Censored-Science Top 20
Evolution and its Timeline Debunked!
Main Page - References linked below
#1 Population Growth Rate
#2 Not enough stone age skeletons
Evolutionary anthropologists now say that Homo sapiens existed for at least 185,000 years before agriculture began, during which time the world population of humans was roughly constant, between one and ten million. All that time they were burying their dead, often with artifacts. By that scenario, they would have buried at least eight billion bodies. If the evolutionary time scale is correct, millions of the supposed eight billion stone age skeletons should still be around (and certainly the buried artifacts). Yet only a few thousand have been found, easily fitting the biblical creation timeline, but quite a stretch for the evolutionary timeline.
#3 Dinosaur and other
soft tissue found
In recent years, there have been many findings of “wondrously preserved” biological materials in supposedly ancient rock layers and fossils. One such discovery that has left evolutionists scrambling is a fossilized Tyrannosaurus rex femur with flexible connective tissue and branching blood vessels. According to evolutionists, these dinosaur tissues are more than 65 million years old, but laboratory studies have shown that there is no known way, and likely none possible, for biological material to last more than thousands of years.
The very speculative evolutionary alibi is that iron mixed with the tissue has preserved the dinosaur soft tissue. Iron may cause dino tissue to last a few more thousand years at best, but do you know the difference between a few thousand years and a million years? But get this. For dino tissue to fit the evolutionary timeline, they need TENS OF MILLIONS OF YEARS!!!; aprroximately 65 million years ago, which they say, was the last dinosaur to live. Clearly, as the bible tells, as well as cave drawings, dinosaurs were living just thousands of years ago. The claim by evolutionists that dinosaur flesh can last tens of millions of years is incredibly absurd!
#4 Trees running vertical
thru 200 million year old strata
There are a number of petrified trees running verticle thru supposed millions of years old strata found all over the earth. The problem with the fraudulant evolutionary geologic chart, is that it would take millions of years for these trees to become buried. The tree would have rotted or decomposed long before it was all buried, if the strata they were in was millions of years old.
The National Park Service took down their incorrect sign that had claimed petrified trees in two dozen different strata had proved that long ages had passed during the rise and fall of dozens of successive forests. But the petrified trees there had no root systems, and the trees had been transported by water and settled into rapidly and sporadically deposited sediments just as had occurred in Spirit Lake after Mount St. Helens erupted.
As geology professor William J. Fritz put it, "When I visited the Mount St. Helens area shortly after the eruption, it was just like Yellowstone! ... Both the mudflows and the appearance of the trees is identical."
This proves geologic strata or layers, are not gradual and uniform over the course of millions of years. On the contrary, this evidence tells of a catastrophic event, namely, the biblical world wide flood, as evidnced by these petrified trees vertically shown in deep strata all over the earth.
#5 Radioactive Helium In Rocks
Through radioactive decay of uranium and thorium, helium is produced in rocks and leaks out very slowly, no longer than 100,000 years. The rate of decay is constant and measurable. There should not be any rocks older than 100,000 years old, if containing helium, yet, there is plenty of helium in rocks from even some of the deepest strata, supposedly billions of years old. Even greater evidence for this is found here.
#6 Millions of Evolutionary Years
Missing from Grand Canyon
Because erosion is relentless, geologists would expect to find great erosion between the layers of strata exposed in the canyon (including layers that extend over thousands of square miles). But as millions of tourists have been able to see for themselves, not the exception but the rule is a genearl lack of erosion with extended flat boundaries between layers.
Intensifying this problem for evolutionary geologists is their claim, as in this Geology of the Grand Canyon report available from the U.S. National Park Service, that 120 million years of the geologic record are missing from between conforming layers in the canyon. That is, they claim that about 120 million years of strata deposition and evidence of erosion are completely absent from the middle of the Paleozoic, including the entire Ordovician and Silurian periods, which are missing from the rock record. (and by the way, those same layers are missing throughout most of Montana.)
No one with eyes can miss seeing the flat boundaries, called flat gaps, between strata which in many places lack any evidence of erosion between the strata (even with, for example, rain drop impressions atop one layer not eroded but preserved by the layer above it). This general lack of erosion indicates that the layers exposed in the Grand Canyon, including therefore dinosaur-bearing strata globally, were deposited rapidly. And just as the system of large stratified canyons at Mount St. Helens formed rapidly in 1980, and the river flowing from Spirit Lake didn't carve those canyons but the canyons formed the river, so to with the Grand Canyon. By that modern analog, and by much hard evidence like millions of nautiloids fossilized standing on their heads, the deposition and carving were both rapid. a devestating blow to the fictional evolutionary timeline.
#7 Carbon 14 everywhere
it's not supposed to be
Far from proving evolution, carbon-14 dating actually provides some of the strongest evidence for creation and a young earth. Radiocarbon (carbon-14) cannot remain naturally in substances for millions of years because it decays relatively rapidly. For this reason, it can only be used to obtain “ages” in the range of tens of thousands of years.
C14 is everywhere it shouldn't be. Unless from a secondary source, like contamination or neutron capture. Anything millions of years old should have NO Carbon-14. However, scientists are consistently finding C-14, as reported in 2011 in the journal PLoS One for an allegedly 80-million year old mosasaur, and as reported elsewhere in natural gas, limestone, fossil wood, coal, oil, graphite, marble, dinosaurs, and even in supposedly billion-year-old diamonds. A secondary assumption by old-earth scientists proposes that the C-14 in diamonds (coal, etc.) must have come from N-14 (or C-13, etc.) and neutron capture. Theoretical physicist Lawrence Krauss (emphasis on the theoretical) told RSF that C-14 in allegedly million-year-old specimens is an "anomaly." However, an anomaly is something that deviates from what is standard, normal, or expected. Because modern carbon exists in significant quantities, far above the reliability threshold of the AMS labs doing the tests, these results can no longer be called anomalies! It is now expected that organic specimens supposedly millions of years old will yield maximum C-14 ages of only thousands of years!
Scientists from the RATE (Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth) project examined diamonds that evolutionists consider to be 1–2 billion years old and related to the earth’s early history. Diamonds are the hardest known substance and extremely resistant to contamination through chemical exchange.
Yet the RATE scientists discovered significant detectable levels of radiocarbon in these diamonds, dating them at around 55,000 years—a far cry from the evolutionary billions!
Diamonds, because they are the hardest naturally occurring substance on Earth, are therefore resistant to contamination. This makes their radiocarbon content all the more compelling, and especially when they are mined from a quarter-of-a-mile below the surface, insulated from our C-14 bearing atmosphere.
There is also too much carbon 14 in deep geologic strata. With their short 5,700-year half-life, no carbon 14 atoms should exist in any carbon older than 250,000 years. Yet it has proven impossible to find any natural source of carbon below Pleistocene (Ice Age) strata that does not contain significant amounts of carbon 14, even though such strata are supposed to be millions or billions of years old. Conventional carbon 14 laboratories have been aware of this anomaly since the early 1980s, have striven to eliminate it, and are unable to account for it. Lately the world's best such laboratory which has learned during two decades of low-C14 measurements how not to contaminate specimens externally, under contract to creationists, confirmed such observations for coal samples and even for a dozen diamonds, which cannot be contaminated in situ with recent carbon. These constitute very strong evidence that the earth is only thousands, not billions, of years old.
#8 DNA can't last millions of years
Natural radioactivity, mutations, and decay degrade DNA and other biological material rapidly. Measurements of the mutation rate of mitochondrial DNA recently forced researchers to revise the age of "mitochondrial Eve" from a theorized 200,000 years down to possibly as low as 6,000 years. DNA experts insist that DNA cannot exist in natural environments longer than 10,000 years, yet intact strands of DNA appear to have been recovered from fossils allegedly much older: "Neandertal" bones, insects in amber, and even from dinosaur fossils. Bacteria allegedly 250 million years old apparently have been revived with no DNA damage, as well as from supposedly 65 million year old Soft tissue and blood cells from dinosaurs. What an evolutionary stretch!
DNA extracted from allegedly 130-million year old weevil as reported in the journal Nature, DNA has been successfully isolated from an allegedly 130-million year old weevil found in amber from Lebanon. The insect fossil yielded DNA of sufficient quality that it could be amplified by the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and subsequently sequenced, including segments of specific identifiable genetic material including 18S rRNA and the internal transcribed spacer along with their corresponding nucleotide sequences of hundreds of base pairs! These sequences were compared with genetic material from living fruitflies, mosquitos, and weevils leading to the conclusion that the DNA extracted did indeed come from the fossilized weevil. This paper claims that this discovery represents the oldest fossil DNA ever extracted and sequenced, absurdly claiming that they've extended by 80 million years the known duration of DNA. Rather, the existence of such endogenous DNA indicates that the fossil is not millions of years old, a possibility that a working scientist dare not consider aloud, regardless of the evidence, at the risk of losing his career.
#9 Millions of nautiloid fossils prove
rapid Grand Canyon limestone formation
Millions of nautiloids buried in limestone layers at the Grand Canyon testify to rapid burial and not gradual evolutionary layering. Many of these organisms were longer than your forearm. As seen in the canyon's walls and beyond, millions of natiuloids that were buried in an extremely rapid mass kill as this limestone layer formed. This particular bed, made up of the persistent bottom (basal) layer of the 500-foot thick Redwall Limestone, is exposed throughout the canyon. Along with many other dead creatures in this narrow layer, 15% of these nautiloids were killed and then fossilized standing on their heads. Yes, vertically. They were catastrophically buried, being caught in a hyperconcentrated flow, such that gravity was not able to cause all of their dead carcasses to fall over onto their sides.
Even a strongly-biased old-earth geologist should be able to agree that, this must be considered hard evidence of rapid limestone deposition for this layer, evidence enough, to kill the fraudulant evolutionary geologic timeline that says these layers or strata took millions of years to form.
#10 Surtsey Island, forms
million year features in 10 years
Surtsey Island is a brand new island that formed off the coast of Iceland in 1963. New Scientist reported in 2007 about Surtsey that "geographers... marvel that canyons, gullies and other land features that typically [i.e., allegedly] take tens of thousands or millions of years to form were created in less than a decade."
Iceland's official geologist wrote in the early months of the volcanic island of Surtsey, "that the time scale", he had been trained, "to attach to geological developments is misleading." For what is said to "take thousands of years... the same development may take a few weeks or even days here," including to form "a landscape... so varied and mature that it was almost beyond belief" with "wide sandy beaches and precipitous crags... gravel banks and lagoons, impressive cliffs… hollows, glens and soft undulating land... fractures and faultscarps, channels and screes… confounded by what met your eye... boulders worn by the surf, some of which were almost round..."
Here's the Point: Of course most islands are much older than the recently formed Surtsey, but the rapidly grown formations on this island undermine the old-earth, knee-jerk assumption presented to millions of students that the kinds of geologic features seen on Surtsey require million-year timeframes to form.
#11 Erosion Measurements
Whole villages on the English coastline have been lost due to erosion, and locals are used to seeing houses teeter on the edge. Geologists have been observing this erosion of 1 metre every 6 years for decades. Do the math!. If the cliffs have been eroding at one metre every six years since the end of the Cretaceous (65 million years ago), more than 10,000 km of coastline would have eroded away. That’s like the distance from London to Cape Town Africa, or nearly from Los Angeles to Sydney, Australia. The erosion conundrum is worldwide. Think California mudslides!
This problem has been highlighted by a number of geologists who calculated that North America should have been levelled in 10 million years if erosion has continued at the average rate. This is a ridiculously short time compared with the supposed 2.5-billion-year age for the continents.
Evolutionists argue erosion was much less in the past before humans interfered. However, measurements on the effect of this human activity have found that erosion rates are increased only 2 to 2.5 times. For this explanation fit the evolution timeline, the increase would need to be several hundred times greater. Once again, the explanation does not work for evolution.
#12 Sediment on the Sea Floor
Rivers and dust storms dump mud into the sea much faster than plate tectonic sub-duction can remove it. Each year, water and winds erode about 20 billion tons of dirt and rock from the continents and deposit it in the ocean. According to secular scientific literature, that process presently removes only 1 billion tons per year. As far as anyone knows, the other 19 billion tons per year simply accumulate. At that rate, erosion would deposit the present mass of sediment in less than 12 million years.
Yet according to evolutionary theory, erosion and plate subduction have been going on as long as the oceans have existed, an alleged three billion years. If that were so, the rates above imply that the oceans would be massively choked with sediment dozens of kilometers deep. An alternative (creationist) explanation is that erosion from the waters of the Genesis flood running off the continents deposited the present amount of sediment within a short time about 5,000 years ago.
#13 Historical Records too short
According to evolutionists, Stone Age Homo sapiens existed for 190,000 years before beginning to make written records about 4,000 to 5,000 years ago. Prehistoric man built megalithic monuments, made beautiful cave paintings, and kept records of lunar phases. Why would he wait TWO THOUSAND CENTURIES before using the same skills to record history?
#14 Bristle Cone Pine Trees
and the Great Barrier Reef
The bristle cone pine trees are approximately 4,300 years old, dated via tree rings. The method may not be perfect, but it is the best we have for dating trees. Scientists admit, these trees could live for another 5 thousand years. So the question begs, why do we not find a grove of these trees much older? The answer lies in the biblical timeline, not the evolutionary one.
Another similar witness, is The Great Barrier Reef ; less than 4,200 years old—dated via measuring the growth rate for 20 years. Even though both are less than 5,000 years old, they and the bristle cone pine trees are the two oldest living organisms on earth. Their ages easily fit the creationist point of view, but leave loose ends for the evolutionist. Why aren’t there older trees or more ancient reefs?
#15 Recession of the Moon
The gravitational pull of the moon creates a “tidal bulge” on earth that causes the moon to spiral outwards very slowly. Because of this effect, the moon would have been closer to the earth in the past. Based on gravitational forces and the current rate of recession, we can calculate how much the moon has moved away over time.
If the earth is only 6,000 years old, there’s no problem, because in that time the moon would have only moved about 800 feet (250 m). But most astronomy books teach that the moon is over four billion years old, which poses a major dilemma—less than 1.5 billion years ago the moon would have been touching the earth!
#16 Magnetic Field Decay
Studies over the past 140 years show a consistent decay rate in the earth’s magnetic field. At this rate, in as few as 25,000 years ago, the earth would have been unable to support life because of the heat from the electric current.
The total energy stored in the earth's magnetic field ("dipole" and "non-dipole") is decreasing with a half-life of 1,465 (± 165) years. Evolutionary theories explaining this rapid decrease, as well as how the earth could have maintained its magnetic field for billions of years are very complex and inadequate. A much better creationist theory exists. It is straightforward, based on sound physics, and explains many features of the field. The main result is that the field's total energy (not surface intensity) has always decayed at least as fast as now. At that rate the field could not be more than 20,000 years old.
#17 Not enough salt in the ocean
Every year, rivers and other sources dump over 450 million tons of sodium into the ocean. Only 27% of this sodium manages to get back out of the sea each year. As far as anyone knows, the remainder simply accumulates in the ocean. If the sea had no sodium to start with, it would have accumulated its present amount in less than 42 million years at today's input and output rates. This is much less than the evolutionary age of the ocean, three billion years. The usual reply to this discrepancy is that past sodium inputs must have been less and outputs greater. However, calculations that are as generous as possible to evolutionary scenarios still give a maximum age of only 62 million years. Calculations for many other seawater elements give much younger ages for the ocean.
#18 Faint Sun Paradox
Earth would never recover or thaw from a faint young sun. A star like our Sun has about ten billion years worth of nuclear fuel. Billions of years of nuclear fusion would change the Sun's characteristics. Leading secular astronomers and astrophysicists have accepted for decades basic physics calculations which show that the sun would have been nearly a third cooler a few billion years ago and that the Earth's oceans then would have frozen over.
However, ice-age knowledge not withstanding, no mainstream scientific camp claims that the earth was completely covered in ice for any period of time, let alone for billions of years. Based on the timeline of the claimed evolution of both the solar system and its life, a temperate Earth is required for those early billions of years, first, for life to originate in some warm pond, then for liquid seas to fill with living creatures and for some of those creatures to begin dwelling on land. Further, if the Earth had been frozen over, it would not absorb the Sun's life-giving rays but reflect them back out into space.
Without reservation, evolutionists call upon the most strained rescue devices rather than to ackowledge that their theory may be in error. They make extreme secondary assumptions about how to warm up such an early Earth by trapping extra solar energy during the alleged billions of years while the Sun was cooler, and then they gradually tweak those claimed conditions as the eons pass to adjust simultaneously for the changing Sun and the changing Earth, all to prevent what was a too-cold Earth now from overheating. Such time-sensitive fine-tuning of complex eco-system factors was completely unpredicted by the big bang model and instead results from story-telling techniques designed to accommodate contrary evidence.
#19 Modern Artifacts found in rock
300-500 million years old
There have been plenty of fairly modern artifacts found in rock and coal deposits. Evolution propagandists tell us coal is hundereds of million of years old, but that would make man made relatively modern artifacts impossible, since man was far from evolved at that time.
In June 1936, near London Max Hahn and his wife found a man made ancient hammer encrusted in rock. The rock encasing the hammer was dated to be 400 million years old. How awkward when the hammer itself was dated 500 million years old. Clearly the radiometric dating methods used were false. The hammer handle began to morph into coal. The hammer head was made of more than 96% iron, indicating a relatively modern smelting process.
In 1889, near Nampa Idaho, in a layer of 15 million year old lava, was found a small figurine made of baked clay, 320 feet down, by workers boring an artesian well.
In 1944 a ten year old boy, dropped a lump of coal and it broke in half. Inside the coal was a hand crafted brass alloy bell with an iron clapper and sculptured handle. The coal was supposedly mined from a 300,000 year old seem.
There are many other similar finds locked away from public scrutiny, proving the evolutionary geologic chart and its timeline, to be a work of fiction, which by the way, is not obseveved in its entirety anywhere on earth, but is pieced together in an attempt to make evolution appear scientific.
#20 Earth too finely tuned to be random evolution
* The Finely Tuned Earth includes:
- the Earth's surface gravity strength prevents the atmosphere from rapidly losing water to space
- the Earth's just-right ozone layer filters out ultraviolet radiation and helps mitigate temperature swings
- the Earth's spin rate on its axis provides for a range of day and nighttime temperatures to allow life to thrive
- the atmosphere's composition (20% oxygen, etc.) provides for life's high energy requirements
- if Earth's oxygen content were higher, forest fires would worsen; at 30%-40% the atmosphere could ignite
- the atmosphere's pressure enables our lungs to function and water to evaporate at an optimal rate to support life
- the atmosphere's transparency to allow an optimal range of life-giving solar radiation to reach the surface
- the atmosphere's capactity to hold water vaper provides for stable temperature and rainfall ranges
- efficient life-giving photosynthesis depends on quantum physics, as reported in the journal PNAS
- organisms do not metabolize lignin (component in soil) for otherwise most all plant life would be impossible
- carbon atom the phenomenally harmonious water cycle (which is one example of astounding functional complexity not explainable by evolutionary theory; another example is the astounding world of quantum physics)
- water permits the passage of the Sun's life-giving radiation to depths of 500 meters
- the carbon atom's astounding capabilities.
As Cambridge astronomer Fred Hoyle wrote: "Some super-calculating intellect must have designed the properties of the carbon atom, otherwise the chance of my finding such an atom through the blind forces of nature would be utterly minuscule. A common sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."
Back to Main Page
For deeper verification, these sites have the references
For deeper verification, these sites have the references