RE: RATE Vol. II

Hi Karl, you wrote:
 
>> There is NO scientific controversy over the age of the earth and ASA should be willing to say so (as noted by others, this has nothing to do with membership requirements). Special issues of PSCF or detailed analyses of RATE probably would have a detrimental effect in that it would give RATE a forum in which it would appear that they are a legitimate contender. Look at ID; they've been doing this for years. Despite the fact that numerous scientific and theological groups have addressed ID and shown it's massive shortcomings, the only thing the public hears is that legitimate groups seem to be taking ID seriously. And that gives them a credibility in the public (the voting public!) mind. ID has played this public relations game to the hilt.<<
 
We can play point - counter point till the cows come home. I think the atttitude that they made their bed, let them lie in it serves us just as well or maybe even better than if we jump into the game. I mentioned to a sales clerk in a Christian book store that I had a book in the works, and I mentioned a local versus global flood. She started regurgitating YEC propoganda, and I found myself offering counter explanations one by one. What I would have preferred to say is that I belong to the American Scientific Affiliation and we disavow the idea that the earth is only a few thousand years old. “Here is an issue of PSCF that should answer your questions,” it would have been nice to have been able to say.
 
In such an issue I think it would be beneficial to concentrate on solid old-earth evidence from various areas of science, avoid anti-YEC rhetoric. Make it positive. Here is one example of what I would submit for possible inclusion:
 
Coral Growth Rate at Eniwetok
When the United States tested atomic bombs after World War II, a couple of remote island sites in the Pacific Ocean were selected. One of these was Eniwetok, a coral reef in the Marshall Islands. The U. S. Geological Survey performed extensive drilling to provide a benchmark against which to measure the effects of the atomic detonation.
Coral results from the death of coral animals, a mineral record of the past is built up as a progression of time. Coral cannot be deposited rapidly like gravel beds. Minuscule animals are born into the world, live out their life cycles, procreate and die, building layer upon layer of carcasses of descendant animals on top of their ancestors.
There are numerous limiting factors that inhibit the rate of coral growth. Too deep, it drowns, too shallow or if it is above sea level, all vertical growth stops. In the last 100 years or so that we have studied these coral reefs, they have been wearing down at approximately the same rate of growth.
Rates of coral growth do vary a little as to species and location. E. F. Hoffmeister did a study of Florida-Bahama coral that was published in a Geological Society of America Bulletin in 1964. The fastest growth rates he measured under optimum conditions were 10.7 millimeters in height per year, or about two-fifths of an inch.
Under the supervision of A. G. Mayer, the Carnegie Institute did a study of coral growth in the Samoan Islands from 1917 to 1920, and determined that the rate of coral growth averaged 8 millimeters a year, or less than one third of an inch. Taking the larger of these two figures, under ideal conditions, one thousand years of non-stop growth could produce a column of coral roughly 400 inches in height.
So how deep did they drill at Eniwetok? From the top of the reef, they drilled through 4,610 feet of coral before reaching the volcanic sea mount at the bottom. If the coral started growing at the day of creation and forged ahead nonstop at a reasonable rate of growth, for it to reach that height would take 165,960 years!
But how old is the volcano upon which the coral was built? And there were times in the past when the coral was above water as evidenced by concentrations of pollen in the zones of 2,440 feet to 2,510, 820 to 880 feet, and 670 to 680 feet.
How long did Eniwetok tarry above sea level at least three times before it again was submerged and could start growing again? How many times and for how long might the coral have been too deep to grow at all?
(The entire report and the references can be found in Dan Wonderly's book, God's Time-Records in Ancient Sediments, pp. 23-47.)
Dick Fischer
Dick Fischer, Genesis Proclaimed Association
Finding Harmony in Bible, Science, and History
www.genesisproclaimed.org
Received on Tue May 23 09:31:48 2006