The Young Earth Project


This question was posted on a Facebook page/group that I am a part of and I will post this there also but I though maybe the blogosphere would be interested in it also.

So, here we go.


As a “young earth creationist” I will try to answer this question, rather question(s) as they are presented.

“What motive would such a majority of scientists have to conspire to mislead the public to the true age of the earth?

The implication that the majority of scientists believe the earth is billions, and not thousands of years old is incorrect to begin with. In the U.S alone there are thousands of scientists who believe in a young earth.
These scientists choose not to speak out against the “majority” for fear of chastisement, or worse, losing their job.

The “majority” of scientists that believe in an “old earth” are the ones that are published and seen as having the correct answer to the how old is earth? question. They didn’t conspire to mislead anyone, they believe they are right. Having the status and even fame of having all the answers and not being wrong. That is where you would find the motive to conspire if in fact it was a conspiracy, which it isn’t because if it was they would know they’re wrong and still perpetuate lies. The motive would be fame, fortune, and status.
Admitting to being wrong would take away credibility and hence take away what they idolize, pride.

I’m sure you’re thinking, how does this guy think he has all the answers and all of those scientists are wrong?
The answer is I don’t think I have all the answer I just don’t trust scientists who think they have all the answers.
Science is always changing, and I get that it has to change with the evidence. What happens in situations where the evidence doesn’t change but the scientific explanation does?

For example, the Grand Canyon.
Radioisotope dating of the layers of the canyon showed that layers near the top dated much older than layers near the bottom. How can that be? Wouldn’t the lower layers be older than the layers on top of them? Yes they certainly would be, so what happened? Radioisotope dating is a flawed process. Yet science uses it to date the earth.
That’s not all, since Radioisotope dating didn’t work scientists used another type of dating process called Uranium Lead dating which produced a number much closer to what scientists wanted it to be so they publish this report instead.
A simple Google search will show that amongst scientists the debate about how old the Grand Canyon rages on, one said about 6 million years, another says 70 million years and others still say it’s in the billions. These are reports by scientists who are of the persuasion that earth is billions of years old, as in not young earth creationists.
How and why should I believe what scientists have to say about the age of the earth when they can’t even come to a consensus on how old the Grand Canyon is?

So, what’s in it for scientists to perpetuate this “truth”?

Well, the answer is as I’ve already stated above is their status. If scientists start saying they were wrong and earth is in fact only thousands of years old and not billions, they might not be viewed through the same lens as their peers, scientists have been preaching evolution for so long that if some of them suddenly turn and say it was incorrect, well they might just be kicked out of the inner circle, they might be labeled as a creation scientist and Lord knows nobody wants that, those people aren’t even real scientists (Insert sarcasm here).
Seriously though, evolutionists are the ones that get published, they’re the ones who decide what’s taught in science labs in school, they’re the ones who reap the benefits of continuously trying to find a way to prove creationists wrong, when something like the way the Grand Canyon is dated comes up wrong they have to find another way to get the answer they’re looking for so they get more funding and are able to keep their jobs and so on. It is in the best interest of scientists to keep people believing in evolution if for no other reason than this way they won’t have to submit to a higher power, because we all know that the highest power there is, is the scientist himself (insert more sarcasm).

Listen, I believe in science, if done properly. I don’t believe in the scientists themselves, because they do have a motive, and an idea that they hope to prove correct but true science shouldn’t have an objective other than the truth and when scientists say the canyon is 6 million years old and anyone who denies him is labeled a crackpot, then later scientists say the canyon is 70 million years old and anyone who believes it’s only 6 million years old is wrong… well then there is a problem, science itself is not the problem, it’s the scientists.

I would love to know your thoughts and thanks for reading.

Posted from WordPress for Android

One thought on “The Young Earth Project

  1. I think one reason that evolution in general is promoted is that the atheistic community needs a way to explain how we got here. And to do that they have to oppose everything creationists stand for, otherwise people think they’re the same. So, since creationists believe in a young earth, evolutionists cannot. That’s my theory.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s