As Christians, we believe the Bible is the Word of God without error in the original manuscripts. We trust that God has overseen the preservation of the texts. There are some minor differences among the many available copies, but those differences don’t affect any major doctrines. The extant copies are so numerous and similar that what was in the originals is often discernible. The canon of scripture is closed. So we have a reliable Word that we are commanded to study and live by.
One might wonder whether there is any science to support the model described in the earlier articles in the Big Stretch series, especially after seeing how much it agrees with the Bible. In this short article, we take a look at the scientific evidence for this model.
This article is part of a continuing series about a cosmological model that integrates 2 scientific fields, each based on work of multiple Nobel prize winners. The resulting model, referred to here as the Setterfield model or the Setterfield ZPE-plasma model, is not only in agreement with laboratory results and astronomical observations, but is in amazing agreement with the oldest texts of Genesis. Last month we reviewed evidence for the agreement of this model with the Bible. That included the sun forming on day 4 of creation week, light on day 1, and the earth forming before the sun. See part 3 of the series (http://tasc-creationscience.org/article/big-stretch-3) for more Biblical evidence, and part 1 (http://tasc-creationscience.org/article/big-stretch-1) for a general introduction to this model.
One might ask, how were there days, mornings and evenings, before the sun lit up on day 4, according to the Bible? There is a scientific model that can account for that! According to the physics of this model, there would have been light, starting on the first day, from a quasar at the center of the galaxy. This would provide light from a single direction, like the sun does today. See the illustration of a quasar, which make this point obvious.
Quasar Image - from NASA
Agreement with Biblical Chronology
The model agrees with Biblical chronology. We noted in the second article of this series that the actual age of astronomical objects, as well as the actual age of radiometrically-dated objects (rocks), can be calculated using this model. We will look at the calculated age of the universe from the calculations of the model, and compare this with when creation week occurred according to the most ancient available Biblical texts.
This month I discuss 4 topics that point to God or agree with Genesis, including evidence the early earth was completely covered by water, problems for Big Bang inflation, why you are not related to Homo naledi, and spiritual empiricism. The segment on spiritual empiricism relates to how we can know God through communication with Him and contains my testimony.
Organic matter in the fossil record generally dates by carbon 14 (C14) dating to about 20,000 to 40,000 years. Other radioactive dating methods such as potassium/argon (K/Ar), rubidium/strontium (Rb/Sr), uranium/lead (U/Pb), thorium/lead (Th/Pb) and others that are based on decay of longer-lived isotopes often give ages in the millions or hundreds of millions of years for these fossils. Why is this? Why are the dates so different?
Many creationists believe that radioactive decay was faster in the past. However, in this talk I want to concentrate on reasons to believe the C14 dates are more accurate and that they give evidence that all life on earth is very young. If decay rates were faster in the past, then even the C14 dates could be too old.