A Divine Appointment in a Drab Ukrainian Orphanage

Every night when seven-year-old Tanya tried to sleep, memories haunted her. Memories of wandering around in the cold and trying not to be seen by the police while begging for money. The smile on her mom's face when Tanya brought home enough money. The hostility, anger, and beatings she received when she didn't. The gut-wrenching pain she felt when one of her mother's boyfriends stabbed her with a knife and another scalded her hands in boiling water.

Living in a drab, cold Ukrainian orphanage, Tanya prayed every day that God would give her a forever family. One afternoon her eyes lit up when she spotted a nice-looking young couple touring the orphanage. Tanya walked right up to them and told them she had been praying for a family.

What Tanya didn't know was that God was already working in this couple's hearts, prodding them to become part of New Hope's Orphan Care ministry. That day something very special, something they believe was a divine appointment, began. And about a year later, then-eight-year-old Tanya said good-bye to the stark orphanage and became part of Vasyl and Ira Fityo's family.

The weeks, months, and years ahead were anything but easy and smooth. It took a great deal of love, patience, prayer, and tenacity for Vasyl and Ira to help Tanya find wholeness and healing. But today, ten years later, 18-year-old Tanya's life has been imprinted and changed forever by this loving Christian family and their church community. Tanya is a happy, independent young lady who loves the Lord Jesus Christ with all of her heart.

Tanya's own words of appreciation: "I am very glad that you and New Hope Ukraine supported me financially and spiritually for all these years. May God bless you richly! Thank you, New Hope, for the chance in life you gave me by helping my parents find me and help me!"

(from the New Hope International newsletter, December 2012)
(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)

Abiogenesis: metabolism or information? Better question: chicken or egg?

Abiogenesis, the idea that life arose from inorganic matter, is between a rock and a hard place. If the origin of life began with metabolism, the first life molecules were so simple they could not copy themselves. If it began with information, the first life molecules had to be so complicated that they have never been produced by reasonable chemical processes. The real answer can be found in the age-old question: "Which came first, the chicken or the egg?"

(excerpts from Timothy R. Stout, Testimony of the Origins Divice, published in Creation Matters, a publication of Creation Research Society, Volume 17, Number 5, September/October 2012, to appear at http://www.creationresearch.org/creation_matters/pdf/2012/CM17%2005%20low%20res.pdf)

Melissa Lee Phillips published an article not too long ago in BioScience magazine titled, “The Origins Divide: Reconciling Views on How Life Began” (Phillips, 2010). In it she gives a history of the understanding of abiogenesis, the idea that life arose from inorganic matter.

Regarding the large macromolecules which are so critical to the functioning of living organisms, she commented,

All of these molecules and processes are so intertwined that it’s difficult to imagine how any of them could have arisen without the others already in place. Chicken-and-egg problems abound.

It turns out that the big, fundamental divide facing abiogenesis researchers today is whether the origin of life was information first or metabolism first. Study has revealed serious problems with both of these situations! The molecules which are proposed to have arisen in the metabolism-first scenario are simple enough to have achieved some level of concentration in plausible prebiotic chemical processes. However, the fact that these molecules do not copy themselves is a critical shortcoming since reproducibility is a fundamental, required characteristic of life.



Phillips says: "The metabolism-first model proposes that life probably arose at deep-sea hydrothermal vents, like the black smoker pictured here, when very simple molecules such as carbon dioxide, hydrogen, and hydrogen sulfide reacted with each other on the common iron-sulfur minerals pyrrhotite and pyrite. Photograph: OAR/National Undersea Research Program (NURP); NOAA."

By contrast, the molecules associated with an information-first scenario are so complicated that they have never been produced by chemical processes which can be reasonably associated with prebiotic circumstances. The meager positive results occasionally observed experimentally in- variably are found to have required extensive human intervention. Indeed, Phillips quoted Jim Cleaves of the Carnegie Institute for Science who said that whenever researchers manage to synthesize an interesting molecule, “it’s such a complex and kind of contrived experiment, it’s hard to really swallow.”



Phillips says: "The 'RNA world' model arose with the discovery of ribozymes—RNA molecules, such as the self-cleaving hammerhead ribozyme depicted here, that can act as catalysts. Could these self-replicating molecules have evolved from short, noncatalytic stretches of RNA, or would an autocatalytic network of chemical reactions have had to come first? The pink spheres are Mg11ions that stabilize the structure of the ribozyme. Graphic: Kalju Kahn and Esther Zhuang, University of California, Santa Barbara; created with PyMol (DeLano Scientific)."

Finally, after six pages of pointing out major problems at every level of abiogenesis, Phillips endeavored to end the article on an optimistic note by discussing the new “emergent systems” approach.

In this approach, scientists “toss dozens or hundreds of chemicals together and see what happens.”  John Sutherland of the University of Manchester, United Kingdom, declared, “We spent fourteen years exploring all that assembly chemistry and were largely extremely unsuccessful…” Then, using this “systems” approach, they discovered a method to make RNA nucleotides, the only successful effort by abiogenists to make nucleotides (Powner et al., 2009)

However, they did not just step back and watch the synthesis happen. In order to avoid a series of problems, not the least of which was the formation of tar, they had to monitor and control the process very carefully.  In another article, Benner and others simply chalk this up as another example of an experiment which is supposedly plausible for a prebiotic scenario, but which realistically requires far too much human intervention to be suit- able (Benner et al., 2012 )

Sixty years of study in abiogenesis has not provided the anticipated solutions to the problem of life’s origin, but just the opposite! The abundance of “chicken-and-egg problems” implies the necessity of all of these components making a simultaneous, first appearance, in a fully-functioning interdependent form. If there were no religious implications, the evidence would be sufficient to make the case and this would be the end of the discussion.

Of course, there are religious implications and this changes the entire character of the discussion.

The Bible states that the Creation of the entire cosmos (universe) took place in six days. It is clear from the context that these were literal days, not figurative. Experts have failed to build a scientifically-defensible case otherwise. 
 Illustration from the Creation Facts Screen Saver. 

Marko's comment: It seems that scientists always like to talk about “chicken-and-egg problems." Which came first, the chicken or the egg? Thinking people who also believe that there is a God who gave us the Bible - they know the answer. It's the chicken! Created on Day Five of the Creation week! How did life arise from inorganic matter? The answer is not in the primeval depths of time, it is that God Himself called living creatures into being.

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)

References

Benner S.A., H-J. Kim, and Z. Yang. 2012. Setting the stage: The history, chemistry, and geobiology behind RNA. Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 4:a003541. doi: 10.1101/cshperspect.a003541

Phillips, M.L. 2010. The origins divide: Reconciling views on how life began. BioScience 60(9). 10.1525/bio.2010.60.9.3.  Retrieved October 25, 2012, from www.deepdyve.com/lp/university-of-california-press/the-origins-divide-reconciling-views-on-how-life-began-vOMlkgH3Lk

Powner, M.W., B. Gerland, and & J.D. Sutherland. 2009. Synthesis of activated pyrimidine ribonucleotides in prebiotically plausible conditions. Nature. 459:239–242. doi: 10.1038/nature08013

A Bottle of Vodka Costs the Same as a Loaf of Bread

Alcoholism is a big problem in Romania, especially in the villages. It's quite common for families to self-produce --- and consume --- close to one hundred gallons of vodka a year. And lives that are on a path of destruction often pull others along with them. Especially in a land where a bottle of vodka costs the same as a loaf of bread.

But a Christian ministry offers true hope and change. As a result of their program, many Romanians not only get released from the bondage of their addiction, but also become followers of Christ. For them, this Christmas will not be about vodka and abuse, but about freedom and hope in Christ!

Levente Horvath.

This ministry is Good Shepherd Romania, a partner with 4D Ministries. Good Shepherd is led by Levente Horvath, who helps churches become "missional" --- to reach out with the love of Christ in order to see lost people redeemed and restored. Christmas to Levente is not about getting, but about passing on God's love and grace to those in need.

On average, the subsidy paid by Good Shepherd is about $400 per participant. The remaining 40 percent of the cost is paid by the family or sending church, which gives them a stake in the program, often resulting in much needed prayers and follow-up programs.

In the last few years over 700 people participated with a success rate of over 70 percent. That's about 500 people, both men and women, who have left their lives of alcohol. Many also became followers of Christ!

Levente did not look for a comfortable job when he got involved. It was clearly God's calling and empowering that made him a messenger of God's Good News to those desperate and in need. What an inspiration!

(from the 4D Ministries newsletter, December 2012. 4D means "for Deo/God")

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)

Uğur never came back with the Bible

Uğur Yüksel

More than five years ago, a young Turkish man named Uğur shared his love of Jesus with a waitress at a café he often visited in Malatya, Turkey. He said he'd bring her a Bible the next day, and she eagerly waited for it.

However, he never came.

Instead, she saw his picture on the news and learned that Uğur had been brutally murdered. She was heartbroken and confused, and began a prolonged search for a Bible.

This summer she learned of believers at a Christian camp an hour away, and she continued her search there. When she arrived, they shared the Gospel with her and gave her the Bible she'd sought for the past five years. The group was meeting at the very same lake where Uğur made his profession of faith and was baptized.

Please pray that this dear woman will follow his godly example.

(from a Christian prayer letter, November 2012)

For more info on Uğur Yüksel, see
New Evidence Stalls Murder Trial in Malatya, Turkey, April 22, 2010.
Alleged ‘Middleman’ Arrested in Malatya, Turkey Murders, October 21, 2012.

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)

Beware Biologos attempts to improve on Scripture...

Evil has nothing to do with the Curse or the Fall of man? Evil is somehow a natural outcome of evolutionary progress? God does not know the details of how history will turn out? Here is a suggestion: When Biologos or any other group attempts to improve on Scripture, be suspicious.

Selections from Don DeYoung's book review of The Language of Science and Faith, by Karl Giberson and Francis Collins.

(These selections by Marko Malyj are of the book review published in Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal, Volume 49 Number 1, Summer 2012)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)

Physicist Karl Giberson is on the faculty of Eastern Nazarene College, Quincy, Massachusetts, and geneticist Francis Collins directs the National Institutes of Health. Both authors are in leadership of the Biologos Foundation, which strongly promotes theistic evolution.

One of the questions that the authors address is "What about about evil in nature? [It] has no simple answer; alas it also has no complex answer” (p. 128). The authors state that evil has nothing to do with the Genesis 3 Curse or the Fall of man. Instead, Biologos concludes that evil is somehow a natural outcome of evolutionary progress (p. 132).

Furthermore, they believe that God does not know the details of how history will turn out. “God has endowed nature with a degree of freedom … with and inherent liberty … it explores its own inherent potential through its evolving process” (p. 116).

It is further stated that a literal Adam and Eve are ruled out by genomics (p. 206). The studies conclude that there is too much genetic variation in humanity for an origin in just two people. Instead, there must have been at least 10,000 prehuman creatures to get us where we are today. The apostle Paul must not have gotten this memo, since he refers to Adam and Eve in Romans 5:12. The Lord makes similar reference in Mat­thew 19:4.

Here is a suggestion: When Biologos or any other group attempts to improve on Scripture, be suspicious.

The Language of Science and Faith by Karl Giberson and Francis Collins
IVP Books, Downers Grove, IL, 2011, 250 pages, $20.00.

Is the Romance of Radiometric Dating Getting Old?

Radiometric dating is still a faulty argument against biblical history. Naturalistic geolo­gists often “cherry-pick” dates they deem appropriate to their particular studies. Carbon-14 has been found in coal and diamond samples supposedly be billions of years old, even though the half-life of ¹⁴C is only 5730 years. The creationist RATE group's theory that there have been periods of accelerated nuclear decay in the past runs into the problem of rapid volume cooling. Woodmorappe's statistical noise theory that radiometric dating is inherently unreliable may indeed be vindicated.

The inherent inconsis­tency of secular results strengthens the argument for a young earth, as the Bible describes in a most straightforward way!
 
Selections from RATE Study: Questions Regarding Accelerated Nuclear Decay and Radiometric Dating, by Carl R. Frode Jr. and A. Jerry Akridge.

(These selections by Marko Malyj are of the article published in Creation Research Society Quarterly Journal, Volume 49 Number 1, Summer 2012)

(To receive new uMarko posts via a daily email, please click Subscribe)

Introduction

Radiometric dating remains a popular, but still faulty, argument against biblical history.

Radiometric dating utilizes the decay rates of certain radioactive atoms to date rocks or artifacts. Uniformitarian geologists consider this form of dating strong evidence that the Earth is billions of years old. Many atoms (or elements) exist as numerous varieties called isotopes, some of which are radioactive, meaning they decay over time by losing particles. Radiometric dating is based on the decay rate of these isotopes into stable nonradioactive isotopes. To date an object, scientists measure the quantity of parent and daughter isotope in a sample, and use the atomic decay rate to determine its possible age. (Creationwiki, 2012)

But research by creationists has revealed a large number of problems with radiometric dating. 

For instance, Naturalistic geolo­gists often “cherry-pick” dates they deem appropriate to their particular studies, and if results do not agree with expected dates, the “error” is attributed to any number of possible problems (Froede, 2010).

Yet another challenge for the interpretation of nuclear decay findings is documentation of detectible Carbon-14 in coal and diamond samples purported to be billions of years old, even though the half-life of ¹⁴C is only 5730 years.

Radiometric Age-Dating in Creation Science— A Brief History

Beginning with the publication of The Genesis Flood (Whitcomb and Mor­ris, 1961), radiometric age-dating was deemed incompatible with biblical history. Over the years, many young-earth creationists have documented the problems and unbiblical assumptions of various dating methods (Acrey, 1965; Armstrong, 1966; Clementson, 1970; Cook, 1968; Lammerts, 1964; Whitelaw 1968, 1969a, 1969b; Woodmorappe, 1979, 1999).

However, many young-earth creationists have suggested that radiometric dating can be accepted with one or more episodes of ac­celerated nuclear decay having occurred during Earth’s past.

In 1968, Gentry proposed a bold idea based on his work on radioactively damaged zircons. He stated, “While there might be other alternatives, one possible explanation of these ‘fractures’ or ‘blasting’ halos is that the rate of ra­dioactive decay was at one time greater than that observed today” (Gentry, 1968, p. 85; italics added).

But no one could of­fer a mechanism for decay acceleration.

Chaffin (2000) proposed that a variation in the fifth dimension of our universe early in the Creation Week might have led to accelerated nuclear decay.

RATE Project

The radioisotope age dating book
and DVD set by the RATE
group can be purchased here.

As a joint project between the Institute for Creation Research and the Creation Research Society, the RATE group convened in 1997 to discuss issues with radiometric dating within the framework of a young earth  (Vardiman, 2000).

Research seemed predicated on the belief that

at some time in the past much higher rates of radioisotope decay may have occurred, leading to the production of large quantities of daughter prod­ucts in a short period of time. It has been suggested that these increased decay rates may have been part of the rock-forming process on the early earth and/or one of the results of God’s judgment upon man follow­ing the Creation, that is, the Curse or during the Flood (Vardiman, 2000, p. 4).

The results of the eight-year study were published in 2005 (Vardiman et al, 2005), and the RATE scientists de­termined that "accelerated nuclear decay was the most promising explanation for the large amount of daughter products." (Vardiman, 2005, p. 7).

Problem of Massive Heat Generation

Any episode of rapid nuclear decay should result in the release of large amounts of heat (Humphreys, 2005; Snelling, 2005; Vardiman, 2005). This heat would profoundly affect the planet, whether it happened during the Cre­ation Week, following the Curse, or during the Flood. Humphreys (2005, pp. 68-70) stated

rapid cooling occurred .... most of the cooling could not be by the normal processes of conduction, convection, or radiation. Instead, the process would have to cool the entire volume of material simultaneously (“volume” cooling) and abnormally fast.  

In my feasibility study, I pointed out a little-known and less-understood phenomenon in standard General Relativity theory that seems quite relevant. The mech­anism causes photons and moving material particles in an expanding cosmos to lose energy. The equations clearly show the loss of energy but where and how the energy goes is less clear…. This mechanism offers good potential for removing heat on a large scale. 

But if volume cooling cannot be empirically demonstrated, then it remains specula­tion.

Variability in the Rates  of Nuclear Decay: K-Ar, Rb-Sr, Sm-Nd, and Pb-Pb Isochron Discordance

In his analysis of the parent/daughter radioisotopes for the Beartooth amphibolite (Wyoming) and the Bass Rapids diabase sill (Grand Canyon, Arizona), Austin determined that changing decay rates created discor­dances in the K-Ar, Rb-Sr, Sm-Nd, and Pb-Pb radioisotope age-dates. He noted,

Furthermore, our data are consistent with the possibilities that, at some time or times in the past, decay of the α-emitters (²³⁸U, ²³⁵U, and ¹⁴⁷Sm) was accelerated more than decay of the β-emitters (⁸⁷Rb and ⁴⁰K). (Austin, 2005, p. 386)

Snelling and others reached this same conclusion in their investigation of the Bass Rapids diabase sill (Snelling et al, 2003, p. 283).

Both projects concluded that there was decay-dependent variability in the rate of nuclear decay that should show consistent differences between different radiometric dating methods, yet some level of consistency in the same method.

What radiometric age- dates would indicate Creation Week rocks, post-Curse antediluvian rocks, or Flood rocks and sediments? (Figure 1) If the results (using accelerated decay) are to be useful, the ability to link rocks/sedi­ments to biblical history is essential. This also raises the question of a quantifiable conversion factor for each radiometric method; such numerical factors would be invaluable for creationist analyses of radiometric age-dates (Figure 2).


Figure 1. This diagram shows a biblical geologic timescale with three shaded boxes corresponding to the three periods of time when accelerated radiomet­ric decay purportedly occurred. The darker the box, the greater the level of accelerated radiometric decay based on the findings of the RATE project team.

Figure 2. This diagram presents a hypo­thetical mathematical formula necessary to convert naturalistic radiometric dates to accelerated and acceptable values in the Creation/Flood geologic framework of earth history. Missing are the conversion factors for each of the secular radiometric age-dating methods. These factors will need to be provided in order to demonstrate that accelerated nuclear decay occurred within the anticipated time frame of the biblical record (see Figure 1).

Inconsistency between Carbon 14 and Long-Lived Nuclides

Baumgardner (2005) presented an in­teresting study on detectable carbon 14 (¹⁴C) in various “old” coal deposits and diamonds.

... during the Flood might have affected a offer the tentative hypothesis that, This amount of decay represents short half-life isotope like ¹⁴C.... perhaps only a modest amount of accelerated ¹⁴C decay took place dur­ing the cataclysm itself.... whatever the physics was describing the decay acceleration, it did not operate in so simple a manner as to reduce temporarily the effective half-lives of all radioisotopes by the same factor. (Baumgardner, 2005, p. 620)

At present, it is not clear how ac­celerated nuclear decay could have occurred at very high rates for the K-Ar, Rb-Sr, Sm-Nd, and Pb-Pb systems but at very low rates for short-lived isotopes such as ¹⁴C.

Certainty and the RATE Results

It is use­ful that some of the results of the RATE research appear to be critiques of radio­metric dating from both theoretical and experimental perspectives (Snelling et al, 2003; Snelling, 2004).

Unfortunately, the same circularity that afflicts modern secular stratigraphers seems likely to also plague creationists that take this route. Quantifying accelerated decay for each dating method would go a long way to­ ward reducing those uncertainties.

Discussion and Conclusions

The RATE group considered the possibility that a substantial amount of decay might have occurred dur­ing the Judgment in the Garden of Eden, but then it was concluded that the implied levels of radiation and heating would have been so highly destructive to biology at that point in earth history as to render this possibility unlikely (Vardiman et al, 2005, p. 737).

Unfortunately, there is an inherent problem of knowing the relative ages of rocks in the first place. Some creationists resolve this problem by accepting a compressed ver­sion of the standard geologic timescale, although one reason for doing so is the presumption of accelerated radiometric dating (Dickens and Snelling, 2008a, 2008b). However, Reed (2008a, 2008b, 2008c, 2008d) and others (Froede, 2008; Reed and Oard, 2008) have questioned this approach.

There is a demonstrated lack of accuracy and precision of radiometric results, and their inconsistency with other field evidence. Some of these stud­ies showed results that were definitively wrong (Austin, 1988, 1992, 1994, 1996, 2000; Snelling, 1995, 1999a, 1999b, 2000a, 2000b).

The statistical noise theory was a competing model proposed by Woodmorappe (1999). He asserted that radiometric dating is inherently unreliable and that secular scientists select desired results from a reservoir of inconsistent results, based on their needs at the time. It would require researchers to find a quantitative basis for eliciting consistency from apparently inconsistent results. This might provide the basis for conversion factors or equa­tions that would ultimately allow the theory to become useful in field studies. If they cannot, then the skepticism of Woodmorappe (1999) and the earlier creationists who wrote against radiomet­ric age-dating might be vindicated.

But even then, a good result will have been achieved. If creationists can demonstrate the inherent inconsis­tency of secular results, the argument for a young earth is greatly strengthened. This would force acknowledgment that chronology must ultimately rest on the divinely inspired historical documents provided in the Bible. Similarly, the demonstration of the unreliability of radiometric dating would reinforce the inherent weakness of the geological timescale (Reed, 2008c).

References (selected)

Acrey, D.O. 1965. Problems in absolute age determination. CRSQ 1:7–9.

Armstrong. H.L. 1966. An attempt to correct for the effects of the Flood in determin­ing dates by radioactive carbon. CRSQ 2:28–30 and CRSQ 3:4.

Austin, S.A. 1988. Grand Canyon lava flows: a survey of isotope dating methods. Impact No. 178. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA.

Austin, S.A. 1992. Excessively old “ages” for Grand Canyon lava flows. Impact No. 224. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA.

Austin, S.A. 1994. Are Grand Canyon rocks one billion years old? In Austin, S.A. (editor), Grand Canyon: Monument to Catastrophe, pp. 111–131. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA.

Austin, S.A. 1996. Excess argon within min­eral concentrates from the new dacite lava dome at Mount St. Helens volcano. CenTJ 10(3):335–343.

Austin, S.A. 2000. Dubious radiogenic Pb behavior places U-Th-Pb mineral dating in doubt. Impact No. 319, Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA.

Austin, S.A. 2005. Do radioisotope clocks isochron need repair? Testing the assumptions of isochron dating using K-Ar, Rb-Sr, Sm- Nd, and Pb-Pb isotopes. In Vardiman, L., A.A. Snelling, and E.F. Chaffin (editors), Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Results of a Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative, pp. 325–392. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA, and Creation Research Society, Chino Valley, AZ.

Baumgardner, J.R. 2005. 14C evidence for a recent global Flood and a young Earth. In Vardiman, L., A.A. Snelling, and E.F. Chaffin (editors), Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Results of a Young- Earth Creationist Research Initiative, pp. 587–630. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA, and Creation Research Society, Chino Valley, AZ

Chaffin, E.F. 2000. A mechanism for acceler­ated radioactive decay. CRSQ 37:3–9.

Clementson, S.L. 1970. A critical exami­nation of radiocarbon dating of rocks. CRSQ 7:137–41.

Cook, M.A. 1968. Radiological dating and some pertinent applications: do radiolog­ical clocks need repair? CRSQ 5:69–77.

Creationwiki 2012. Radiometric dating. http://creationwiki.org/Radiometric_dating, accessed 11/8/2012.

Dickens, H., and A.A. Snelling. 2008a. Precambrian geology and the Bible: a harmony. JoC 22(1):65–72.

Froede, C.R., Jr. 2008. Harmony between the Bible and Precambrian geology—too fa­ vourable to naturalism. JoC 22(3):40–41.

Froede, C.R., Jr. 2010. Radiometric cherry-picking. Creation Matters 15(6):1–4.

Gentry, R.V. 1968. On the invariance of the decay constant over geologic time. CRSQ 5:83–5.

Humphreys, D.R. 2005. Young helium diffu­sion age of zircons supports accelerated nuclear decay. In Vardiman, L., A.A. Snelling, and E.F. Chaffin (editors), Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Results of a Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative, pp. 25–100. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA, and Creation Research Society, Chino Valley, AZ.

Lammerts, W.E. 1964. Discoveries since 1859 which invalidate the evolution theory. CRSQ 1(1):47–55.

Reed, J.K. 2008a. Toppling the timescale part I: evaluating the terrain. CRSQ 44:174–178.

Reed, J.K. 2008b. Toppling the timescale part II: unearthing the cornerstone. CRSQ 44:256–263.

Reed, J.K. 2008c. Toppling the timescale part III: madness in the methods. CRSQ 45:6–17.

Reed, J.K. 2008d. Toppling the timescale part IV: assaying the golden (FeS2) spikes. CRSQ 45:81–89.

Reed, J.K., and M.J. Oard. 2008. Precam­brian dissonance. JoC 22(3):42–44.

Snelling, A.A. 1995. The failure of U-Th-Pb “Dating” at Koongarra, Australia. CenTJ 9(1):71–92.

Snelling, A.A. 1999a. “Excess argon”: The “Achillies’ Heel” of potassium-argon and argon-argon “dating” of volcanic rocks. Impact No. 307. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA.

Snelling, A.A. 1999b. Potassium-argon and argon-argon dating of crustal rocks and the problems of excess argon. Impact No. 309. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA.

Snelling, A.A. 2000a. Dubious radiogenic Pb behavior places U-Th-Pb mineral dating in doubt. Impact No. 319. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA.

Snelling, A.A. 2000b. Conflicting “ages” of Tertiary basalt and contained fossilized wood, Crinum, central Queensland, Australia. CenTJ 14(2):99–122.

Snelling, A.A., S.A. Austin, and W.A. Hoesch. 2003. Radioisotopes in the diabase sill (upper Precambrian) at Bass Rapids, Grand Canyon, Arizona: an application and test of the isochron dating method. In Ivey, R.L. (editor), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Cre­ationism, pp. 269–284. Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA.

Snelling, A.A. 2004. Radioisotope dating of Grand Canyon rocks: Another devastat­ ing failure for long-age geology. Impact No. 376. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA.

Snelling, A.A. 2005. Radiohalos in granites: evidence for accelerated nuclear decay. In Vardiman, L., A.A. Snelling, and E.F. Chaffin (editors), Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Results of a Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative, pp. 101–207. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA, and Creation Research Society, Chino Valley, AZ.

Vardiman, L., A.A. Snelling, and E.F. Chaf­fin (editors). 2000. Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: A Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA, and Creation Research Society, St. Joseph, MO.

Vardiman, L., A.A. Snelling, and E.F. Chaf­fin (editors). 2005. Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth: Results of a Young-Earth Creationist Research Initiative, Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA, and Creation Research Society, Chino Valley, AZ.

Whitcomb, J.C., and H.M. Morris. 1961. The Genesis Flood. Presbyterian and Re­ formed Publishing Co., Phillipsburg, NJ.

Whitelaw, R.L. 1968. Radiocarbon confirms biblical creation (and so does potassium-argon). CRSQ 5:78–83.

Whitelaw, R.L. 1969a. Radiocarbon and potassium-argon dating in the light of dis­coveries in cosmic rays. CRSQ 6:71–73.

Whitelaw, R.L. 1969b. A reply. CRSQ 6:114.

Woodmorappe, J. 1979. Radiometric geo­ chronology reappraised. CRSQ 16:102– 129, 147, i.

Woodmorappe, J. 1999. The Mythology of Modern Dating Methods. Institute for Creation Research, El Cajon, CA.