A Built on Rock Website
Home Key Points Artwork Articles Resources Contact Events

Home     Key Points     Artwork     Articles     Resources      Contact     Events

About Built on Rock     Useful Links     Book a Talk

Built on Rock Websites

Dinosaurs for Dummies                                  Richard Dawkins                                                   More To Life

Built on Rock ! Exploring Answers to Questions about Life, The Universe & Everything

If catastrophism caused the major features of the earth then the entire realm of geology should be re-evaluated. A catastrophe which included a global flood and massive sediment laden turbidity currents would have laid down huge horizontal layers of strata, some covering thousands of miles. It would have killed and buried, and fossilised billions of creatures, from birds and fish to dinosaurs and mammals, some of these being dumped into fossil graveyards covering great areas, like the Morrison Formation. It would have also have buried mountainous loads of plant life, causing the creation of the world's oil and coal deposits worldwide. All of these are known to exist and none of it is a matter of controversy. But regardless of this kind of evidence, Darwinism still required long ages, and could not exist without them. In the 19th century this meant challenging the old orthodoxy founded on a literal historical understanding of Genesis. And Lyell, who became a friend of Darwin, wanted to shake those foundations, which had, until the emergence of the Enlightenment dominated scientific enquiry. It should be noted that neither of these men were qualified by university degrees as experts in either geology or zoology. Lyell was trained as a lawyer, while Darwin's university course was on divinity.

Lyell's vision of millions of years gave Darwin exactly what he needed: time. This belief, and it is a belief, relies on untested and untestable assumptions. There is nothing that can distance radiometric dating from the doubt cast upon them by many unproven baseline assumptions, which would if they were in error, make all dates (on for example dinosaur fossils) null and void. Are they likely to be in error? Yes they are, because they assume the conditions that evolutionists require. That rocks capable of being dated when laid down were never interfered with by any contaminant or dramatic changes in the environment, and other factors to complex to go into here. Considering that the buzz word contamination arises every time a discordant date is given, which often happens, you might expect evolutionists to be cautious about their conclusions.


Does Geology show that vast Long Ages are so?

You can read more in another Geology article on this website:-

Geology of the Earth

Intrigued to know more? In a  Nutshell

Overturning the scriptural base of 19th century thinking about what had caused the geology of the earth was the stated purpose of both Darwin and the geologist Charles Lyell. Reference to this and quotes from both men can be found in the article Darwin's Agenda.

Lyell argued that no forces other than slow and gradual erosion and deposition had ever applied to the geology of the earth. Seen from our current perspective that belief is the equivalent of being a believer in a flat earth around which the sun orbits.

No modern geologist would come close to fully accepting Lyell's dogmatic statement. There is abundant evidence that forces of unimaginable power and ferocity have sometime in the past scoured, uplifted, moved, dumped and destroyed vast quantities of flora and fauna and heaved truly massive objects, from mountains to ocean floors and twisted and translocated them, to such an extent that marine fossils are found atop virtually every mountain range on the planet. But the feeling that Lyell won the debate against the Christian catastrophists remains intact largely due to a media dominated by Darwinism which for no scientific reason rejects a global flood. A flood primarily caused by violent tectonic movements and the release of reservoirs of water from beneath the ocean floors added to the deluge descending from the skies.

There is a way of testing the Darwinian theory to destruction but it is steadfastly avoided. They will not use Carbon 14 dating, which is known to be reliable and relatively consistent, against radiometric dating which gives millions of years to objects being tested. Dinosaurs are "known" to have become extinct 65 million years ago. This is a "fact" that no evolutionist doubts. Why? Because radiometric dating has "proved" it to be so. They could put this matter to bed and do huge damage to the Creationist cause by testing some of their samples in laboratories specialising in Carbon 14 dating methods. How would this help? Because no Carbon 14 should register beyond fifty thousand years and absolutely no chance over one hundred thousand years. Therefore no dinosaur bone should register anything in terms of Carbon 14. Will they do the tests. Not a chance. They refuse and obfuscate and constantly complain about horrible crafty creationists trying to upset the apple cart. In fact they should be falling over each other to do it themselves because it is their duty as scientists to apply any test that can settle the matter. If, having taken every precaution to ensure there is no possibility of contamination, Carbon 14 turned up in these bones then the long ages applied to dinosaur fossils goes up in smoke. And with it goes evolutionary theory.

These tests on dinosaur bones have in fact been done, by both Russian scientists and creationists and the dates given fall regularly between 20 - 40 thousand years. The tests were done in the same labs as those used by evolutionists. If these dates were accepted then evolution never happened and a horrible vista appears on the horizon, the only possible alternative: a Creator God!

That thought is what prevents evolutionists doing the tests. It is of course possible they have done them already and suppressed the results.

While Carbon 14 Dating paints a different picture of the Geological Layers