Also see: Detailed Contents
he proponents
of “scientific” creationism (for example,
54, 77, 90, 92, 95, 96, 135) claim to have developed a legitimate scientific model for the
creation and history of the universe that explains extant
scientific observations as well as, if not better than, the
current theories and concepts of biology, chemistry, physics,
geology, and astronomy. Even a cursory reading of the literature
of “scientific” creationism, however, reveals that
the creation model is not scientifically based but is, instead, a
religious apologetic derived from a literal interpretation of
parts of the book of Genesis. Indeed, this literature abounds
with direct and indirect references to a Deity or Creator, and
citations of the Bible are not uncommon (for example,
22, 77,
90,
91, 96, 97, 99, 131).
The tenets of
“scientific” creationism include the beliefs that the
Earth, the Solar System, and the universe are less than 10,000
years old (13, 77, 92, 116, 117) and that nearly all the sedimentary rocks on the Earth were
deposited in about one year during a worldwide flood
(29, 77, 92, 131). Both of these propositions are disproved by a vast and
consistent body of scientific evidence.
The ages of the
various rock formations, the Earth, the Moon, and meteorites have
been measured using radiometric (also called isotopic) dating
techniques — atomic clocks within the rocks themselves
that, if properly used, reveal the elapsed time since the rocks
formed. There is overwhelming scientific evidence that the oldest
rocks on the Earth are 3.6 to 3.8 billion years old, that the
oldest rocks on the Moon are 4.4 to 4.6 billion years old, and
that the Earth, the Moon, and meteorites all formed about 4.5 to
4.6 billion years ago. In addition, these same dating techniques
have conclusively verified and quantified the relative geologic
time scale (Figure 1), which was independently deduced by
stratigraphers and paleontologists on the basis of nearly two
centuries of careful scientific observations of the sequence of
sedimentary rock units and fossils.
In spite of
massive evidence to the contrary, creation
“scientists” continue to defend their belief in a
very young Earth. Their arguments fall generally into two
categories: The first involves criticisms of radiometric dating
techniques and data; the second involves various calculations
that they claim provide quantitative evidence that the Earth is
young. In this paper I explain briefly how radiometric dating
methods work and the principal evidence that the Earth is 4.5 to
4.6 billion years old. I also examine in detail some examples of
the creationists’ criticisms and calculations and show that
they are scientifically meaningless.
Figure 1:
Simplified geological time scale. The relative order of the eras,
periods, and epochs was determined on the basis of stratigraphy
and paleontology. The time scale was independently confirmed and
quantified by radiometric dating. After Harbaugh
(61). Ages are
based on the new decay constants adopted by the International
Union of Geological Sciences.
|
I dedicate this
paper to the memory of Max Crittenden, who died of cancer on
Thanksgiving Day, 1982. Max was not only a friend and colleague,
but was a leader in the effort to preserve the integrity of
California science textbooks against the creationists’
attack in the early 1970s. Max was a constant source of
encouragement and support in many matters, but especially in my
efforts to expose the glaring errors in the creationists’
propaganda about the scientific evidence for the age of the Earth
and the vastness of geologic time.
I thank my
friends and colleagues Patrick Abbott, Calvin Alexander, Frank
Awbrey, Arthur Boucot, Stephen Brush, Max Crittenden, Norman
Horowit, Thomas Jukes, Arthur Lachenbruch, Marvin Lanphere,
Robert Root-Bernstein, John Sutter, and Christopher Weber, who
read an early draft of the manuscript and offered valuable
comments, suggestions, and encouragement.
