Science Disproves Evolution

A tall pile of tar will slowly flow downhill, ultimately spreading into a nearly horizontal sheet of tar. Most material, under pressure, “creeps” in this way, although rocks deform very, very slowly.

Calculations show that the growing upward bulges of large crater floors on the Moon should reach their current extent in only 10,000 to 10,000,000 years (a). Large, steep-walled craters exist even on Venus and Mercury, where temperatures are hot enough to melt lead. Therefore, creep rates on those planets should be even greater. Most large craters on the Moon, Venus, and Mercury are thought to have formed more than 4,000,000,000 years ago. Because these craters show no sign of “creep,” these bodies seem to be relatively young.

a . Glenn R. Morton, Harold S. Slusher, and Richard E. Mandock, “The Age of Lunar Craters,” Creation Research Society Quarterly, Vol. 20, September 1983, pp. 105–108.The above study drew upon the work of Z. F. Danes, which was described as follows:

The history of a circular crater in a highly viscous medium is derived from the hydrodynamic equations of motion by Z. F. Danes. The variation in shape of the crater in the course of time is expressed as a function of a time constant, T, that involves viscosity and density of the medium, acceleration of gravity, and radius of the crater lip. Correspondence between theoretical crater shapes and the observed ones is good. However the time constant, T, is surprisingly short if commonly accepted viscosity values are used. Geological Survey Professional Paper 550-A (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1966), p. A 127.

Since Danes’ work was published, rocks from the Moon have been returned to Earth and their viscosity has been measured. Their values fall between 10[SUP]21[/SUP] to 10[SUP]22[/SUP] poises. According to the Geological Survey paper just quoted, “If viscosities of lunar rocks were around 10[SUP]21[/SUP] to 10[SUP]22[/SUP] poises, the ages of large craters would have to be only 10[SUP]4[/SUP] to 10[SUP]7[/SUP] years.”

In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - 78.

The only I'd say is the ocean deep we know more about space then our own ocean floors, because of the pressures are so great, in space it's the opposite there's space wind and lights for signs and understanding knowledge..The earth has changed been broken up who knows which parts was above water and which parts was under water we know less than 5% of the ocean floors who knows what is really down there. It takes a lot more to get to the bottom of the oceans then it does looking into space with high powered telescopes, and instruments on reading the incoming lights rays etc..

A surprising amount of heat is flowing out of the Moon from just below its surface, and yet the Moon’s interior is relatively cold (a). Because it has not yet cooled off, the Moon is much younger than most people had guessed, or relatively recent events have altered the Moon’s heat flow (b)— or both.

a. “[The following is] a somewhat surprising outcome considering the size of the Moon and the assumption that most of its heat energy had been lost....These unexpectedly high lunar [heat flow] values seem to indicate the Moon’s interior is much hotter than most thermal models had anticipated. If the temperature gradient in the lower regolith is extrapolated to great depths, the lunar interior would appear to be at least partly molten—a condition contradicted by other evidence.” Nicholas M. Short, Planetary Geology (Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1975), p. 184.

u In 2011, the Moon was discovered to have a small liquid core. [See Renee C. Weber et al., “Seismic Detection of the Lunar Core,” Science, Vol. 331, 21 January 2011, pp. 309–312.]

u “Actual values of heat flow determined on the Moon at the Apollo 15 and 17 sites were two and three times higher than had been predicted.” Short, p.183.

b. Dr. Kent Davey developed a 40,000 finite element model that considered a body of water 1/2 mile thick at temperature 150°F only 1/2 mile below the Moon’s surface. After 10,000 years that water’s temperature would only have decreased 53°F. Kent Davey, personal communication, 9 November 2015.

c. The unexpectedly large heat flow may be a consequence of large impacts occurring on the lunar surface soon after the global flood. Because the flood was recent (only about 5300 years ago) excess heat should still be present. [See "When Was the Flood?" on page 480, Figure 164 on page 297 and "Did the Preflood Earth Have a 30-Day Lunar Month?" on page 580.]

Most Scientific Dating Techniques Indicate That the Earth, Solar System, and Universe Are Young.

For the last 150 years, the age of the Earth, as assumed by evolutionists, has been doubling at roughly a rate of once every 15 years. In fact, since 1900 this age has multiplied by a factor of 100!

Actually, most dating techniques indicate that the Earth and solar system are young—possibly less than 10,000 years old.

[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences47.html]

Interesting indeed though my view the earth is 4.5 mil old the moon around the same.

What evidence do you have supporting that idea?

Evolution is dying, didnt you hear? Aliens did it lol the truth is easier to believe than the lie

What about rapid fossilization?
How about nephilim?
Book of enoch?
Catholic church admits they took the book out of the original bible.
All these things science will deny or not talk about.

As comets pass near the Sun, some of their mass vaporizes, producing a long tail and other debris (a). Comets also fragment frequently or crash into the Sun(b) or planets. Typical comets should disintegrate after several hundred orbits. For many comets this is less than 10,000 years. There is no evidence for a distant shell of cometary material surrounding the solar system, and there is no known way to add comets to the solar system at rates that even remotely balance their destruction. Actually, the gravity of planets tends to expel comets from the solar system rather than capture them (c). So, comets and the solar system appear to be less than 10,000 years old. [For more on comets, see: In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - The Origin of Comets ]

a. Ron Cowen, “Comets: Mudballs of the Solar System,” Science News,Vol. 141, 14 March 1992, pp. 170–171.

b. Ray Jayawardhana, “Keeping Tabs on Cometary Breakups,” Science,Vol. 264, 13 May 1994, p. 907.

c. “Many scientific papers are written each year about the Oort Cloud, its properties, its origin, its evolution. Yet there is not a shred of direct observational evidence for its existence.”Sagan and Druyan, p. 210.

However, Sagan and Druyan believed that the Oort cloud exists, and went on to predict (p. 211) that“with the refinement of our scientific instruments, and the development of space missions to go far beyond Pluto,”the cloud will be seen, measured, and studied.

d. Raymond A. Lyttleton, “The Non-Existence of the Oort Cometary Shell,” Astrophysics and Space Science,Vol. 31, December 1974, p. 393.

If comet formation accompanies star formation, as evolutionists claim, then many comets should have been expelled from other stars. Some expelled comets should have passed through our solar system in recent years. No incoming comet has ever been observed with an interstellar (i.e. hyperbolic) orbit. [See Wetherill, p. 470.]

For the last 150 years, the age of the Earth, as assumed by evolutionists, has been doubling at roughly a rate of once every 15 years. In fact, since 1900 this age has multiplied by a factor of 100!

Actually, most dating techniques indicate that the Earth and solar system are young—possibly less than 10,000 years old.

[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences48.html]

This is a painting by Akiane Kramarik when she was 8 years old. The first time I heard of Akiane, I was watching “Heaven is for Real” by Todd Burpo. In the spring of 2003, the author’s little four year old boy, Colton, suffered from a near-fatal illness and hadvisions of heaven. After Colton recovered, his dad kept showing him images of Jesus, and Colton kept shaking his head and saying "no, that doesn’t look like him". Finally, Todd showed him Akiane’s painting of Jesus, and Colton said, "yes, that's him".

Akiane's life began in an unusual way, with an underwater home birth in a shack on the edge of a cornfield.

Although during her first years the family experienced severe hardships, Akiane grew up in a nurturing home-schooling environment. Her mother was a Lithuanian immigrant teacher and her father a chef from Chicago. In their rural Illinois home the family had no friends, no relatives, no television or radio, and their life was quite simple: long walks in nature, open conversations, and hands on explorations of knowledge.

When Akiane was four years old, even though the family was indifferent to spirituality or religion, suddenly she started experiencing vivid impressions about invisible realms and a great desire to express them through art utilizing whatever medium was found on hand: candles, lipstick, fruits, vegetables, charcoal or pencils.

Though once in while she would share many details about the self-aware universes she was seeing, most of her spiritual experiences, however, she kept secret, so as not to overwhelm her parents. "It is not time yet for you to know what I see. When that time comes, then you will know."

Whether it was Akiane's vivid imagination or real experiences, her realistic drawings of mostly faces, undoubtedly impressed everybody, and during the first local art exhibitions people often had a hard time believing that the work could actually be created by such a young child.

Soon afterwards, Akiane plunged into the world of colors, and a few more years later into the world of poetry leaving her family and audiences puzzled.

Gradually the days became filled with thinking, painting and writing, and at the tender age of eight the self-taught prodigy completed her first five-foot long oil paintings mastering realism equal to that of a seasoned artist.

Photographs taken from Earth-orbiting satellites show small, ice-filled comets striking Earth’s upper atmosphere at an average rate of one every three seconds (a).





Figure 33: Small Comets. The Dynamic Explorer satellite took this picture in ultraviolet light showing small comets (the dark spots) colliding with Earth’s upper atmosphere. The comets begin to break up 800 miles above the Earth’s surface, then frictional heating vaporizes the pieces and their descent stops at an elevation of about 35 miles. The water vapor, which soon dissipates, blocks ultraviolet light from Earth, producing the dark spots. The northern lights are shown by the halo.

Each comet adds 20–40 tons of water to the Earth’s atmosphere. If this influx began when evolutionists say the Earth started to evolve, all our oceans would have come from small comets. Actually, impact rates were undoubtedly greater in the past, because the planets have swept many of these comets from the solar system. Therefore, small comets would have placed much more water on Earth than is here today. Obviously, this did not happen, so oceans look young. [See also pages 303 and 312 http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/Comets6.html#wp1105567In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - Details Relating to the Hydroplate Theory]

a. Louis A. Frank with Patrick Huyghe, The Big Splash (New York: Carol Publishing Group, 1990).

Richard Monastersky, “Comet Controversy Caught on Film,” Science News, Vol. 133, 28 May 1988, p. 340.

Timothy M. Beardsley, “Ice Storm,” Scientific American, Vol. 258, June 1988, p. 24.

Jonathan Eberhart, “A Bunch of Little Comets—But Just a Little Bunch,” Science News, Vol. 132, 29 August 1987, p. 132.

Richard A. Kerr, “In Search of Elusive Little Comets,” Science,Vol. 240, 10 June 1988, pp. 1403–1404.

Richard A. Kerr, “Double Exposures Reveal Mini-Comets?” Science, Vol. 243, 13 January 1989, pp. 170–171.

Richard Monastersky, “Small Comet Controversy Flares Again,” Science News,Vol. 137, 9 June 1990, p. 365.

For the last 150 years, the age of the Earth, as assumed by evolutionists, has been doubling at roughly a rate of once every 15 years. In fact, since 1900 this age has multiplied by a factor of 100!

Actually, most dating techniques indicate that the Earth and solar system are young—possibly less than 10,000 years old.

[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences49.html]

Jupiter, Saturn, and Neptune each radiate away more than twice the heat energy they receive from the Sun (a). Uranus (b) and Venus (c) also radiate too much heat. Calculations show that it is very unlikely that this energy comes from nuclear fusion (d), radioactive decay, gravitational contraction, or phase changes (e) within those planets. This suggests that these planets have not existed long enough to cool off (f).

a. H. H. Aumann and C. M. Gillespie Jr., “The Internal Powers and Effective Temperatures of Jupiter and Saturn,” The Astrophysical Journal, Vol. 157, July 1969, pp. L69–L72.

“Jupiter radiates into space rather more than twice the energy it receives from space.”G. H. A. Cole, The Structure of Planets(New York: Crane, Russak & Co., Inc., 1978), p. 114.

M. Mitchell Waldrop, “The Puzzle That Is Saturn,” Science,18 September 1981, p. 1351.

Jonathan Eberhart, “Neptune’s Inner Warmth,” Science News,Vol. 112, 12 November 1977, p. 316.

b. Ibid.

c. “The Mystery of Venus’ Internal Heat,” New Scientist,Vol. 88, 13 November 1980, p. 437.

d. To initiate nuclear fusion, a body must be at least ten times as massive as Jupiter. [See Andrew P. Ingersoll, “Jupiter and Saturn,” Scientific American,Vol. 245, December 1981, p. 92.]

e. Ingersoll and others once proposed that Saturn and Jupiter could generate internal heat if their helium gas liquefied or their liquid hydrogen solidified. Neither is possible, because each planet’s temperature greatly exceeds the critical temperatures of helium and hydrogen. (The critical temperature of a particular gas is that temperature above which no amount of pressure can squeeze it into a liquid or solid.) Even if the temperature were cold enough to permit gases to liquefy, what could initiate nucleation? When I mentioned this in a private conversation with Ingersoll in December 1981, he quickly acknowledged his error.

f. Paul M. Steidl, “The Solar System: An Assessment of Recent Evidence—Planets, Comets, and Asteroids,” Design and Origins in Astronomy,editor George Mulfinger Jr. (Norcross, Georgia: Creation Research Society Books, 1983), pp. 87, 91, 100.

Jupiter would have rapidly cooled to its present temperature, even if it had been an unreasonably hot 20,000 kelvins when it formed. Evolutionary models require too much time. [See Edwin V. Bishop and Wendell C. DeMarcus, “Thermal Histories of Jupiter Models,” Icarus,Vol. 12, May 1970, pp. 317–330.]

For the last 150 years, the age of the Earth, as assumed by evolutionists, has been doubling at roughly a rate of once every 15 years. In fact, since 1900 this age has multiplied by a factor of 100!

Actually, most dating techniques indicate that the Earth and solar system are young—possibly less than 10,000 years old.

[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences50.html]

Dust particles larger than about a 100,000[SUP]th[/SUP] of a centimeter in diameter form a large disk-shaped cloud that orbits the Sun between the orbits of Venus and the asteroid belt. This cloud produces zodiacal light (a). Forces acting on these particles should spiral most of them into the Sun in less than 10,000 years. (This is called the Poynting-Robertson effect.) Known forces and sources of replenishment cannot maintain this cloud, so the solar system is probably less than 10,000 years old.

This is how the Poynting-Robertson effect works: Rain falling on a speeding car tends to strike the front of the car and slow it down slightly.Likewise, the Sun’s rays that strike particles orbiting the Sun tend to slow them down, causing them to spiral into the Sun. Thus, the Sun’s radiation and gravity act as a giant vacuum cleaner that pulls in about 100,000 tons of nearby micrometeoroids per day. Disintegrating comets and asteroids add dust at less than half the rate at which it is being destroyed (b).

A disintegrating comet becomes a cluster of particles called a meteor stream.The Poynting-Robertson effect causes smaller particles in a meteor stream to spiral into the Sun more rapidly than larger particles. After about 10,000 years, these orbits should be visibly segregated by particle size. Because this segregation is generally not seen, meteor streams are probably a recent phenomenon (c).

Huge quantities of microscopic dust particles also have been discovered around some stars (d). Yet, according to the theory of stellar evolution, those stars are many millions of years old, so that dust should have been removed by stellar wind and the Poynting-Robertson effect. Until some process is discovered that continually resupplies vast amounts of dust, one should consider whether the “millions of years” are imaginary.

a. “For decades, astronomers have speculated that debris left over from the formation of the solar system or newly formed from colliding asteroids is continuously falling toward the sun and vaporizing. The infrared signal, if it existed, would be so strong at the altitude of Mauna Kea[Hawaii], above the infrared-absorbing water vapor in the atmosphere, that the light-gathering power of the large infrared telescopes would be overkill. ... In the case of the infrared search for the dust ring,[Donald N. B.]Hall [Director of the University of Hawaii’s Institute for Astronomy]was able to report within days that ‘the data were really superb.’ They don’t tell an entirely welcome story, though. ‘Unfortunately, they don’t seem to show any dust rings at all.’ ” Charles Petit, “A Mountain Cliffhanger of an Eclipse,” Science, Vol. 253, 26 July 1991, pp. 386–387.To understand the origin of zodiacal light, see In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - The Origin of Asteroids, Meteoroids, and Trans-Neptunian Objects.

b. Steidl, The Earth, the Stars, and the Bible, pp. 60–61.

Harold S. Slusher and Stephen J. Robertson, The Age of the Solar System: A Study of the Poynting-Robertson Effect and Extinction of Interplanetary Dust,ICR Technical Monograph No. 6, revised edition (El Cajon, California: Institute for Creation Research, 1978).

c. Stanley P. Wyatt Jr. and Fred L. Whipple, “The Poynting-Robertson Effect on Meteor Orbits,” The Astrophysical Journal,Vol. 3, January 1950, pp. 134–141.

Ron Cowen, “Meteorites: To Stream or Not to Stream,” Science News,Vol. 142, 1 August 1992, p. 71.

d. David A. Weintraub, “Comets in Collision,” Nature,Vol. 351, 6 June 1991, pp. 440–441.

[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences52.html]

In galaxies similar to our Milky Way Galaxy, a star will explode violently every 26 years or so (a). These explosions, called supernovas, produce gas and dust that expand outward thousands of miles per second. With radio telescopes, these remnants in our galaxy should be visible for a million years. However, only about 7,000 years’ worth of supernova debris are seen (b). So, the Milky Way looks young.

In A.D. 1054, Chinese observers (and perhaps Anasazi Indians in New Mexico and Arizona) witnessed and described a supernova. It was visible in daylight for 23 days and briefly was as bright as a full moon. Today, the remnants from that explosion comprise the Crab Nebula.

a. “An application of the present results to the [Milky Way]Galaxy yields one supernova per 26 (± 10 estimated error) years in very good agreement with the evidence from historical supernovae.” G. A. Tammann, “On the Frequency of Supernovae as a Function of the Integral Properties of Intermediate and Late Type Spiral Galaxies,” Astronomy and Astrophysics, Vol. 8, October 1970, p. 458.

A more recent technique that surveyed thousands of galaxies, including smaller galaxies, concluded that... the time between [supernova] explosions is 100 years or more.”Michael S. Turner, “Yes, Things Really Are Going Faster,” Science,Vol. 299, 31 January 2003, p. 663.

b. Keith Davies, “Distribution of Supernova Remnants in the Galaxy,” Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Creationism (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Creation Science Fellowship, Inc., 1994), pp. 175–184.

“Where have all the remnants gone?” Astronomy Survey Committee of the National Research Council Challenges to Astronomy and Astrophysics (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1983), p. 166.

[http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences53.html#wp1606721]