I would like to call your attention to a post by Dr. Hugh Ross of Reasons to Believe, but first I’d like to tell you a little bit about how I became involved in science-faith apologetics.

Looking Into Cosmology

Sometime in the late 1990’s, a millennium or so ago, my interest in astronomy led to an interest in cosmology. Being a Christian, I particularly wanted to become familiar with Christian perspectives on cosmology. I, like many other Christians, had been taught in church that the Earth is only less than 10,000 years old, and in school that the dinosaurs lived about 65 million years ago. I had felt a vague discomfort, wondering how – and if – this could all be worked out.

The first book I read about cosmology was “Scientific Creationism” by Henry M. Morris. As I read the book, I recall thinking, “That doesn’t sound right”…”That’s just wrong”…”That’s really wrong!” Even with my somewhat limited knowledge of science at that time, I could tell that Mr. Morris was way off track, both scientifically and biblically.

The next book I read was “Creation and Time” by Dr. Hugh Ross. I had a totally different experience with this book, thinking “Yes, that sounds right”…”That explains things.” Science and the Bible are not in conflict! I also felt that the Holy Spirit was confirming in me the truth of what I was reading. This was a major turning point in my life.

Science and the Bible are not in conflict!

The Science-Faith Connection

God, the GeometerHugh Ross is a gifted astronomer and pastor who has amazing insight into both science and the Bible. He has shown that nature, properly understood, and the Bible, properly understood, are not only not in conflict, but both point the way to God. Since I read my first book by Hugh Ross, I have read several others and even started a local chapter of Reasons to Believe, a science-faith apologetics organization which was founded by Hugh and his wife, Kathy, 30 years ago.

I have learned much about science, nature, and the Bible over the years since then and one thing that has consistently troubled me is the stubborn refusal of young-Earth creationists (who believe that the Earth is 6,000 – 10,000 years old) to give up that line of thinking, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that the Earth is many billions of years old.

A Show-Stopper

Ice Core Layers

Ice Core Layers

Ice cores are one line of research that provides excellent, easily-understood evidence that the Earth must be much older than 10,000 years. Cores consisting of as many as 800,000 annually-deposited layers have been drilled in Greenland and Antarctica. Multiple lines of evidence confirm that each layer represents only one year.

As I see things, since 800,000 years is a much, much longer period of time than 10,000 years, ice cores are a show-stopper for young-Earth creationism. And this is just one show-stopper among many! Why don’t they just throw in the towel? What does it take to kill that failed model?

With all that as background, I will now point to a blog post by Hugh Ross, “What Does It Take To Kill a Scientific Model?” Ice cores get only a brief mention in the post but this is one of my favorite articles by Hugh, for multiple reasons. For one, he tackles the tough question of why people hang onto failed models, which is a sore spot for me. For another, he takes on both naturalism and young-Earth creationism in a brief, yet powerful article. And lastly, I attended the conference at which Hugh debated the young-Earth creationist of which he spoke in his post, so this is personally relevant to me. I highly recommend Hugh’s post and also the many resources available at reasons.org.