Customer Reviews

Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Creationist Research

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Contrary to 'What a Joke' (below), this book involves no 'denial of science'. All contributors are professionally accomplished Ph.D.s (physics, geology, and geophysics) who do not reject science but question the 'starting assumptions' that underpin the majority view of the scientific establishment (in this case, geology).
Observations show that a significant amount of radio-active decay has occured in the earth's crust. These scientists do not dispute this. Instead they question the assumptions held by the scientific establishment - for instance that these radio-active decay rates have been constant. This is an a priori assumption that scientists can neither prove nor disprove. Therefore, the assumption that the decay rates have NOT been constant are just as valid - particularly as there is no thoretical problem with this assumption.
These scientists have, and are, conducting real, verifiable research on this issue. This book is their initial report. It includes theories, tests, demonstrations, documentation, and PREDICTIONS as to what should be found if their theories are correct. The year (2005), the follow up will be published. This will include the results of over five years of research and will test the results against their predictions in this book. Already, there has been successes (for instance in the area of helium diffusion).
A good statement of the approach these scientists take is found on page 334 (chapter 7 - Accelerated Nuclear Decay : A Viable Hypothesis?). Humphreys states,

"What I want to show in this paper is that accelrated nuclear decay is a good answer to the problems posed by geoscience and nuclear data. I will show that the data require it, Scripture suugests it, theory allows it, and observations can test it."

This is nothing more than good old-fashioned scientific research. When the next book is done, the establishment, if they wish to retain crediblity, will have to grapple with real, hard, scientific data and stop the ad hominem attacks.

This book provides a wealth of information on alternatives to the long ages suggested by conventional isotopic dates. Much of the emphasis of this book is on the physics of radioactive decay, and how decay rates can be changed. There are also some geologically-based studies of isotopic dating techniques, and I would personally like to see more of these.

While I disagree with the conclusions reached in the book, I appreciate a consistent and thorough reporting on the young-earth creationist viewpoint. My main disagreement comes with the repeated conclusion that there must have been accelerated nuclear decay at some point in the past. I would like to point out the interesting contradiction here with another branch of Christian science: the Intelligent Design movement. One of the strongest arguments for ID is known as "fine tuning," which states that if the physical constants were different from what they are, life on earth would be drastically affected. In order to achieve accelerated decay, young-earthers assert that there must have been a weakening in the strong nuclear force, along with others (see Chaffin, p. 305). If it's a choice between fine tuning and accelerated decay, I choose fine tuning.

I don't know if they want me to say this, but poke around online. I found this book in a .pdf, all 676 pages of it.

Having read this work and follow up papers, it is the atheist that must question his faith, not the Christian. With this book, more data is gathered to support a hypothesis that they hold. (Which is what science is about!) I am a former evolutionist, but I have always held an open mind to the evidence which converted me to creationism, a position well supported by the evidence in this book and others. What really got me was the exploration of helium loss of rocks that had underwent "1.5 billion years" of nuclear decay and 6000 years of helium loss, which evolutionists can't explain. This book can only be given a low rating by biased readers who do not have an open mind to truth. The truth, by its nature, is divisive, which means someone is wrong. I just don't get why evolutionists who read this book can't admit that they were wrong.

Contrary to what the authors contained in this weighty tomb would have you believe, there is no science in here. Yes, all the contributors hold a Ph.D. of some sort. However, science does NOT start with the answer and then look for "facts" to bolster their case which is exactly what this book does. A couple of quotes show this.

"To them, even when the problems seem daunting, there must be an answer, and this answer must come within the framework of Biblical history." (p. vii).

"Our unified premise is that observation and theory should always be subservient to a proper understanding of the Word of God." (p. 6)

I repeat, this is NOT science. It is creationism plain and simple. The fact that, to date, none of the research initiatives in this book have born any fruit endorsed by the scientific community at large or shown up in any refereed scientific journals should speak volumes to most readers. However, if you want to continue to live with your head buried in the sand, ignorant of the scientific process and the world around you, then by all means, read and enjoy.