11 most of those have been fulfilled. 17:12 And the ones that haven't are either future 17:14 or conditional, and so forth. 17:17 If we looked at our odds, we've got very, very high odds 17:21 that what the Bible says is true. 17:23 And it's sort of like, if you are flying in a plane, 17:26 and someone told you, "Look, I work as an engineer. 17:29 And, you know, the engines in these planes 17:33 are due for a major breakdown at so many hours, 17:36 and this plane is one hour before that," 17:39 would you hop in the plane? 17:40 And so you've got good data up to this time 17:43 that all these engines fail after so many hours. 17:47 Well, we don't know for sure whether it is going to fail, 17:50 or we could be lucky. 17:52 But this is exactly what we face with the Bible. 17:54 And this gets me; why young people aren't being taught 17:58 about the Bible today. 17:59 We have so much scientific evidence supporting the Bible 18:02 as a historical account of God's history with man, 18:07 and young people aren't being told about it. 18:08 When we look at the science, when we look at the mathematical 18:11 probability, the probability that the Bible is true 18:14 and the account about God is correct is very high. 18:18 ~ Talking about the evidence, talking about the erosion 18:22 rates and the sedimentation, it's a fascinating area which 18:25 really supports faith in the Bible. 18:28 And one of the questions I have is, you've got these erosion 18:31 rates, but isn't it possible that the deposition rates, 18:36 the deposits kind of match the erosion rates? 18:40 And so we kind of have this equilibrium. 18:42 So the earth could be a lot older than what the 18:45 erosion rates may tell us. 18:47 Hmm, okay, so the surface of the earth is replenished 18:51 with volcanic material. 18:52 ~Ah, yes. 18:54 Okay, so when we look, we know at the present time 18:58 the rate at which new volcanic material is being 19:01 poured out on the surface of the earth. 19:03 And I forget the actual figure and what it is, 19:05 it's, you know, 3 or 4 or 5 cubic kilometers per year. 19:09 And so, if we look at now all the known volcanic 19:16 sort of outputs onto the surface of the earth that we can measure 19:21 and observe today, all those would occur 19:24 in, I think from memory, just over 30 million years. 19:27 At the current rate. 19:30 But of course, you know, you walk just down to the beach here 19:33 and there's all these dikes that come through, 19:35 and you see the seals that have come through. 19:37 There's a lot of volcanic activity in this area, 19:39 and just about everywhere you go, that is now dormant. 19:42 Thankfully. 19:43 And so, we know that the volcanic activity in the past 19:47 was much more rapidly. 19:48 So again, even if we look from the volcanic intrusion effect, 19:52 the amount of volcanic material coming on 19:53 the surface of the earth, the earth's surface can't be 19:56 hundreds of millions of years old. 19:58 It just doesn't fit. 19:59 It all comes back to the biblical picture timeline. 20:03 And not only do we have the erosion rates, but 20:05 we have the matching mutation rate as well. 20:09 I was just wondering if there's anybody else 20:11 who has some questions for John on these topics. 20:14 You know, I have a question about the mutation rates 20:17 of, you know, the human DNA. 20:19 And according to evolutionary theory, evolution can take place 20:24 because of genetic mutations that are positive, 20:27 and a positive thing for humanity. 20:29 But you mentioned in your book in this chapter about 20:32 how the amount of genetic mutations in human DNA 20:37 that would have taken place in that long of a time, 20:40 as evolutionary theorists suggest, 20:42 would actually lead to human life being extinct. 20:46 And so, the very thing that evolutionary theory depends upon 20:51 today with mutations seems to be the very thing, 20:54 or another thing, that disproves it as being true. 20:58 I just wondered if you might be able to comment. 21:00 ~ Yes, this has been discussed in the scientific literature, 21:05 and it's something that's blowing the minds of a lot of 21:09 evolutionists and people that believe in those long ages. 21:13 Because we now have very good data on genomic decay, 21:17 the rate at which we're accumulating mutations, 21:20 particularly in mitochondrial DNA. 21:22 There's a report in the top journals like Nature, 21:25 and so forth. 21:26 And so we now know. 21:28 And if we extrapolate back, sure, life on earth 21:31 cannot be more than 10 or 20 thousand years old, 21:34 at best, or maybe 100,000 years at best. 21:38 Because the amount of mutations would accumulate 21:42 if life was older than that. 21:44 Like, for example, they claim, you know, humans started about 21:47 2 million years ago, sort of began to separate from apes 21:50 about that time, and sort forth. 21:51 You know, somewhere between 1 and 2 million years ago. 21:55 Well, during that time we would have accumulated 21:58 so many mutations that our bodies would have broken down. 22:01 There would be so much disorder. 22:03 So you're spot on. 22:04 So this is just one of so many things that says 22:07 evolution is impossible and didn't happen. 22:10 So why would a God create, though, an earth that decays, 22:16 and a genome that decays, and so forth? 22:20 Well, our understanding is, of course, as revealed 22:23 in the Bible that this decay was a result of disobedience or 22:29 a breakdown of following God's perfect laws in the beginning. 22:33 So God set up a system that was perfect, 22:37 and the first humans there sort of chose to violate that. 22:43 And I guess this brings in a whole other concept 22:45 of the supernatural. 22:47 You know, a lot of people just believe in the physical world 22:51 here, but of course, the Bible reveals that there 22:54 is a spiritual world, there's spiritual creatures, 22:56 angels, demons, and so forth. 22:58 A lot of people don't want to accept that, 23:00 that there are demons and this sort of thing. 23:02 The Bible clearly points to this. 23:04 And I think there's a lot of evidence for this, 23:06 particularly when we go into more primitive societies. 23:10 And so we have, I think it's very clear that people 23:13 can see there's a conflict between good and evil, 23:15 and there's a battle going on. 23:17 And as a result of that, of course, our bodies 23:20 no longer are perfect. 23:22 They're subject to this decay. 23:23 And I think God had to do that because it wasn't good 23:27 for evil to just continue to go on. 23:30 We see the effects of evil in our world today. 23:33 It's terrible. 23:35 You know, I often think, why are people developing 23:38 all these weapons, and then they're firing rockets 23:40 and bullets, and they're blowing up people 23:42 that was somebody's little baby that grew up 23:45 and they loved? 23:46 You know, why are we destroying each other, 23:49 and there's so much greed and hate? 23:51 We can see all these bad things, and yet we see 23:54 the love of a newly married couple, we see the love of 23:57 a parent to a child, we see the innocence of young children, 24:01 and so forth, and there's so much good. 24:02 We see people rallying together with the bushfires, 24:05 and when national tragedy is happening. 24:07 But we see this conflict between good and evil. 24:11 You know, we have the bushfires, the firemen 24:13 are there fighting, and there's also people 24:15 coming in and looting. 24:16 You know? 24:17 So it explains a lot, the Bible. 24:20 It's very interesting, you talk about that conflict 24:24 between good and evil. 24:25 And I guess the question that I have is, 24:27 you know, the theory of evolution, where does that 24:30 kind of fit into this conflict between good and evil? 24:34 Have you reflected on that question? 24:37 Well, you know, other people have too, and sort of linked, 24:42 well it's survival of the fittest. 24:46 And also, the whole concept of evolution seems to have 24:48 underpinned a number of atheist regimes that 24:53 have certainly committed a lot of really bad things. 24:56 And a lot of people say, 24:58 "Well, hang on, it's not atheism that's bad." 25:00 But I think, really, and the argument has been raised, 25:04 if we're not accountable to a creator God, 25:07 why should we be good if we know we can get away with it? 25:11 It raises that question there. 25:14 And I don't think there's an answer. 25:15 And you know, atheists say, "Well, you know, I can 25:17 choose to be moral," and all this sort of thing. 25:19 And that's right, they can. 25:21 But again, one questions, "Well, where does that 25:23 choice come from?" 25:25 And maybe there is something more. 25:27 See, one of the things that evolution doesn't explain 25:30 is the concept of consciousness, 25:33 and the mind, and who we are, as being non-material. 25:36 And I could talk on that for a while, but, 25:38 you know, we're getting off topic here of erosion rates. 25:40 I think the bottom line is that erosion rates, 25:43 deposition rates, when we look at them, 25:46 they all point to a young earth. 25:48 And the other important factor is that they raise 25:51 serious questions about the radiometric dating results 25:54 that we get that points to this deposit being 25:56 a hundred million years old, 25:58 this deposit being three hundred million years old, 26:00 and so forth. 26:01 It doesn't work in terms of erosion rates. 26:03 So therefore, there's got to be something fundamentally wrong 26:07 with radiometric dating. 26:08 And yet, radiometric dating is considered 26:11 as the be all and end all, 26:12 the rock solid data, sort of thing, age method. 26:16 That's how we can look at it. 26:18 Maybe if we just dive into this topic, into the sea, 26:21 what about marine sedimentation kind of layers? 26:24 And how thick are the deposits down there? 26:27 Well that right; again, if the earth was 26:29 hundreds of millions of years old, those deposits 26:31 would be much, much thicker than we calculate them to be 26:35 at the current erosion rates. 26:36 All the deposits that we measure in the depth of the sea, 26:39 they are only about 450 meters deep, 26:41 they were deposited in about 15 million years. 26:44 So again, no matter where we look at, 26:46 it's all pointing to a young earth. 26:49 It's amazing. This has been a very fascinating topic. 26:52 And I'm sure that you've enjoyed following along our discussion. 26:55 If you'd like to learn more about the idea that our planet 26:58 may not be old enough to give sufficient time for evolution 27:02 to have occurred, you want to get Dr. John Ashton's book. 27:08 You can go to your favorite online bookstore 27:10 anywhere around the world and just click on it and get it 27:14 right where you are. 27:16 It is quite astonishing that sedimentation and erosion 27:20 rates point to a young earth. 27:23 But as we talked about, what about 27:25 radiometric dating methods? 27:27 Aren't those methods absolutely rock solid, 27:30 not only here on earth, but also in the universe as well? 27:33 That's a topic for our next episode. 27:36 And it's definitely not a discussion to miss at all. 27:39 So we really invite you to come and join with us again. 27:43 And if you want to catch up on previous episodes, 27:45 just go to our website... 27:49 We look forward to you joining us again next time. |
Revised 2020-03-24