One hundred reasons why the Earth is old.

By the first half of the 19th century, educated Christians accepted that the geological evidence comprehensively ruled out a 6000 year old Earth. As long ago as 1848, John Thomas casually alluded to an Earth millions of ages old. Robert Roberts, the first editor of The Christadelphian likewise accepted the overwhelming evidence for an ancient Earth, while his successor C.C. Walker flatly stated back in 1911 that:

"[t]en years ago the average scientist would have asserted that our habitable globe had not existed for more than a hundred million years. Now it would be hard to find a competent physical specialist who would fix a definite maximum below a thousand million years:’ [1]

Advances in geophysics have allowed us to fix the age of the Earth to around 4600 million years, a figure that is around six orders of magnitude greater than the YEC figure. If Walker was alive today, he would have no reason to recant his statement that it would be difficult to find a 'competent physical specialist' who would endorse a young Earth. The evidence is beyond dispute.

The evidence is not just from radiometric dating, powerful though that line of evidence may be. As geoscientist Jonathan Baker points out, the evidence for an ancient Earth comes from areas as diverse as dendrochronology, coral banding, glacial cycles, stromatolite formation and the cooling times for igneous intrusions. 

What this means of course is that if Christadelphian YECs can't even get right the most basic facts about geology, there is no reason why we should pay any attention to their other claims about how God created all living things. 

1. Walker. C.C, ‘The Age of the Earth’, The Christadelphian (1911) 48:450

Suboptimal design and special creation

The question of how to reconcile suboptimal design with special creation is one that has puzzled our community for some time. While the existence of suboptimal design is not 'proof' of evolution, for any special creationist who appeals to design in nature as evidence of special creation, the existence in nature of suboptimal design that directly leads to morbidity and mortality is a problem that is too often ignored. I have received in correspondence a comment on this this subject, which I am more than pleased to post here:

From the Dust - Conversations in Creation

Given the dearth of scholarly, informed commentary on the subject of evolution and creation in our community, anyone seeking a scientifically and theologically informed discussion will need to look elsewhere. One of the best resources for any Christadelphian seeking information on this subject comes from the BioLogos Forum, and the  film From the Dust - Conversations in Creation will provide much-needed theological and scientific insight on this question. Participants include N.T. Wright, John Polkinghorne, Peter Enns, John Walton, Chris Tilling, Alister McGrath, and Darrel Falk. Definitely a must-watch for all Christadelphians who want to go past the theological and scientific vacuity of YEC, as well as the usual content-free polemics that characterise YEC discussion of this subject.

The film website is here.

40,000 year old art found in Indonesian cave - yet more problems for YEC

Artwork in a limestone cave in Sulawesi previously thought to be only 10,000 years old has now been dated to nearly 40,000 years using uranium-thorium dating techniques [1]. That makes it the world's oldest artwork found to date, predating cave art in Europe. Not only will this prompt a renewed search for similar cave art in Asia, it provides yet more evidence - as if any more evidence was needed - that humans have been on Earth far longer than 6000 years. Via Nature:

Though the paint itself cannot be dated, uranium-thorium dating can estimate the age of the bumpy layers of calcium carbonate (known as ‘cave popcorn’) that formed on the surface of the paintings. As mineral layers are deposited, they draw in uranium. Because uranium decays into thorium at a known rate, the ratio of uranium to thorium isotopes in a sample indicates how old it is. 

The researchers dated 12 stencils of human hands and two images of large animals. Because they sampled the top layer of calcium carbonate, the uranium dating technique gave them a minimum age for each sample. 

They found that the oldest stencil was at least 39,900 years old — 2,000 years older than the minimum age of the oldest European hand stencil. An image of a babirusa, or ‘pig-deer’, resembling an aubergine with stick-like legs jutting from each end, was estimated to be 35,400 years old — around the same age as the earliest large animal pictures in European caves. [2]

Christadelphian: Origins Discussion Back in Business

Some time ago, I posted both on the launch of Christadelphian: Origins Discussion, a new Christadelphian Facebook group dedicated to origins discussions, and its disappearance. Thankfully, it didn't stay dormant for long before starting again. Excellent news for those who want to see rational, informed discussion on this subject, particularly when the posts show just how far our community has shifted from its original rational, evidence-based approach. Just how much of a need that site meets is evident from a recent post comparing what we used to believe, with what we now believe, on  subjects ranging from the age of the Earth to textual criticism:

Historical criticism - a guide for the perplexed

One term that is guaranteed to make fundamentalists blanch even more than 'evolutionary biology' is historical criticism. Mention it, and you are guaranteed to have them talk at length about evil 19th century German scholars out to destroy the Bible, with Schecter's aphorism that "Higher Criticism is no more than Higher anti-Semitism" summarising the fundamentalist antipathy towards historical criticism. Certainly, allegations about Julius Wellhausen's anti-semiticism have circled for ages, while Friedrich Delitzsch's "Babel und Bibel" lecture series, in its "claim that the literature of the Bible was dependent on, and even borrowed from, the literature of the dominant culture represented in the region of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers" implied "that the origin of the Old Testament was human, not divine, and that the Christian faith therefore had its roots in pagan mythology." [1] 

However, abuse of a tool does not necessarily discredit it. It certainly needs to be remembered that Jean Astruc, the father of the documentary hypothesis was a Christian who saw his work as defending Christian orthodoxy, while many respected Biblical scholars who are also Christians use historical criticism and do not see it as being inconsistent with faith. [2]

On crackpots, science denialists, and false doctrine - a parable for the scientific age

Dealing with alt-health cranks is an occupational hazard in medicine. There's nothing like a little paranoia, a Google PhD and a dash of Dunning-Kruger to make the layperson who thinks that natural is best cross over into hard-core denialism. However, this one was different.

"The germ theory of disease is a myth," he intoned. "Koch and Pasteur were wrong. An imbalance of the four humours is always to blame for every disease. In fact, the field of modern medicine is a giant hoax. Metabolic disorders. Genetic disorders. All bunk. Bad humours explain all disease." He looked at me with that glazed look of triumph and braggadocio that is practically pathognomonic of the crank. Educating the crank is all but impossible, but as one of the most important roles of doctor is to teach the general public, I felt compelled to make one valiant attempt.

"The germ theory of disease has been accepted in mainstream medicine for quite some time." I pulled out my phone, and tapped on the screen. "Here. Here's a website which outlines the scientific basis of modern medicine for the interested layperson." I handed my phone to him. He looked at the article, looked at the author's name, then scowled, and returned my phone.

"It's written by a Catholic. If his theology is flawed, then why should I trust anything he has to say about modern medicine? If he can't interpret the Bible, then he cannot understand anything else. "