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
 <http://www.genesisproclaimed.org> www.genesisproclaimed.org
Received on Tue May 23 10:09:58 2006