Earth Can’t be Old - Answering the Critics

Why do biblical creationists insist that the earth is ‘young’? Hasn't science proven that it is millions/billions of years old?
Where does the ‘6,000 years old’ figure come from, anyway-and is the methodology used to get that figure defensible? What did the church fathers believe? And for Christians, isn’t this whole topic just a massive distraction from the ‘real’ issues of the Gospel?
Join Dr Mark Harwood for an engaging discussion in which he responds to some of the challenges skeptics have posed following his previous, highly popular, video on the age of the earth ( • Why the Earth Can’t be... ).
⏳ TIMESTAMPS
00:00 Teaser
00:40 Introduction: Why believe that the earth can’t be old?
01:38 Why ‘historical science’ is different from ‘experimental science’
04:05 Historical science is subject to the investigator's preconceptions about history
05:09 In matters of history, the historical method trumps the scientific method
07:17 The myth of neutrality: Even scientists have presuppositions
08:52 Uniformitarianism: Is ‘the present the key to the past’?
10:19 How does the Bible give 6,000 years?
11:45 Challenge: “You can't use the Bible’s chronogenealogies-they use rounding”
14:07 Challenge: “The early church fathers didn’t believe the earth was young”
14:52 Challenge: “The age of the earth doesn't matter; it’s a distracting side issue for Christians"
16:04 → An old earth undercuts the logical consistency of the Gospel
19:42 → An old earth undercuts the character of God
20:12 → An old earth undercuts the inerrancy of Scripture
21:11 → An old earth undercuts the Bible’s explanation for death and suffering
25:02 → Summary: It does matter!
26:14 Challenge: "Geology proves millions of years, via sedimentary layers and radiometric dating"
26:49 → Sedimentary layers are not consistent with ‘millions of years’ conclusions
28:43 → Fossils in sedimentary rock show the layers were laid down rapidly
29:43 → Millions of years can't be found between the sedimentary layers, either
31:17 → Summary: There’s no ‘millions of years’ in the rocks at all!
32:22 → Case study: Rapid sedimentation at Mount St Helens
33:41 → Case study: Radiometric dating at Mount St Helens
37:01 → Radiometric dating does not (and cannot!) provide ‘absolute dates’
38:51 Challenge: “Population growth estimates don’t support biblical creation”
42:52 Challenge: “Soft tissue in dino bones is satisfactorily explained by the presence of iron”
44:55 → How long can DNA be preserved?
47:10 Challenge: “Carbon-14 in dinosaur bones is not a problem for millions of years”
49:03 Conclusion: The biblical account makes so much more sense of real-world observations!
50:38 Where to get more info: creation.com
✍️ LINKS AND SHOW NOTES
• Why the Earth Can’t be Old - • Why the Earth Can’t be...
• 101 evidences for the age of the Earth - creation.com/age
• Did God create over billions of years? And why is it important? - creation.com/billions
• ‘It’s not science’ The importance of understanding ‘science’ - creation.com/its-not-science
• How radiometric dating methods work - creation.com/how-dating-metho...
• Does carbon dating prove millions of years? - • Does Carbon Dating Pro...
• Learning the lessons of Mount St Helens - creation.com/lessons-from-mou...
• How does the Bible teach 6,000 years? creation.com/6000-years
• The History of Interpretation of Genesis 1-11 - creation.com/rc-ch3
• If the world is old, where are all the people? - creation.com/where-are-all-th...
• Dinosaur soft tissue - creation.com/dinosaur-soft-ti...
• Iron preserves dinosaur soft tissue? - • Iron preserves dinosau...
• DNA and bone cells found in dinosaur bone - creation.com/dino-dna-bone-cells
📚 HELPFUL RESOURCES
• Radioactive Dating & A Young Earth - creation.com/s/35-8-626
• Evidence for a Young World - creation.com/s/35-8-614
• The Dating Game - creation.com/s/35-8-600
💙 SOCIAL MEDIA
► Facebook: / creationministries
► TikTok: / creationministries
► Instagram: / creationministries
► X / Twitter: / creationnews
► eNewsletter: creation.com/infobytes
📅 EVENTS
We present at hundreds of events around the world each year.
To see what events are happening near you, or to request a creation presentation in your Church (or other gathering) visit:
creation.com/events
Thanks for watching!

[@andrewclema]

I love Dr. Hardwood's no compromise no negotiation stance on the Word of God - even if it doesn't make sense it's still the Word of God and it's our understanding that needs to be corrected. That's how believers are supposed to approach God's Word. His thoughts are far above our own. There must be an element of faith - accepting Him as True even if it doesn't make sense because we have experienced Him. That's what most skeptical believers need - an actual encounter with Jesus. When that happens you will believe the Word of God especially when it doesn't make sense 😅

[@jtlbb2]

Of course, it's easy to say something doesn't make sense, especially when no examples are provided. But you know what doesn't make sense? To believe that if we're all just the product of an accident, and all of our thoughts are just electro-chemical reactions that we should expect anything to make sense. The atheistic universe has no rational basis for logical thinking. For you to expect something to make sense is to borrow from the Christian worldview because only the Christian worldview can provide a rational basis for logic.

[@alancoates8955]

So even when it's wrong it's right because it's in the bible? Rather a silly argument. The earth is 4.5 billion years old. Science has proven this using many different methods. To simply deny it because it's not in the bible is ridiculous because the bible is not a science book.

[@garymoore2535]

It says in the Bible "The only way to God is through me (Jesus)" and yet the preacher says any faith will do contradicting the Bible. There are something like 3000 different Faith's....... any God capable of creating the Heavens and the Earth would surely be capable of communicating his instructions without relying on the scribings of relatively primitive men ? 🤷‍♀️

[@stevepierce6467]

For millennia, it was people's "no compromise, no negotiation stance on the word of god" that killed so many innocent people by refusing to see that it is germs and not sin or miasma or evil spirits which cause illness. That is why thinking rational people reject that stance.

[@Yamyatos]

If something doesnt make sense, then either the author was an idiot, or incompetent at writing comprehensible statements. Not sure which is better. But ask yourself this.. you are an omniscient being.. why on earth do you write so much nonsensical stuff, if you, and only you, know exactly what words would convince everybody. Why are most people not convinced then? Further, why is so much of the stuff you wrote obviously wrong or contradicting? Maybe, just maybe.. it wasnt an omniscient being who wrote it, but desert dwelling, superstitious people.

[@VernCrisler]

The fact that these thick sedimentary layers also include many monoclines and synclines and folded rocks means all these layers had to be ductile in order to curve at the same time. Creationists have done microscopic analysis of these curved layers and have shown that they are no different than the horizontal layers of the same stratum. That blows away the whole idea of an evolutionary geological column. In addition, it blows away the validity of radiometric determinations in dating these rocks.

[@MrLogo73]

The stratigraphic column consists of different strata.

[@abelincoln.2064]

@@MrLogo73 with no transition layers ... just as there aren't any transitions forms proving Evolution. Natural & Unnatural (breeding) Selection was known back in the 1850's ... to only cause variation or adaption within a species. We know today mutations never creates new genes with new traits. Because Universal Functions ... is the Hypothesis for Sir Issac Newton's Watchmaker Analogy over 300 years ago and all machine Analogies. Evolution, Abiogenesis and Big Bang fail the scientific Method and should have been relegated to ... fantasy. Whereas Universal Functions easily passes the scientific Method ... becasue space, time, Laws of Nature, matter & energy ... are clearly natural Funcitons ... with information like purpose, reason, rules, properties, processes & design ... which can only come from the Mind of an Intelligence.

[@knightclan4]

Well said mate

[@jamesballard1170]

No. Absolute lunacy. These frauds are trying to fit the moon through the eye of a needle.

[@VernCrisler]

@@MrLogo73 And?

[@Baseball4lifer]

I clicked this video so fast!!! Thank you CMI for opening my eyes to a world of creation!!

[@miyojewoltsnasonth2159]

*@Baseball4lifer* What was the primary point that changed your mind from believing the earth is billions of years old to a position that the earth is 6000 years old? *Reply to:* _"I clicked this video so fast!!! Thank you CMI for opening my eyes to a world of creation!!"_

[@victormason6954]

who are these god squad speakers they keep wheeling in, and I'm being over polite when I call them speakers and I would only say one word to them, "DINOSAURS".

[@caronbryan9612]

I believe I was saved before I became a young earth creationist but the Holy Spirit brought me to a love of the truth and I was overjoyed to find Ken hams ministry in lockdown. Fast forward to today and I’m reading through John with my atheist friend whose main objection is the scientifically held age of the earth and its contradiction with Gods word. It’s important work that you’re doing, God bless you.

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

That's great that he is willing to engage with you! Prayers for you and your friend

[@caronbryan9612]

@@SheridanFalkenberry thank you, your prayers are very much appreciated. She was in a coma a couple of years ago and we were told she wasn’t going to make it. We prayed for her and she miraculously woke up and recovered, now she’s seeking God. one of her stumbling blocks is the age of the earth and evolution. I think people find it hard to accept they’re whole world view is not true but we keep praying and presenting her with the truth.

[@JesusistheonetrueGod]

@@caronbryan9612 Patient endurance in effect. Keep teaching your friend the truth. God is able to overcome the programming we received in state run institutions.

[@Ianswillis]

Kent hovind is another great one

[@FirstnameLastname-cx6go]

What does any of this have to do with anything?

[@markgerard5585]

Cats make cats cats, dogs make dogs. There are NO EXCEPTIONS. SUPPOSEDLY crocodiles haven't changed in millions of years. Why? They were and always will be crocodiles.

[@JesusistheonetrueGod]

@@haggismcbaggis9485 how do you know it was a "bear-dog"? It made more of its own kind just like everything else.

[@JesusistheonetrueGod]

@@haggismcbaggis9485 That is your interpretation of the creature, but our observation of the creatures that aren't extinct is that they all produce after their own kinds.

[@FirstnameLastname-cx6go]

Ah, the "cats make cats, dogs make dogs" argument, a favorite among creationists and opponents of evolution. It's a simple yet flawed understanding of genetics and evolutionary biology. While it's true that species reproduce within their own kind, the concept of speciation and evolution goes far beyond that simplistic view. Evolutionary processes like genetic mutations, natural selection, and environmental pressures lead to the diversification of species over time. As for crocodiles not changing in millions of years, that's not entirely accurate. Crocodiles, like all living organisms, have undergone evolutionary changes and adaptations to survive and thrive in different environments. While they may appear similar to their ancient ancestors, they have indeed evolved over time, just at a slower pace compared to some other species. So, while it's catchy to say "cats make cats, dogs make dogs," the reality is much more nuanced and complex, showcasing the wonders of evolution and the diversity of life on Earth.

[@FirstnameLastname-cx6go]

Do you really want to hear the error in your understanding of science, or are you just cheerleading?

[@pitchlumin]

@@FirstnameLastname-cx6go farmers rely on life producing after it's own kind. Things change within their own pool. They do not skipper fish to other ponds over time. If you make that claim (which defies observation) you need to demonstrate, the cop out of Evolutionism is an appeal to time, that things Evolve so slow we can not observe. Unfalsifiable faith in that which has never been seen.

[@Mythtrekker610]

I have autism and OCD, for me to u derstand something I have to take it apart in minute detail. So looking into this and other Christian things has made my faith deeper and strong as when I look it is like looking into the mind of God, in my humble option.

[@philiprobe755]

In the beginning God created the Heaven (freezing cold void) and the Earth (spherical ball of water) In parentheses is what we see today

[@philiprobe755]

The verse 2 describes the only thing created so far ..other than the space to put it.. science is importance so verse 3 was extremely important because the light spectrum allows for freezing and Heating.

[@philiprobe755]

The next verse is where God places the atmosphere between the ice and the Seas.. the pressure formed by this process allowed the insects to grow huge and in fact because of the inverse Square law, that atmosphere was absolutely necessary for the size of fossils we have in the fossil record.

[@philiprobe755]

And finally, everything was Leviathan in those days, or huge... because of the atmosphere people and animals lived long and got real big.. but God was mad at man and removed the ice which in turn caused the flood.. when the ice was removed.. all of the vegetation and animals began receiving the radiation that is looked for by the age dating tests. That's Peter's World standing inside and outside of water verse❤. . That's what we will learn ..that's how he did it.😅

[@mikeekim242]

Mythtrekker610, You missed one small detail to take apart. Why can't anyone demonstrate a god even exists using ANY objective demonstrable evidence? Why are people relegated to trying to define an imaginary being into existence?

[@Smaddx]

The premise of Dr. Harwood's main argument is correct. Our assumptions drive our interpretations of data. Data does not "speak for itself." Data is interpreted to create information. Those interpretations are made based on the assumptions, even in experimentation (ie HYPOTHESIS/assumption comes before the actual experiment). This is not a criticism; just a statement of how science works (vastly oversimplified of course). I like Dr. Harwood's approach to the explanations. What I find to be so incredible about all the "debates" of God's existence (Hitchens, Dawkins, et al) is that they attempt to use data as information itself, all the while injecting their assumptions into the interpretation of that data. To believe God exists or does not exist, in both cases, is based on faith. "Science" does not excuse anyone from having faith, but it does blind people into believing they have "facts," and that those "facts" can only drive to one conclusion.

[@ndjarnag]

I disagree Data can speak for itself Look at basic statistics I can build empirical models with with high statistic probably and know nothing about about this underlying background of the data. In fact this is how machine learning and “AI” is so powerful. Because you can run the statistic in a data set with out biased human interpretation

[@ndjarnag]

I approach your point but again I would look into statistics It’s amazing stuff

[@Smaddx]

You don’t know the difference between data and information. There is nothing to disagree with if you know science (and data analysis).

[@ndjarnag]

@@Smaddx Perhaps I don't understand. but modern semiconductor and drug industries for example arnt just a human reviewing a scatterplot in excel... There are large predictive and empirical models that use hypothesis testing to literally take the human element out of it.

[@phillipteems6617]

@@ndjarnag actually that is incorrect. AI is a conglomeration of computers and programs written by whom? How can science stand alone without interpretation? your model is like a tree falling in the forest with no audience; Does it make a sound?

[@mikeballard8404]

Thank you for these episodes, they really close the deal of a God, who through his love has shown his mercy and grace through his only begotten son, the Lord Jesus Christ the Righteous. The Good News will make an Episcopalian jump and shout !!!

[@gooberdoober2286]

Thanks guys. I love these chats. It confirms my belief in a young earth and gives me knowledge to share with my unbeleiving friends. It just makes so much sense 😊

[@joshuataylor3550]

Insane. His first criticism was a direct argument against not just young earth but all christianity. He only believes the bible as evidence because he's already a christian.

[@mizmera]

Occam's Razor is the truth. The dating methods has been so much changed it is impossible to tell and each time before it changed it was said it was spot on.

[@kernow343]

People who believe in Genesis literally like this are extremely deluded. The standard yec arguments about assumptions with radiometric dating etc don't hold water given that different methods corroborate . Funny how they skip past their own massive assumptions based purely on faith that firstly their god actually exists and secondly that the Bible is inerrant and six days is God's word and not just the musings of whoever wrote it.

[@TheSnoopi8]

Deluded how? Name some legit assumptions. Maybe i can help you with those or give me some strong argument against the bible which could point out that it isnt accurate.

[@kernow343]

@@TheSnoopi8 I stated the assumptions in my post. Of course the Bible isn't accurate in a literal sense. For example no sane adult can take the noahs ark story as anything but a myth.

[@othnielpyngrope2908]

You were the inspiration for a sermon I gave. As a Christian we need to understand Genesis as we understand John 3:16. As in Mathew 5:12 we are to be the salt... How are we to explain the good news to the world when they don't understand the bad news (the fall of man). You also inspired me to study science more indebtly.

[@newcreationinchrist1423]

God bless you CMI 🙏🙏🙏✝️ We know that God's word is true and we also know Genesis 1 was written historically. Not metaphorically. Jesus also took the OT as literal. No reason for us to do any different today.

[@ianevans2917]

'Jesus also took the OT as literal. No reason for us to do any different today'. Really? Evidence please.

[@stevepierce6467]

I like your choice of words: "no reason" to do any differently today. Those of us who choose to use our ability to reason have found good reasons to do differently. One reason, our explanations for natural phenomena actually explain. Another reason, our findings are backed up by tangible observable and verifiable evidence.

[@razark9]

''We know that God's word is true'' No. You believe without evidence and AGAINST the evidence. In other words, you started with a conclusion that must be true no matter what while denying science.

[@stevepierce6467]

@@razark9 Hurray!

[@LaOrajPantalonoj]

No, its a copy of real Summer texts 😂

[@derrickburry1788]

The young earth argument makes so much more sense to me. I have abandoned all old earth and evolution theories. I accept the Biblical account to be accurate and true.

[@travisshaffer552]

6000 years is still very old. How is 6000 years considered young.

[@joelcarter2535]

@travisshaffer552 well it's way younger than the accepted view of our worlds history.

[@derrickburry1788]

@@travisshaffer552 When you compare billions of years as proposed by mainstream scientists, 6000 years is quite young. The billions of years paradigm is necessary for their fake evolution theory.

[@jongoff7829]

It is a mistake to treat the bible like a scientific text. It's not.

[@nightrider963]

Also in the whole picture the 1000 yr Millennium reign of Christ ruling the Earth from his throne in Jerusalem brings the whole of the ages to a fulfillment at 7000yrs. Then the new heavens and new earth to last for all of eternity.

[@josebravo834]

The universe is under no obligation to make sense to humans.

[@thomast626]

That is one of the best comments I've seen from anyone, particularly in regards to the discussion of Earth's origins. It goes perfectly with Proverbs 3:5-6. I'm not sure what to believe exactly when it comes to the age of the Earth, but I do believe one thing for sure - that our Father in Heaven created it - whether as a young Earth or as an event millions of years ago with evolution unfolding as a result... I believe without doubt that it was done by God in the manner in which He intended with His infinite wisdom, regardless of what we mere mortals think is the case. Afterall, we humans don't have the best track record when it comes to getting things right. We should have some humility as a result. So thank God for His grace and mercy! ✝

[@black-cross]

yes He is. He put me here

[@jacob.tudragens]

​@thomast626 Forgive me, but you seem to accept the 'possibility' of evolution. God said, specifically, how He did it. Evolution declares God to be a liar.

[@abelincoln.2064]

@@thomast626 The Bible clearly says ... follow & obey God not Man ... and the Universe as created over ... 4 x 24 hr days ....5994 years ago, before an ALL KNOWING God created the Sun & Solar system and put Earth into its orbit creating the day & night, morning & evening, and year. The Universe is less than 6000 years old. And if you actually understood the scientific method you would have easily figured out the evidence of Creation.

[@gregdavis4857]

You can’t give human characteristics to an inanimate object. The “universe” can’t have “obligations “.

[@theshawnmccown]

These people who say "Why does it matter?" are two types of people. One type, are those who struggle with science and want an excuse to not educate themselves. The other type are those who have idolitry in their heart. They want to be accepted by the world and the secular science community and don't want to put God's Word above man's. I had one guy tell me that if believing in Christ required him to believe in the Genesis account of 6 literal days, then he would not be a Christian because the Bible is then wrong. His way of believing in Christ was that the Bible didn't violate his belief in an old earth. So, his belief in secular science is above his belief in Christ and the Word of God. That's idolatry. But, these people don't admit they have idolatry in their hearts or that they have trouble following scientific concepts, so they pridefully dismiss the ministry of creation research. There are many who are following God's calling on their life to show how the world around us backs the Bible, but these types attack or arrogantly dismiss these callings. And MANY of the people I know who had fallen away from Christ used science as one of the excuses.

[@riverbank2193]

One of the dangers of holding onto ancient beliefs is that when they are shown to be incorrect, that throws your faith into question. Many Christians accept the Earth is old and that life changed over time and they believe that God is in charge of all of that. Many Christians have accepted that the Earth is not 6000 years old. You can believe in modern science and still believe in God. Science does not attack religion. It just reveals the truth of how the world works. Galileo was thrown in prison and forced to recant his scientific discoveries because the church felt threatened. Science is not idolatry. It's an open-minded acceptance of the truth, and a realization that ancient texts are to be taken for the lessons they are teaching but not necessarily to be taken literally. If religion accepts science then you will see fewer people leaving religion. If it's a choice between reality or mythology, you're going to be losing believers. Probably better to accept scientific knowledge as understanding the truth of God's universe rather than rejecting data and evidence. If you're going to be like the people who forced Galileo to recant his discovery because you feel threatened, you're going to wind up losing believers.

[@riverbank2193]

On April 12, 1633, chief inquisitor Father Vincenzo Maculani da Firenzuola, appointed by Pope Urban VIII, begins the inquisition of physicist and astronomer Galileo Galilei. Galileo was ordered to turn himself in to the Holy Office to begin trial for holding the belief that the Earth revolves around the sun, which was deemed heretical by the Catholic Church. Standard practice demanded that the accused be imprisoned and secluded during the trial. This was the second time that Galileo was in the hot seat for refusing to accept Church orthodoxy that the Earth was the immovable center of the universe: In 1616, he had been forbidden from holding or defending his beliefs. In the 1633 interrogation, Galileo denied that he “held” belief in the Copernican view but continued to write about the issue and evidence as a means of “discussion” rather than belief. The Church had decided the idea that the sun moved around the Earth was an absolute fact of scripture that could not be disputed, despite the fact that scientists had known for centuries that the Earth was not the center of the universe. This time, Galileo’s technical argument didn’t win the day. On June 22, 1633, the Church handed down the following order: “We pronounce, judge, and declare, that you, the said Galileo… have rendered yourself vehemently suspected by this Holy Office of heresy, that is, of having believed and held the doctrine (which is false and contrary to the Holy and Divine Scriptures) that the sun is the center of the world, and that it does not move from east to west, and that the earth does move, and is not the center of the world.” Along with the order came the following penalty: “We order that by a public edict the book of Dialogues of Galileo Galilei be prohibited, and We condemn thee to the prison of this Holy Office during Our will and pleasure; and as a salutary penance We enjoin on thee that for the space of three years thou shalt recite once a week the Seven Penitential Psalms.” Galileo agreed not to teach the heresy anymore and spent the rest of his life under house arrest. It took more than 300 years for the Church to admit that Galileo was right and to clear his name of heresy.

[@Yamyatos]

As someone who went through the pain of aquiring a masters degree, i can proudly claim that i do not have trouble following scientific concepts. As such i know that a young earth is simply impossible. Young earth creationism is absolutely on the same level as people claiming the earth is flat. Both parties managed to convince themselves that all the evidence that doesnt support their opinion must be wrong, and jump at every little crum they think is evidence for their case. In reality, both are delusional.

[@riverbank2193]

@@Yamyatos the one (fake) ace they have up their sleeve is relying on miracles (magic). Anything at all is possible if you give credence to miracles.

[@TheMMSpirit]

I don't believe in 6 literal days, who are you to say I'm not a Christian? How do we know that a day to us is the same as a day to the Lord? Doesn't it say that a day to us is like a thousand to the Lord in scripture? How do we know that eons didn't pass before each stage *day* of creation? Why is it that 6th day man was created before Adam, and differently like the animals? How long was it after the 6th day when Adam was created?

[@billm5555]

Someone said "There is starlight coming from billions of light years away. Some galaxies we still see star light from don't exist anymore. That proves that the universe is billions of years old." But if the universe expanded from a single point, whether that starting point was God or the Big Bang, it stands to reason that the light from those objects also started from that same point. So even if those objects are millions of lightyears away now, when they were created they were much closer. Perhaps very close. So even if those stars are only a few thousand years old we would see them today

[@LyndenMcconnell]

A Quantum Physist freind 20 years ago told me the earth couldn't be older than 44,000 years old in his groups opinion after extensive studies.

[@scmacsart]

It matters when unsaved people are seeking answers.

[@1969cmp]

As an ex-atheist, I 100% agree. "God, if you are there, I need to know. I need to know what is true" I said as a teen and in my early 20s at least on three separate occasions. In 1993 a friend tried to give the Gospel and he hit a wall. That wall came down we he shared with me a VHS on Mount Saint Helens, Evidence for Catastrophe. The ball was rolling toward a radical transformation.

[@88Padilla]

People aren't saved just because they're Christians and believe the Bible wholly and unquestionably.

[@riverbank2193]

Science is entirely neutral when it comes to religion. It doesn't make decisions based on religion. It makes decisions based on facts and evidence. It has no preconceived notions. It follows the evidence where it leads. Religion has a preconceived notion. It only except evidence that it approves of and disregards evidence that it disapproves of. You will note that the top experts in their field, and many branches of science, for many different religions, can agree on the evidence. The only people who disagree or people who hold a fundamentalist religious view and they feel their view is threatened. Religion and science or two different things. Scientific discovery should not be biased by religious beliefs.

[@djsarg7451]

Yes, this is the problem with YEC. Hebrews 4:9-10 is clear. Have you entered into the 7th day as the Bible asks you to? In Genesis 2:4. The entire time span of God’s creative activity is called a “day”. So yes, Genesis tells us that the word day in Genesis is long time span. The events that happen on day 6 can not happen in 24 hours, too many events, must be a long time span.

[@alantasman8273]

@@djsarg7451 Exodus 20:11 For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it. God did not rest for millions or billions of years on day seven as an example to man to rest one day out of seven. The six days of creation had a morning and evening. Adam was made on day six and sometime later he sinned and death entered the world. There was no death before Adam The Bible clearly provides the genealogy of Adam to Jesus the Christ. Based on this timeline in scriptures the Universe and all therein was created only about 6,000 years ago.

[@BCFalls1]

I just saw the top of a very tall Mountain in BC and the ridge line was so narrow it was skinnier than a balance beam with a shear drop off on both sides near vertical, as soon as I saw it I thought, how can this not be warn down? I would say all pegmatite veins and mountains are the same age as my trees, 4200 yrs +/- 100 yrs

[@carlt8188]

I'm sure you've heard of the late Chuck Missler. He is a believer and asked his audience he was speaking to how many believed in a young universe and who believed in an old universe. The audience was mixed in their opinion. Chuck then said, "What if I told you it was both?"

[@BlueLake7]

But not even the strongest telescope looking out into the farthest reaches of the universe hold up the idea of an old universe. Even non creationist are unable to find evidence of an old universe.

[@valleyscharping]

So glad you did this follow up!!!

[@1969cmp]

Gee it was good, very good.

[@mikko1360]

What he says about the sendimentation rate and how fossils are formed, it's really impossible when you think about it for that creature to have not be preserved or killed rapidly. Because like he says we have to then believe that there was a huge amount of time when this creature was laying on open ground with nothing, literally nothing happening at the same time. I can tell you from experience that other animals will scavenge within minutes of a creature laying on the open forest floor, and certainly not lasting more than a day without something having a go at it. I find it incredulous that a dinosaur would sit there for 500 million years at a sedimentation rate of 0.04mm per year, theres just no way it wouldnt have been eaten by what we can imagine wouldve been plenty of opportunistic scavengers, probably more than there are today.

[@boomstand2872]

Imagine a chocolate cake sitting on the staff room table... how long would any remains survive before scavengers fully dealt with it? Not a million years, that's for sure.

[@DeVoN-eu6go]

@@boomstand2872 😂

[@bryancollier704]

Which would explain why some remains are preserved and others are not. The ones that last are covered quickly. An example would be as from a volcanic eruption, or sinking into a tar pit. What animal is going into the tar pit to eat? The answer is none.

[@repentant2]

Thank you very, very much guys for making this video! Extremely encouraging. God bless you all.

[@PTHastings]

🎯 Key points for quick navigation: 00:00 *🌍 Earth's Age Determination* - Science is about observation and repeatable experiments. - When making pronouncements about the past, it is essential to consider the inability to observe the past directly. - Our beliefs influence how we interpret evidence, especially when it comes to historical matters. 01:27 *🔬 Scientific Evidence Interpretation* - Scientific evidence is interpreted in alignment with preexisting beliefs. - Science is limited in illuminating historical events due to its focus on observable, repeatable processes. - Assumptions and beliefs play a crucial role in interpreting the evidence presented. 05:15 *📜 Role of History in Understanding the Past* - History often trumps science when it comes to addressing historical matters. - Different belief systems and worldviews influence how individuals interpret scientific data. - Understanding the history one believes in is critical when determining the age of something. 21:49 *🧭 Death and suffering as a result of rebellion against God* - Death and suffering came from our rebellion against God, not from Him. - God's love is shown through sending Jesus to pay the price for sin and suffering. - Belief in a young Earth aligns with the hope for a new heaven and Earth without sin and death. 26:13 *🌍 Challenges to the old age of the Earth* - Sedimentary layers and fossils do not align with the claimed vast periods of evolutionary time. - Rapid sedimentation and fossilization contradict the slow processes of evolutionary timelines. - Lack of evidence for elapsed time between layers supports rapid formation of sedimentary rocks. 33:40 *🕰 Issues with radiometric dating methods* - Potassium-argon dating inaccuracies due to argon trapping in rocks skew results. - Excess argon complicates accurate dating and calls the whole process into question. - Cross-checking radiometric dates with other evidence is essential due to errors and assumptions. 43:59 *🦕 Soft tissue and DNA challenges* - Soft tissue preservation challenges the idea of millions of years - DNA decay analysis shows it doesn't support ancient age claims - Recent burial in flood event likely explains soft tissue findings 47:20 *🧬 Carbon 14 in dinosaur bones* - Carbon 14 in dinosaur bones contradicts millions of years timeline - Scientific journal states radiocarbon dating in bones is inaccurate - Efforts to defend against challenges to evolutionary theory 49:15 *✨ Evidence supporting biblical creation* - Looking at the world through biblical eyes reveals design and purpose - Clear evidence of a creator in the world around us - Understanding the world through the Bible enhances the gospel message Made with HARPA AI

[@spitfirered]

I Believe Also That The Earth Is Not That Old And Their Is More History To Discover, The Powers Have Deterred Discovery And claimed It Themselves!

[@buckjones4901]

They will not and can not allow old earth to die, because it also ends the evolution fairy tale and they then left with creation and God. Some might say aliens seeding life, without the sense enough to ask how the aliens came to be.

[@88Padilla]

​@@buckjones4901the main point of that would be that the God of the Bible doesn't exist. Christians don't have a monopoly on God.

[@MrLogo73]

The measured data show, that the earth is at least 4.4 B years old.

[@globalcoupledances]

Wilde, S. A.; Valley, J. W.; Peck, W. H.; Graham C. M. (2001-01-11). "Evidence from detrital zircons for the existence of continental crust and oceans on the Earth 4.4 Gyr ago". Nature. 409 (6817): 175-178. Wyche, S.; Nelson, D. R.; Riganti, A. (2004). "4350-3130 Ma detrital zircons in the Southern Cross Granite-Greenstone Terrane, Western Australia: implications for the early evolution of the Yilgarn Craton". Australian Journal of Earth Sciences. 51 (1): 31-45.

[@abelincoln.2064]

The scientific Method (Function) developed mostly by Christians( intelligence) relies on fixed laws of Nature (functions) to explain natural phenomena (Functions) and is simply: 1. Observe 2. Hypothesis 3. Test & predict 4 Conclude Evolution, Big Bang fail the scientific Method. However Universal Functions from Machine Analogies ... easily passes the scientific Method.

[@timothym7608]

Well, when God created Adam, he wasn't a baby. He was fully grown. So, to us, the Earth is billions of years old, but God created it instantly and made it ready for our use. People need to stop putting limits on what God can do.

[@creationministriesintl]

You may be interested to read our article: → God created with functional maturity, not ‘appearance of age’ - creation.com/is-apparent-age-biblical

[@user-gx2yy1df6f]

What an interesting point , this way the earth can be both 6,000 years old and billions of years old. in other words, God made a new thing but He made it out of billions year old material.

[@knightclan4]

Not putting limits on God with the exception that He cannot lie. He said he flooded the earth recently and according to scripture, He created make and female in the beginning. So, it really does make a difference in order to not have blind Faith.

[@alancoates8955]

No sensible person believes the Adam and Eve story. You can believe that that God made incest OK but the rest of the world find it abhorrent

[@scottb4579]

@@user-gx2yy1df6f No, He didn't. He created all things within 6 days a little over 6000 years ago. God Himself states this clearly in Exodus 20:11. And again in Exodus 31:17. He makes clear even everything in Heaven was made in the 6 days. The beginning in Gen 1 is the beginning of all things. If there was material billions of years old, there would have to be another beginning to account for it, and thus God would have spoken in error in Gen 1:1; "In the beginning.......

[@cmaranatha9890]

Yes!!! We go home soon!!! I knew we were close to the Rapture and Tribulation, but learning about the 6000-year plan last year, and knowing the earth is so close to its 6000th year, adds a huge cherry on top!!!

[@1969cmp]

Mark is an absolute gem. 💎 Legend.

[@netzftbl]

If the daughter product was dated it would just be younger than the parent isotope so the earth could be even older further disproving a young earth. 4:45 also, the energy industry actually relies on radiometric dating to locate where gas and oil is trapped underground by creating a “basin model”. If radiometric dating was inaccurate the energy supple would crumble.

[@TheAaronYost]

Both things you said are not true. Radiometric dating, at best, can give you and upper limit for the age of a sample. Second, oil companies aren't dating rock samples to find oil. They are surveying the surface and subsurface looking for specific geologic features and patterns that are common where oil is found. Then they literally drill and look. Oil exploration is a very here and now discipline.

[@netzftbl]

@@TheAaronYostno, they also use age of rocks to help know where they are trapped

[@TheAaronYost]

@@netzftbl They do not date rocks in order to find oil.

[@bryancollier704]

@TheAaronYost but they most definitely do lol.. "....microscopically examine drill debris to determine if they are in the target formation , typically coral/marine shells. This is not done for all wells but for exploratory and step-out wells ( expanding a field). Primary interests are gas/oil ratio, hydrocarbon/water ratio, sulfur level. Age is only of interest as it gives information of the other properties."

[@TheAaronYost]

@@bryancollier704 Actually there's a simpler way to dismantle the stupidity of this argument that belief in a young earth means you can't find fossil fuels. Geologic age estimates are based on assumptions about the past and conclusions drawn from observable data. As long as you make consistent assumptions and draw consistent conclusions the actual age of the earth is completely irrelevant. If I consistently make the same assumptions and consistently draw the same conclusions based on the data, I will consistently find oil in the same places another person, making different, but consistent, assumptions and conclusions will, even if one of us is using incorrect assumptions and drawing incorrect conclusions.

[@David-lq4tq]

Take the Bible literally. If you claim to be a Christian you MUST believe the Word of Yahuah. AIG picks and chooses what they believe from the Bible. Let Yahuah be true and every man a liar, that includes every scientist. I do appreciate this man’s literal age of the earth. Kudos for the approach to this topic.

[@melissasw64]

I have a question. What is AIG? I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you. I don't have an opinion about the age of the earth. I don't pick and choose what I believe but I do try to learn about the type of literature I am reading, what the author intended to communicate, and any linguistic nuances that could alter my understanding.

[@marciaadamson7032]

To all my brothers and sisters in CHRIST! Just remember EVERY KNEE WILL BEND,AND EVERY HEAD WILL BOW ✝️🙏 There will always be deniers until HE COMES AGAIN,AND WHEN HE DOES THEY WILL KNOW THEY ARE FINISHED!!!

[@chrismartino3519]

Ions decay from atoms of rocks and other sediments. This rate of decay can be measured using mathematics. These measurements have reached over 4.5 billion years. These are facts.

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

Hi there! See this article here: creation.com/how-carbon-dating-works

[@chrismartino3519]

@@SheridanFalkenberry yeah that is total crap

[@andrewclema]

Great article

[@robando2922]

​@chrismartino3519 Yeah, creationist scientist is an oximoron because to be a scientist and try to prove God, then you must first denounce him. You can't assume a conclusion before you've even started. Now I can believe in God and know (to an extent) that the universe is bliions of years old. God exists outside of time and space so how's he gonna explain billions of years and complex chemical processes to people who haven't even developed toilet paper yet 😅

[@TickedOffPriest]

Addressing those who mock The Word is one of my favorite pasttimes.

[@EricGray-zr2es]

The Earth is old enough to buy beer. Nuff said

[@Yamyatos]

But it could have been created yesterday.

[@EricGray-zr2es]

@@Yamyatos along with u and I

[@Yamyatos]

@@EricGray-zr2es Exactly! But unless we include the "you wouldnt be able to tell the difference" magic-like arguments.. it's old.

[@van-usa3030]

Fascinating ❤ thank you!!

[@henryschmit3340]

Very good.

[@knightclan4]

Dr Harwood speaks so clearly and down to earth. I will definitely download this video and share it with my skeptical friends

[@derekcrook3723]

after what we just went thru I wouldnt waste my time on 80 % of them .

[@Yamyatos]

Any friend willing to watch 2 hours of this nonsense is a true friend.. make sure you treat them well.

[@SkepticalGodlessAussieGlober]

And when you do, don't be surprised when they laugh at you for being so ignorant and easily fooled by pseudoscience, misrepresentations, lies...just the typical YEC nonsense.

[@jeannemaniscalco2682]

Dr. Harwood pointing out the difference between the scientific method (examination/evaluation of repeatable processes) and history (events that occurred in the past) makes. Also a person’s reference point. I agree in the infallibility of God’s word, hence my world view and reference points are bound to God’s word. Thank you Dr. Harwood.

[@JEREMIAH53031]

As a Christian, I think this is the absolutely worst reasoning I've heard to try to explain the young earth creationist view.

[@bobparsonsartist564]

@@JEREMIAH53031 I'd be interested, since you stated this is the worst, then what have seen that is better?

[@user-sy4ov7tb3q]

How would you explain the young earth creationist view?

[@derekcrook3723]

Makes a whole lot more sense than what they taught us in school ! Problem is they will not present an opposing view . They want everyone dumbed down !

[@boxelder9167]

The dumbing down was intentional. I got a degree in education and I was one of the few people who would ask questions. I went down the rabbit hole of the history of education and learned that there was a few wealthy people who had a lot to gain by making it the way it is today.

[@MrLogo73]

Arguments from ignorance make sense to you?

[@derekcrook3723]

@@MrLogo73 typical liberal mindset ..attack the person and bring nothing to debate .

[@boxelder9167]

@@MrLogo73 - Here’s a fun little fact. You can have an illogical argument about something that is still true even if it’s not a good argument. It’s just not good evidence for the truth claim but it doesn’t make the truth claim itself less true.

[@MrLogo73]

@@boxelder9167 You're right about the illogical argument. But the one, who makes the claim, has to demonstrate, that it's true. He can not just assert, that it is. Even more so, the original comment on top wrote: "Problem is they will not present an opposing view . They want everyone dumbed down .." That is a conspiracy. And creationism, is not an opposing view. It's a conspiracy, nothing more.

[@rodneil4734]

My uncle is a devout Christian a professor and a worldwide expert in nuclear fission track dating. He says it’s impossible for the world to be 6000 years old. The evidence against is overwhelming.

[@MrShnazer]

Your uncle is entitled to his opinion ❤️

[@eugenec2851]

Amen.

[@stevenrobinsonpictures]

He's right. About one thing anyway. (Impossible for the world to be 6,000 years old).

[@stevepierce6467]

@@MrShnazer Fortunately, with solid science, it is not simply an opinion but established fact.

[@TheRancherAndTheWife]

All wisdom only comes from the bible, we can have expertise in extrabiblical matters and still be a fool. To be clear, I'm not at all calling your uncle a fool, just stating plainly that one's accolades outside of biblical truth are meaningless and not a marker of wisdom at all.

[@albert3504]

Praise GOD for what CMI is doing. Thank God for leading us through Answers in Genesis and then through CMI, you set our faith on a firm foundation that cannot be moved. We study or record history because they cannot be repeated. In the same way the Bible give us an accurate history of HIS Story for our faith. If people want to talk about Long age, they will find it when Jesus Christ come again and HE set up HIS eternal age

[@JayZoop]

In science, there are assumptions, and science invites to be questioned and retested to come up with consistency.

[@bensfixitpage341]

I'm fascinated how willing ignorant people are when truth crushes evolution.

[@t_m-z5g]

What truth?

[@stevenwhite8937]

Not all that say to me in that day…..Lord, Lord….. If you don’t believe what the Bible says you don’t believe God….

[@adelinomorte7421]

***MY GOD IS NOT THE BIBLE, THE BIBLE IS WHAT PEOPLE WHO DO NOT BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION WROTE ABOUT GOD. GOD TRANSCENDS EVERYTHING WE BELIEVE. If you know how to read the Bible from genesis to revelations, and understand it, you will find the evolution of the concept human kind had about God.***

[@stevenwhite8937]

@@adelinomorte7421 if you believe in evolution then best of luck with your god materialism…. Because you sure don’t believe in God if you believe in evolution….

[@Skovyd]

​@@stevenwhite8937 people do actually exist who believe in God and accept evolutionary theory. Thus, your statement is demonstrably false.

[@stevenwhite8937]

@@Skovyd They don’t believe God in the least. The Bible says sin started with Adam and death through sin. Yet if evolution is true then death existed millions of years before Adam. Jesus came to redeem people of the curse brought upon by Adam, so they make Jesus irrelevant without even realizing they do so. Besides, it’s the worst theory in existence with exactly zero evidence supporting it….

[@boeraniatv]

@@Skovyd Evolutionists believe that God was not the founder of the earth, instead it was a natural phenomenon, beginning with inorganic molecules evolving into today's modern person. Evolutionists also believe that modern human evolved from an ancient form of Primate, and that primate evolved from single cell organisms called Eucaryotes. Evolution is thus 100% contradictory to the existence of a God. Unless you are a Pantheist who believe that the Universe itself is God.

[@andrewsyd]

How old did the earth appear to be when God created it? I assume Adam looked a lot older than 0 seconds old when his life began. In other words, God can create things that have characteristics which make them appear to be older than they actually are.

[@jacob.tudragens]

He created trees bearing fruit, so... Adam was created as a "fully grown" man, Eve, as a "fully grown" woman! So yeah, you're right. Edit: Picture in your mind a freshly landscaped yard. Makes the yard look 'brand new', doesn't it? So, apparent age is relative.

[@robertmorrison107]

Do you believe in maaagic... could write a song about that.

[@WhiteHorsePilot]

If you read the beginning of the Bible it only takes a few verses before God says, Let there be light, on day one. You'll notice the Earth is already there, so was water. Before light.

[@JuergenBertram-ps7sy]

As usual, brilliant response, Dr Mark Harwood ! Thank You so much !😊

[@jefftolsdorf5653]

Evolution did not disprove God it's just trying to find out how he did it

[@jeffrosen8237]

To beleve in evolution over creation is to say God is not all powerful and basically you take God completely out of the picture. Satan didn't cause Adam and eve to comit some horrible act, he simply got the to question Gods word. God is all powerful and he created us in his image. Thank you for doing these videos.

[@t_m-z5g]

We take god out of the picture because he doesn't exist

[@mighty4371]

Satan is the morally virtuous character in the Christian story and god is the maniac. Satan never lied in the bible and was always honest. God in the bible lies, order mass murder, committs mass murder and condones slavery. Have you ever considered that history (in this case the bible) is written by the victors and that the character you call god is actually the evil victor and that satan is the ally of mankind?

[@mynameisnotyours888]

Yall are the front lines…🙏🏻 wer with u in prayer

[@budekins542]

It's all about mindset rather than observational facts.

[@julesverne2509]

one is used to reinforce the other

[@glenngraham8513]

I like to ask, 'Which is older, evolution or the big bang'? Usually, the answer is the big bang, but the correct answer is evolution as it began in 1859 A.D., whereas the Big Bang exploded on to the scene in 1931 A.D..

[@miyojewoltsnasonth2159]

What is the point you are trying to make as to whether evolution or the big bang is older? *Reply to:* _"I like to ask, 'Which is older, evolution or the big bang'? Usually, the answer is the big bang, but the correct answer is evolution as it began in 1859 A.D., whereas the Big Bang exploded on to the scene in 1931 A.D.."_

[@Varunic219]

@@miyojewoltsnasonth2159 that it was an idea before existing in the minds of men, whether it be true, or not. The idea had to come first to us.

[@glenngraham8513]

@@miyojewoltsnasonth2159 I find it somewhat amusing that there are people alive on the earth today that are older than the big bang. Also somewhat amusing is that God declares the end from the beginning, whereas man declares the beginning from the end. Indeed, His ways are not our ways and our ways are not His ways. It is possible to show that the big bang theory itself is fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. And thanks for the question, I had to spend time thinking about it.

[@miyojewoltsnasonth2159]

*@glenngraham8513* Thank you for your reply, and I appreciate you took time to think about it. Much appreciated. If you believe evolution began in 1859 AD and the Big Bang began in 1931 AD, do you also believe gravity began in 1687 AD when Newton wrote about it in his _Principia?_ If gravity only began in 1687, why did the Ancient Romans need to use nails to hang Jesus Christ on the cross? Or did gravity exist when Jesus Christ was hung on the cross, even if the Ancient Romans didn't have a word for gravity? *Reply to:* _"I find it somewhat amusing that there are people alive on the earth today that are older than the big bang. Also somewhat amusing is that God declares the end from the beginning, whereas man declares the beginning from the end. Indeed, His ways are not our ways and our ways are not His ways. It is possible to show that the big bang theory itself is fulfillment of Biblical prophecy. And thanks for the question, I had to spend time thinking about it."_

[@miyojewoltsnasonth2159]

*@glenngraham8513* Additionally, I am quite curious which prophet prophesied about the "big bang theory itself"? Do you have the biblical book and verse where this prophecy was made? Thank you in advance. *Reply to:* _"It is possible to show that the big bang theory itself is fulfillment of Biblical prophecy."_

[@lylez00]

There is star light coming from billions of light years away. Some of the galaxies we still see star light from don't even exist anymore. That proves that the universe is billions of years old.

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

Please see this article here! creation.com/distant-starlight-and-the-biblical-timeframe

[@tonesmith909]

Shhh, don’t tell them that, it questions what they “know” for a fact.

[@lylez00]

@@SheridanFalkenberry I read it. It throws around vague concepts and a few buzz words from physics, but doesn't really answer the question. The center of the Milky Way has a black hole around which stars otbit in a very peculiar way consistent with the way predicted by general relativity. If God fabricated this light and directed it at us, then he falsified a detailed historical record and thus, is guilty of lying. There's just no wiggling out of this. The Bible is a collection of lies, just like all of the other religions. We evolved from ape-like creatures, and when we die, we're going to stay dead. It sucks, but that's just the way it is.

[@whitney9844]

That's how far it is away from us not the starting point.

[@lylez00]

@@whitney9844 It was the starting point of the light when it was emitted billions of years ago. Thus, the universe is vastly older than 6000 years, thus, the Bible is dead wrong.

[@danielklassen1513]

I would like to see more videos responding to critics. Great idea.

[@billycutiep]

Life requires creation. How would children survive without adults, and how would adults exist without childhood? The first of every life form on earth had to come into existence fully formed and fully mature.

[@richardgregory3684]

_How would children survive without adults_ Many species take no care of their offspring at all. One of th emost common forms of life on earth has no childhood at all, bacteria reproduce by division, so one adlt just becomes two.

[@user-ce8ht2pc8t]

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE debate an old earth evolutionary geologist or paleontologist on the trustworthiness of radiometric dating. Your arguments sound powerful when unchallenged, but they could be devastating if they stand up against a critic.

[@MANIPULATSIOON]

there is evolutionist who turned to young earth theory by their observations and scientific work turned based on that to belive that there is The God. Everything is assumptions what carbon dating is doing. Labs have done fossils within days with molecular picture within 100% similarity.

[@all_bets_on_Ganesh]

I would tune in to that.

[@scorpian3]

A 3rd grader would laugh at this guy

[@vikingskuld]

Why don't you look into Ukrainian labs z-pinch experiments? They did that on SFT and it's really interesting. 1st when the use plasma and make heavy radioactive isotopes the parent daughter ratios fall out like we see around us today. It is one of the better bits of evidence against radiometric dating. There are others who did comparisons of radiometric dating and found out no they don't always agree. That testing heavier elements gives you far older ages and the lighter ones give you far younger ages. Take all that and compare it to soft tissue in fossils? They have had well over 200 finds now in supposed strata that dated from 65 million to 500 million years old. Yet there have been so many tests in forensics showing those protiens can't last a million years. Yet they will swear up and down some Dino from this strata is dated at over 65 million years. Yet soft tissue absolutely disproves that and puts a cap on of less the 10k years. Ultimately there is all the proof you need out there to prove radiometric dating is flawed. You just have to look. The guys getting paid to date that rock are not going to tell you there may just be a problem with there results.. lol good luck

[@alancoates8955]

They won't do it as they run away scared from real scientists

[@omnivore2220]

Yeah, if Darwin's model of macro evolution is correct, then it not only negates the book of Genesis, but it guts the very plan of salvation. Romans 5 suddenly becomes gibberish, specifically, and much of the Scriptures must then be reinterpreted or striken out altogether. If by one man sin did NOT enter the world, nor death by sin, then how does one man, Jesus, take our sin away and save us from it? The beautiful logic of it all is just trashed, and I believe that such was indeed the intent behind those who, before Darwin, began promoting the idea of billions of years and of macro-evolution.

[@danjackson2987]

Bingo!!!!!

[@riverbank2193]

Science is entirely neutral when it comes to religion. It doesn't make decisions based on religion. It makes decisions based on facts and evidence. It has no preconceived notions. It follows the evidence where it leads. Religion has a preconceived notion. It only except evidence that it approves of and disregards evidence that it disapproves of. You will note that the top experts in their field, and many branches of science, for many different religions, can agree on the evidence. The only people who disagree or people who hold a fundamentalist religious view and they feel their view is threatened. Religion and science or two different things. Scientific discovery should not be biased by religious beliefs.

[@eviljeanyis]

The thing many people miss about their understanding of creation is that many parts of the Bible aren't literal. In Genesis every time it says "a day" it could be a day or it could have been a hundred thousand years. We don't really know for sure.

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

Hi there! Please see this article here: creation.com/yom-not-an-eon

[@jackripper5270]

Yom (day) is the word used in Genesis... Every other time the word yom is used in Bible it's a literal 24 hr. Day... So there's that.

[@moodlemech]

What a great interview Mark!

[@lawrencehalpin6611]

How old was Adam when he was created? He was 0 years old. How old did Adam look? Probably about 30 or 40 years old. How old was the universe when God created it. It was zero years old. How old did the universe look when it was created? It was as old as God needed it to look to function.

[@FirstnameLastname-cx6go]

Ah, the timeless conundrum of divine age manipulation. It's a fascinating concept that requires some impressive mental gymnastics to reconcile with scientific realities. So, if I understand correctly, Adam was created as a full-grown adult but with zero years of existence under his belt, and the universe was created with the appearance of age but with a birth certificate that reads "Day 1." It's like the ultimate cosmic magic trick, where God says, "Let there be light... and a fully formed universe with all the bells and whistles!" But hey, who needs consistent laws of nature and observable phenomena when you've got divine intervention? I guess when you're the author of reality, you get to bend the rules however you see fit. Just remember, when you start blurring the lines between appearance and reality, it can make for some interesting philosophical debates, if nothing else.

[@lawrencehalpin6611]

@@FirstnameLastname-cx6go If you believe the first line in the bible you will have no problem with the rest. God bless

[@FirstnameLastname-cx6go]

@@lawrencehalpin6611 Why would I believe the first line in the Bible?

[@lawrencehalpin6611]

@@FirstnameLastname-cx6go Because if I am wrong, not a problem. I have a better life. If you are wrong. Well that would not be good for you.

[@FirstnameLastname-cx6go]

@@lawrencehalpin6611 First of all, that has no bearing on whether or not you are right. Second, if some OTHER religion is wrong then "well that would not be good for you.", so that doesn't save you anyway. And finally, NO you do NOT have a better life. You have a lie that you have CHEAPENED by believing that all of this planet is just a place to wipe your feet before you go to your heaven, and people like me suffer for all eternity, and YOU BELIEVE I DESERVE IT. Right?

[@durrellhanna2724]

When God made Adam he was a grown man not a baby god made the earth the same way

[@Holy_hammer]

Yep.

[@mighty4371]

None of that ever happened. Prove it did.

[@guipe43]

Great discussion! Thank you for sharing!

[@domferraro6082]

Gobekli tepe completely destroys this whole argument. They just found it it's dateable to about 13,000 years ago and that's not in question

[@jackripper5270]

Sure it is (in question)....if they came to that conclusion by carbon 14 dating? Which is flawed (as stated in the video)

[@domferraro6082]

@@jackripper5270 okay so carbon-14 dating is flawed but a book written by men 2,000 years ago which has been bastardized and caught up and reshuffled to fit their narrative That's your solid proof

[@domferraro6082]

@@jackripper5270 who says it's flawed them can't believe a word they say

[@michaeldavis6607]

I became saved at 12 mostly due to my circumstances in early life. Mature Christians showing me Jesus love through their own love. I can’t relate to people who come to Christianity through old earth vs new earth. I suppose it’s up to former atheists who understand. I would add that ice never been around an atheist who displays that kind of love.

[@fcastellanos57]

It is a known fact that the elements of the periodic table took millions if not billions of years to be created. They were created in the stars, and the stars took millions of years to be formed so, to think the universe is only a few thousands of years old is totally out of the question. The Bible does not give any time frame for the creation of the universe, it only says, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”, from here on in Genesis, the attention is placed on the formation of the earth and the emergence of biological life, which took also billions of years.

[@thartwig26]

Billions of years is a heart and worldview issue.

[@Yamyatos]

@@thartwig26 If you have an issue with "reality" as a world view, or "caring about believing as many true things as possible and as few false things as possible", then sure it's an issue.

[@RoboJut]

KJV Genesis 1:5 , 1:8 , 1:13 , 1:19 , 1:23 , 1:31 , 2:2 .

[@Yamyatos]

@@RoboJut Harry potter is a book too! :)

[@RoboJut]

@@Yamyatos And?

[@judaspriestcod-m6259]

Doesn't the BIBLE say we'll be accountable for every idle word Meaning if we lie about GOD'S creation we lie to unbelievers

[@Enigmatic_Nomad24]

I don't think us as mere humans have any idea how old the Earth actually is. All we can go based off of is "science" and what we have been taught. We have no idea the absolute truth about anything I think.

[@Readytoflyhome]

Except the truth is in the Bible

[@Enigmatic_Nomad24]

@@Readytoflyhome I get that and I'm a Christian. But I still ask questions. The Bible is thousands of years old and has been translated thousands of times so we don't ACTUALLY know how accurate today's Bible is. We won't know anything until we die. We don't actually know anything as mere humans

[@maxtaylor1026]

How long was Adam in the Garden before Eve was made? How long were they there before the fruit? Did there clock start ticking after they were cast out of the Garden?

[@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16]

A long time is not necessary when God made the universe ex nihilo (out of nothing). Everything was made for mankind to have dominion over and mankind appeared 6,000 yrs ago ...so bingo.

[@alancoates8955]

Actually the oldest human bones discovered were over 300000 years old. Discovered in Morocco.

[@alancoates8955]

@@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16 not by 294000 years though. 20% margin of error is allowed for. The earth is not young. Science has proven it time after time. The bible is not an accurate history of time no matter how often creationists try to change the data to suit their narrative

[@FirstnameLastname-cx6go]

You believe everything came from nothing?

[@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16]

@@FirstnameLastname-cx6go Just the flick of a finger for an almighty God.

[@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16]

Carbon radiometric dating is proven to be flawed. You won't hear that in the news but it's true.

[@user-nt6cs5lg6d]

Obviously the creation week was supernatural. It had to be for God to create everything that fast. Therefore science is never going to get it right. Only the bible explains what science cannot.

[@justthinking4628]

You are correct, but the presentation they gave could also be flawed. He's taking the 7 human days literally which is directly contradicting the Bible. 2 Peter chapter 3 verse 8 States Gods day is as a thousand years and a thousand years as a day. Taking this scripture literally would mean that at the end of creation, 7 thousand years would have already past. However this scripture only tells us that what man thinks is a long time is only a blink of the eye to God. It also guarantees us that we don't know what time period a day is to God. A thousand years, a billion years but definitely not 24 hours.

[@impossible98123]

​​@@justthinking4628The verse in 2nd Peter is obviously saying God is outside of time. Not comparing the days of creation. A common misunderstanding.

[@BornAgain223]

​@@justthinking4628also you misquoted that verse anyways. It says a day is LIKE a thousand years and a thousand years is LIKE a day to God.

[@BornAgain223]

2 Peter 3:8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.

[@BornAgain223]

​@@justthinking4628at least get the verse right if you are going to try and refute it.

[@JayZoop]

Back then, valcanos erupted all the time, just like Mt. St. Helens. That's why there are fossils.

[@reddas797]

1st Question - In Genesis 1:27 the bible talks about 6 day man . God said let us make man in our own image and let them be fruitful and multiply over the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and the fowl of the air and over every living thing that dwells in the earth . This was in Genesis 1 and in Genesis 2 God formed man as a different creation having a relationship with Adam and Eve in the garden. We're the people on the earth before Adam and Eve? 2nd Question - Adam and Eve had two sons Cain and Abel and Cain went into the land of Nod and he married and she conceived and bared Enoch and he built a city. We're the people on the earth apart from Adam and Eve that had been there all along 3rd Question - The word for day in Genesis 1 is the Hebrew word Yom which can also mean a period of time does that mean that the earth is older than 6000 years . God is not the author of confusion and I think it's logical that's it's a 24 hour day but there are a few in answered questions. Keep up the great work guys

[@jacobbringula571]

Carbon dating contradicts the actual measurements of time. God can be able to make a grown tree overnight ( see the stories of Jonah). Earth is not that billion years old.

[@007gracie]

I remember when they dated Mt St Helen’s as having erupted 2.3M years ago?! The models are obviously very wrong.

[@markwiggins6442]

Oh my gosh! This is SOOOO BAD. I don’t even know where to begin. This is why we loose so many young people after they begin to think for themselves. This is embarrassing as a Christian. This is so sad.

[@IronMatt]

You can trust God's word. I had to ask myself ,23 years ago, " if I believe Jesus turned water into wine, raised the dead,has power over the weather, the miracles of Moses in Exodus; why don't I just trust that God made everything just as He said He did, until dogmaticly proven otherwise?" Stepping out in faith and researching as much information as I could find on the topic ,my faith has grown exponentially. Believing in the biblical account doesn't hurt anyone, really. It may be personally embarrassing to be ridiculed by people for your beliefs, but isn't that what Jesus said is actually part of being Christian? I suggest checking out what the men in the bible believe. Jesus, Paul, Peter, Moses, for example, all refer to Genesis as history. God bless.

[@brianstacey2679]

Agreed. Especially when young people actually think that this represents the majority view among all Christians. It most certainly does not.

[@MulletDestructur]

4:53 the book of Genesis is A. Not a history book. And B. Not an eye witness account. 🤦🏼‍♂️

[@user-gx2yy1df6f]

I WANT the Earth to be old but i don't NEED it to be . What bothers me is this carbon dating thing , the scientist seem to be pretty adamant that it's accurate. is it ?

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

Hi there! See this article from Dr Carter at CMI: creation.com/how-carbon-dating-works

[@user-gx2yy1df6f]

@@SheridanFalkenberry thanks, i made a mistake in my comment, i meant to say i want the earth to be young, not that it matters , nothing will shake my faith in Christ !1

[@RedBird77]

These young Earthets are so embarrassing. Seeing dinosaurs inside the ark encounter had a lot of people laughing.. God gave us brains to think and reason and are commanded to do so

[@creationministriesintl]

You didn't say WHY you though the idea of dinosaurs on the Ark was so silly? What, specifically, do you think defies reason/logic? P.S. We have written MUCH on this over decades. Please use the search bar on creation.com to see if we've already answered your objections. Our dinos Q&A page is a good starting place: creation.com/dinosaurs

[@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16]

Also, nothing could die before the curse of the fall of mankind (bringing death).. and death is necessary for so called evolution. Bingo again.

[@88Padilla]

Death is not necessary for evolution. Change is, and change is the only constant in the universe. Everything changes form, grows old, dies, etc.

[@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16]

@88Padilla Things change and do not die, but living organisms die, and according to the theory of evolution, species change into other species through succeeding generations - requiring death.

[@88Padilla]

@@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16 no, they change in the process of living through enviromental change, not dying. Those changes only become apparent in later generations, but the change has already happened internally. The environment affects and changes our DNA.

[@MrLogo73]

​@@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16Species don't 'change into' other species. That would be transform-o-lution, not evolution. One group of organisms splits into two groups, which decrease in their ability to interbreed. Morphology is also not suddenly poofing into existence out of the blue. Already existing features are being reused for a different purpose and are being refined for that new use.

[@TrustinJesusChrist-John3.16]

@MrLogo73 I said that according to the theory of Evolution (which is a lie) species evolve into other species. It's called speciation, stated by scientists as "fact". There is only a certain degree of adaptation evident within any given species. Scientists won't accept that because they'd have to accept an intelligent Creator created the species to start with.

[@aku7598]

If you don't believe there are people living in the caves and hunter-gatherering and using stone tools, then the age of earth is just 10,000 years. Farming and animal domestication only started 10,000 years ago. According to Bibles, Adam and sons were farmers and shepherds. Thus, they existed around 10,000 years ago. Who made those stone tools and drawing in caves?

[@squaretrianglez]

Well after the tower of babel languages was scattered, people were scattered and migrated tribewise so they had to make do with crude tools and find shelter in caves as they wondered before reaching a place where they could settle and build civilization.

[@ryanclour8680]

I’ve been a Christian all my life and in the past year or so I’ve been extremely challenged on the young earth or old earth debate. I’ve always sided with young earth but lately I think my mind could be changing. People who claim that the Bible trumps all of the scientific evidence that the earth and universe are billions of years old don’t know the history of the Bible. I’d love to see an episode where you dive into the history of the Bible going all the way back to the very beginning of the Bible. I think the Bible we have today does not tell us the true past as it is doctored up over hundreds if not thousands of years. I’m still a Christian and will never subscribe to anything other than we got here by a creator but I’m starting to think there is a lot more we do not know that was taken from the Bible by certain groups in our history. Thus the KJV.

[@creationministriesintl]

We'd encourage you to actively seek answers to your questions. They are not new questions, and good answers are out there. Also, pick your sources with discernment (e.g. skeptics of Christianity and the Bible tend not to be the most balanced sources to ask about Christianity and the Bible), making sure to give a good hearing to trusted Christian apologists. We've written on the topic of the reliability of the Bible (e.g. here: creation.com/should-we-trust-the-bible ), but there are also many more extensive resources out there on how we got our Bible (e.g. creation.com/can-we-trust-the-gospels-williams ). One route of enquiry would be to start with Jesus (Did He really rise from the dead? What's the evidence? Is He who He said He is? Are the Gospel records that we've received reliable?), and then work out from there (e.g. what did Jesus and the New Testament authors believe about the Old Testament? creation.com/genesis-bible-authors-believed-it-to-be-history ). Another route is to start with nature (since Romans 1:20 assures us that creation alone is enough to leave people without excuse with regard to God's existence and his nature), and work outwards from there: Is there evidence that nature is the result of a super-intelligent, super-natural designer? Or can everything, after all, be explained by purely natural causes? (No! E.g., see creation.com/five-atheist-miracles ) We can supply a lot of help with this path of enquiry via our website, where there are thousands of articles (many of which are written by Ph.D. scientists) about how natural causes CANNOT account for all the physical evidence, and how the evidence is, instead, in excellent accord with what the Bible describes of nature and of Earth history (e.g. including abundant evidence for the global Flood described in Genesis). Use creation.com's search bar. Have a look at our Creation Answers Book (you can freely read all the chapters online: creation.com/cab ). The Bible is reliable. And TRUE. All the best.

[@PiersStudio]

Forensic evidence is better than eye witnesses

[@inthelightofhisglory9614]

Not when God is the eye witness and not when people are actively trying to keep God out of the picture.

[@Jesusisking247]

It's surrounded by a firmament separating the waters from the waters and set on pillars too!

[@Bombcart502]

I wonder what he would say about the age of the Universe, since we can view distant galaxies that take light 13 billion years to reach us.

[@knightclan4]

There are many theories concerning light travel. Remember that nobody was there to see the beginning of the experiment of creating the universe. Creation week was a supernatural event whether God did according to scripture or random chance processes

[@gregblankenship7584]

God stretched the heavens several times and time is measured by light travel

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

Please see the article here: creation.com/distant-starlight-and-the-biblical-timeframe

[@Bombcart502]

@@SheridanFalkenberry I'll check it out, thanks!

[@gordonandhollinewhite2214]

The 6-day creation forms the basis for one of the Ten Commandments, which is the law that defines sin, from which we need to be saved. So don't tell me that this isn't a salvation issue!

[@Nicole-ky7ye]

I like the Adam example. God made adam a fully grown adult but if I were to ask how old Adam was on the day God made him saying a day old would be correct. When we think of something a day old we do not think a full grown adult. We think baby or something made within a day like food. God can make things with innate age.

[@gabriellamclellan1102]

The truth is always in front of us.. We accept what justifies our reality.. Maybe it's yet to unfold...in our death...

[@peterdunne1800]

Absolutely wonderful information delivered in a respectful, intelligent and educated manner. Finally, tge word 'SCIENCE ' means KNOWLEDGE. Once you understand this you won't be at a loss when topics like this are being discussed.😉

[@MyFatherLoves]

First off, excellent video. Second, you guys have the budget to process audio through a program called iZotope. Please leverage this program to "De-Click" your vocals. It will very naturally take out all of the mouth noises present in intimate-micing situations like this podcast format. Pretty please.

[@Artcore103]

What about (i didn't hear this mentioned, at least not yet) some form of time dilation theory a la russel humphreys or john hartnett?

[@emb.k.6636]

Very True. As per censored geology, the earth's age do not exceed 20000 years. Eg. Knowledge of semiconductors till date( 80% advancement) did not take even a century and within this short time span the social being , culture and life style of people ( even animals )have drastically change . Erosion would be at higher rate in the earth's initial age and decreases as the earth solidifies.

[@cordiachung9120]

Thank You!

[@easye5653]

But what about the Dinosaur age and before that? So it's plausible that the earth could be Older.

[@James-mc5hc]

Has anyone found any dinosaur remnants in the millions of supposed fossil oil well that was dug? Any bone remnants? Any dinosaur DNA? Oil sands in Canada should have some dinosaur remnants? DNA,bones..............

[@SheridanFalkenberry]

As a matter of fact they have! creation.com/dino-dna-bone-cells

[@juerbert1]

Thank you, Dr.Mark Harwood !

[@valerieprice1745]

Jesus said, "If you don't believe the words written by Moses, how then will you believe in me..." Jesus knew the earth is young. Do you think all the greedy, grant hungry, arrogant academics know more than God? Were they right when they thought the earth was 75,000 years old, or a couple million years old, or hundreds of millions, or 4.7 billion, now 4.3 billion? Which one do you believe, and why would you believe people who are wrong, wrong again, and again and again....

[@boni2786]

Great!

[@MarcelinhoTheRock]

What an excelent explanantion, thanks CMI

[@JayZoop]

Soft tissue has been preserved in rare cases, but now it's turned into rock. It is not currently still soft tissue.

[@user-sy4ov7tb3q]

No, it is still soft (collagen) tissue. There is video footage of Dr Mary Schweitzer stretching the soft tissue with tweezers and it springs back to it's original shape when released. The solution that the fossil was dissolved in dissolves anything that is rock or mineralized. The soft tissue left behind was not mineralized.

[@alandiehl3619]

Mark Harwood: All of science is just based on wrong assumptions. Case closed. Lol. Give this man the Nobel Prize!

[@adminotaku4799]

2:30 there would be proof of the cup being tempered with. when you remove water from a cup there is still residue of said water on the sides leaving a mark that can or cannot be seen. if the cup already had water for a long time and ten you start the dripping process there would still be a seem of residue on the side of the cup where the level stopped for a time. Everything can be calculated in one way or another. If something cannot be calculated, we just haven't found the way to do it yet. That doesn't mean God didn't create the universe we live in, just that we're trying to understand how he did it. some people don't want to know because they're afraid that the answer doesn't match their belief or worst. For those that don't believe the decay and say that maybe these things were like that from the beginning, Rust is a result of decay. It's like saying Iron and Rust are the same and rust was always rust. Try to make a shield out of Rust and tell me if it works the same as an Iron Shield...

[@creationministriesintl]

"if the cup already had water for a long time and ten you start the dripping process there would still be a seem of residue on the side of the cup where the level stopped for a time." Indeed, if it were there for a long time (how long, was the mineral concentration consistent, ect). Geologists do not regard radiometirc dates with anywhere near the respect laymen do. The Geologist Bates McKee divulges such quite eloquently: "One might imagine that direct methods of measuring time would make obsolete all of the previous means of estimating age, but these new 'absolute' measurements are used more as a supplement to traditional methods than as a substitute. Geologists put more faith in the principles of superposition and faunal succession then they do in numbers that come out of a machine. If the laboratory results contradict the field evidence, the geologist assumes that there is something wrong with the machine date. To put it another way, 'good' dates are those that agree with the field data." McKee, B., Cascadia: The Geological Evolution of the Pacific Northwest, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, p.25, 1972. Essentially, if the date doesn't already agree with the assumed fossil dates, then they are tossed. If secular Geologists don't take radiometric dating seriously, then why should we? creation.com/the-way-it-really-is-little-known-facts-about-radiometric-dating

[@adminotaku4799]

@@creationministriesintl That's more a problem with the scientist, not the science. If a priest does a sin, it doesn't invalidate the good guidance of the Bible.