OceanSide church of Christ

 Previous Return to Articles Next 


Victor M. Eskew


            The first time men landed on the moon was on July 20, 1969.  The lunar lander was called the “Eagle.”  The landing occurred at a site known as the Sea of Tranquility.  The scientists who designed the lunar lander believed that the Eagle would come to rest on moon dust that would be fifty to seventy feet deep.  This amount of accumulation of dust was based upon the popular hypothesis called Evolution.  Because they believed the dust would be quite deep because of the “ancient” age of the moon, the lunar module had very wide feet, or, pods, so the vehicle would not sink down into the dust.  It was a huge surprise to many scientists that the moon dust was not deep at all.  In fact, it was only an inch or so deep.  The small amount of dust meant that the moon was not as old as scientists thought.  In fact, the moon had to be very young to only have about one inch of dust upon it.  This one fact, points to an early age for both the moon and the Earth since both are considered the same age.  It is interesting that science does not widely publish this information.  Why?  Because it is opposed to the ancient age of the Earth needed for the hypothesis of evolution.

            There are many other evidences that proclaim the age of the Earth to be extremely young.  Take for instance the population of the Earth.  If a person takes the standard population growth rate and applies it to the time evolution says man has been on the Earth, our population should be 105000This is the number 10 with 5,000 zeroes following it.  It is important to know that the present land mass of the Earth will only hold 10100 number of people.  “On the other hand applying the same growth rate to 2500 B.C. (or the approximate time of the flood, when man’s history began anew) the population of the earth should be 4.5 to 5 billion” (The Other Side of Evolution, Jon Gary Williams, “How Old Is the Earth?”, p. 59).  Again, scientists are silent about this point.  They know that this information does not harmonize with Darwinian evolution.

            The magnetic field of the Earth is also an evidence for a young earth.  This force field “is due to the huge electric current, billions of amperes worth, circulating in the core of the earth” (www.apologeticspress.org, “The Young Earth,” Bert Thompson, Ph.D.).   This field is in constant, rapid decay.  If the decay continues at its present rate, our magnetic field will be gone by A.D. 3991.  Using the decay rate and projecting it backwards presents a huge problem for the evolutionist.  Going backward more than a few thousand years causes the magnetic field to become too large and too hot to be stored in the Earth’s core.  At some point, the Earth’s crust would have had to rupture and crack if the Earth is millions and millions of years old.  “According to the fact associated with the magnetic field, the upper limit for the age of the Earth is 10,000 years” (Ibid.).

            The content of hydrogen within the Universe is another problem for the evolutionist who believes the Universe is billions of years old.  Hydrogen is decreasing at a very steady rate in the Universe.  What is interesting is that hydrogen is not being produced in any significant quantity through the conversion of other elements.  If the Universe is billions of years old, there would not be very much hydrogen left in the Universe, this is not the case.  Hydrogen is everywhere.  “Sir Fred Hoyle, the eminent British astronomer/cosmologist, has noted, however, that ‘the universe consists almost entirely of hydrogen’” (Ibid., Thompson).  The presence of this large quantity of hydrogen tells us that the Earth is young, very young.

            Atmospheric helium is another proof of a young Earth.  Helium is derived from the disintegration of uranium and thorium in the Earth’s crust.  This helium escapes to the earth’s surface and is collected in the atmosphere.  “Scientists have stated that the present atmosphere contains 3.5 x 1015 grams of helium, and that the rate of helium formation is 3 x 1011 grams/year.  Given these figures, the Earth’s age turns out to be in the neighborhood of 10,000 years” (Ibid, Thompson).  Evolutionists try to argue that the helium is escaping into the exosphere.  First, there is no evidence of this.  Second, if this were the case, the temperatures in the exosphere would be extremely high – between 1800 and 2300 degrees Celsius.  Temperatures this high have never been recorded.  The evolutionists are grasping at straws instead of acknowledging the fact of a young Earth.

            Did you know the sun is shrinking?  The rate that the sun is shrinking can be measured.  “At the present rate it is calculated that just 100,000 years ago, the sun would have been twice its present size.  At that size it would have been so hot that the earth would burn up!” (William, Ibid., p. 59).  If the sun existed 500 million years ago, as the evolutionists say it must, it would have been as large as our entire solar system.  Ridiculous!  A young Earth of about 10,000 years of age would account for the sun’s present size.

            There are many other evidences that could be presented that prove the Earth is extremely young (i.e., ocean sediment, natural gas, etc.). Almost all of them prove the Earth to be about 10,000 years old at the most.  Why is all of this evidence rejected?  Why isn’t this information widely disseminated?  Why aren’t these things taught in the classroom at our schools?  The reason is because they destroy the hypothesis of evolution.  Evolution needs billions and billions of years to attempt to explain the Universe.  If the Universe and the Earth are young, their billions of years for evolutionary processes are gone.