If you have not read Stories Versus Truth, you may want to read that before reading this.

Indian Amber Looks Young, So It Must Be Old?

The following is an excerpt from an article that appeared on creationrevolution.com.

The study's lead author, Jes Rust from the University of Bonn, stated in a university press release that amber-encased fossils usually decay with time. He said that these insects seemed to have been preserved by "some resin component."⁷ It wasn't made clear, however, what kind of component could possibly preserve remains for 50 million years.

The idea that these amber insect tissues somehow lasted this long is also refuted by the researchers' description of the amber as being tacky to the touch and easily dissolved. Why is there so little evidence of decay in these insects, which should have occurred even faster in such low-quality, porous amber? And does the tackiness mean that that amber had not had enough time to completely harden?

There are also polystrate fossils. There are fossils of trees that are standing verticle through what Old Earth Mythologists claim to be thousands or millions of years of layers of sediment that were gradually deposited. This, of course, would not be possible unless the sediment had been deposited quickly. (read more) This is strong evidence for the global flood of Noah's day.

Evolutionary history is called into question by the extensive size of this amber deposit, the cosmopolitan assemblage of its various insects, and the freshness of the remains. In contrast, biblical history is right in step with the evidence. The creation/Flood model actually predicts that such things would be produced by the massive watery catastrophe and young earth described in Genesis.

It should be mentioned that scientific method does not, in itself, have the capacity to prove either a young or an old Earth. Both positions use the same scientific facts to come to very different conclusions based on either presupposition or direct revelation. Some would say it this way: the differences are in the beliefs, and those beliefs are based either in presuppositions or in revelation. The same applies to Evolution. Scientists apply scientific method in order to use their beliefs to make speculations that are consistent with those beliefs about what happened in the past. Some are aware that this is the process that they are using, but most, especially those on the side of Evolutionism and Old-Earthism, are totally oblivious to their bias. Logic can only have at its basis one of three things: revelation, circularity, or assumption (which is vapor)

There is a difference between historical inquiry and operational science. The best evidence for determining what happened in the past is the evidence contained in writing.

Ungodly people are forced to hold on tightly to some basic presuppositions.  These presuppositions are just simple-minded assumptions.  They are filters and a way to censor out any information that supports the existence of God.  They set up a web of rules to filter out God.  They will only accept those things that conform to Naturalism, materialism, and uniformitarianism.  Naturalism claims that God does nothing.  Materialism claims that there is no God or spiritual realm.  Uniformitarianism claims that there was not creation and that there was no violent worldwide flood, as the Bible and numerous other historical accounts record.  Whatever they observe that does not conform to this complex filter is censored.  The way that it is censored can take several forms.  The ungodly may boldly proclaim that, though the data appears to support God's version and refute the version of the ungodly, yet it still must be interpreted to mean just the opposite of what it does mean.  A backup method that ungodly people use is to prophecy that in the future, science will be able to explain what they see as an anomaly.  If that fails, they will hide the data, set it aside, or lie to keep the public from knowing the truth.  The data clearly demolishes the story of the ungodly and clearly supports the reality of the Creator God, His Bible, and His abiding Presence in His people.  When confronted with the obvious, a closed-minded ungodly person says, "I can't understand it."  They are willingly ignorant because they refuse to hold God in their knowledge.  The reality is that these people, for whatever reason, don't what to know the Creator.  They don't want to truly know Jesus, their Creator.

Many Christians have lost their faith because of speculations regarding the age of the earth. These speculations usually put death before sin, eliminate the world-wide flood and replace it with millions of years, and eliminate the creation and replace it with billions of years. If death is before sin, then sin does not cause death. If sin does not cause death, that destroys the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

We are not dogmatically claiming to know that the Earth is 6,000 years old. We know that God created the Heavens and the Earth in six days and we know the number of generations between Adam and Christ. That's about it. Even though a plain reading of Scripture seems to indicate a young Earth; even though there is zero observed evidence and only circular reasoning and speculations that support old Earth stories, we can't even deny the possibility that God could have done something that Scripture doesn't hint at and that has left no scientific evidence. It is possible. It just is not worth the time to think about it.

There is plenty of evidence for a young Earth and a recent creation:

• Ten Scientific Facts that Show a Young Earth
• Semi-technical Article
• Several Articles on Various Aspects
• What Evidence is Used to Show that the Earth is Young?
• The Universe was Created Recently.
• Fourteen Easy-To-Understand Reasons for a Young Earth
• Questions and Answers About the Age of the Earth
• Old Galaxies Don't Line Up with Facts