And so it begins!!

Cheyanne is being home schooled by a Christian curriculum. Hanna is attending public school. Hanna came home yesterday talking about how it takes billions of years for fossil fuels to form. Cheyanne is learning creation from a Biblical perspective and thus believes a young earth ideal. Cheyanne expressed her beliefs to her teacher who made her class write cheyanne a letter explaining why she was wrong... WELL Mom was so not taking this! I just happen to be taking a creation class in school and wrote my own letter in reply. If you are going to teach one "theory" you better be prepared to hear about the other one!
Here is a copy of the letter I wrote...I could have gone into much more detail but kept it relatively simple for them to understand...

Problems with radiometric dating…

Two main forms of scientific evidence to prove that the earth is a fairly young planet are carbon 14 and the discovery of helium atoms in crystals. The ways that these two things point to a new planet are that carbon 14 half-life is roughly 5000 years, which means its full decay is roughly 10000 years. If the earth was billions of years old there would be no carbon 14 left in coal and diamonds today. The other way we see this is with helium atoms still stuck in crystals. Helium is an element that escapes the object that it is enclosed in fairly quick. If the earth were billions of years old there would surely be no helium atoms still left in these crystals today. According to RATE, “It takes 5,730 years for half of a carbon 14 to decay. It would then take another 5,730 years for another half carbon to decay. If the earth were billions of years old, there would be no carbon 14 left in objects”. This is especially significant as diamonds are the hardest metal found on earth. According to the Rate research they suggest that the way scientist tested isotope dating to view rocks was skewed. They suggest that the earth is billions of years old. They Rate research found that there has been accelerated nuclear decay that occurred in the past and that is what makes a rock that’s less than 10 thousand years old appear to be very old. According to Dr. Chapmen and Bob Jones research students, “When the strength of the nuclear force is changing, it can suddenly change the wave function for the alpha particle” (Rate). This defines how the rocks could have been accelerated decay. There is also evidence for the beta atoms. They can detect them in laboratories. There is half-life in these beta atoms. An example would include water leaking out of a water bottle. You find the rate of which the water is coming out of the bottle. So, overall there is scientific evidence of a young earth perspective and that is not surprising. These and other evidences suggest that the decay rate has accelerated. So if this is the case why are we to still assume that it took millions of years to create fossil fuels? A straightforward reading of the Bible strongly implies a young age for the earth. A young earth model is internally consistent and makes sense of Biblical data. Most old earth views ignore or force alternate interpretations of scripture. The motivation for nearly all old earth theories is the accommodate scientific date. Much of the fossil record was formed during the flood and shortly after the flood and associated events, thus, the geological column either provides evidence of a global flood or it is evidence for the millions of years. It cannot be both. Current scientific evidence leaves open the possibility of a young age for the earth and universe. Plain meaning of scripture implies a young age for the earth and universe. Matter, energy, laws called to exist but subject to decay since the fall. In the evolution model, matter, energy and laws came from nothing to form subatomic particles and the complex forms of matter. So your argument of “generally accepted theory” may very well be flawed.

Sincerely,

Mrs. Kelly Eckert

Student of Creation Studies