New First Life Estimate Creates More Problems | The Institute for Creation Research

New First Life Estimate Creates More Problems
BY *  | 
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 02, 2015

How long would inanimate chemicals take to swirl themselves together and form a living cell? This unfair question assumes that such chemicals could ever form themselves into a cell even given an eternity to do so, but recent evidence from tiny crystals in Australian rocks causes researchers to think life evolved much earlier than most scientists would ever have thought possible. However, this new story of early emerging life comes with an array of new challenges.

Publishing in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,1 UCLA geoscientist Mark Harrison told the UCLA Newsroom, "Twenty years ago, this would have been heretical."2 Back then, the suggestion that life evolved 3.8 billion years ago was met with incredulity. Models which set the planet's beginning at 4.5 billion years ago show that their early Earth needed more time to radiate the fierce heat it had accumulated over eons from the colliding space debris that supposedly formed it. Is the window of time between when the planet became habitable and when life first evolved shrinking to ridiculously small proportions?

All that heat from all those early collisions would have evaporated whatever water may have been on the planet, which is why many researchers look for comets to have somehow seeded Earth with ample water at a later time, and yet still early enough in our planet's history for life to have evolved.3 Life would have needed water to evolve. Of course, water also prevents life from evolving—a paradox that has always stood in the way of all evolutionary life origins theories.4

Undaunted by the constraints of evolution's storyboard, Harrison and his coauthors now suggest that life's origin needs to be shortened even further—back to 4.1 billion years ago.

Their evidence? The team found carbon inclusions inside a zircon crystal. The stable isotope ratios of that carbon indicate photosynthesis was going on whenever those zircons formed. The team dated the zircons to about 4 billion years old using old-age assumptions about the measured ratio of uranium to lead.5

The suggestion that life evolved before 4 billion years ago collides with another life-ending scenario. In an event called the Late Heavy Bombardment, the impactors that made most of the moon's craters supposedly wreaked havoc on the early earth between 3.8 and 4.1 billion years ago.

Shrinking the available time for cells to evolve to only several hundred million years makes chemical evolution sound even more laughable. Plus, this earlier origin of life theory suffers from the water and bombardment challenges. But these pale in comparison to the fact that life only, and always, comes from pre-existing life. Chance processes always convert a swirling batch of chemicals to a less organized soup, never more life-like.

According to the Bible, God has always been alive, and he formed the first life thousands, not millions, of years ago. That means that these Australian zircons formed very recently, erasing the entire need to navigate evolution's impossible scenarios.

Research team leader Elizabeth Bell told the UCLA Newsroom, "We need to think differently about the early Earth."2 Now that's an understatement.

References

  1. Bell, E. A. et al. Potentially biogenic carbon preserved in a 4.1 billion-year-old zircon. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Published online before print, September 4, 2015, accessed October 26, 2015.
  2. Wolpert, S. Life on Earth likely started at least 4.1 billion years ago—much earlier than scientists had thought. UCLA Newsroom. Posted on newsroom.ucla.edu October 19, 2015, accessed October 26, 2015. 
  3. Thomas, B. Study: Comets Did Not Supply Earth's Water. Creation Science Update. Posted on icr.org December 29, 2014, accessed October 26, 2015. 
  4. Gish, D. 1976. Origin of Life: Critique of Early Stage Chemical Evolution Theories. Acts & Facts. 5 (1). 
  5. Vernon R. Cupps, Ph.D. 2015. Heavy Metal Clocks, U-Pb and Th-Pb Dating Models: Radioactive Dating, Part 7. Acts & Facts. 44 (5): 10-11. 

*Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Article posted on November 2, 2015.

More Earth's Water Cycle Protects and Provides
Oil-eating Bacteria Are Cleaning Up Gulf
The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico has spawned concerns regarding the long-term negative impact on the area's ecology, and especially on local fisheries....
BY: BRIAN THOMAS, PH.D.



	



	Some are concerned that global warming will melt the polar ice caps and lead to a rise in global sea level. Is this really happening?

    [abstract_edit] => 

	



	



	Some are concerned that global warming will melt the polar ice caps and lead to a rise in global sea level. Is this really happening?

    [stage] => 

	

    [stage_edit] => 

	

    [body] => 

	Some are concerned that global warming will cause the polar ice caps to melt, leading to an increase in global sea level. If such a rise in sea level occurred slowly, coastal peoples would have time to adjust to the change. But many are concerned that sea level could rise rapidly, leading to a humanitarian catastrophe.



	Although some scientists claim that satellite and tide-gauge data confirm a rapidly rising sea level, others are skeptical. In fact, two Australian scientists, Dr. Albert Parker and Dr. Clifford Ollier, have recently charged that Indian Ocean sea-level data for the last 140 years were manipulated to show a dramatic rise in sea level, even though the raw data showed that sea level had remained steady, or even dropped.1,2,3



	Indian Ocean sea-level data for the last 140 years were manipulated to show a dramatic rise in sea level, even though the raw data showed that sea level had remained steady, or even dropped. Tweet: Indian Ocean sea-level data for the last 140 years were manipulated to show a dramatic rise in sea level, even though the raw data showed that sea level had remained steady, or even dropped.

Is Global Sea Level Rising? http://www.icr.org/article/10403/

@icrscience



	Concerns over sea level rise are also being stoked by the way secular scientists interpret chemical wiggles within deep-seafloor sediments. These chemical wiggles (called oxygen isotope ratios) are thought to serve as “proxy” or “stand in” values for global ice volume: higher oxygen isotope ratios (denoted by the symbol δ18O) are thought to indicate ice ages, and lower values are thought to correspond to warmer “interglacial” periods.



	When water freezes to form ice, less of Earth’s total water is available to remain liquid. Since the total mass of water on Earth remains essentially constant, an increase in global ice volume should result in a decrease in global mean sea level, and vice versa. This means that δ18O values can presumably indicate past global sea levels.



	Most secular scientists assume the validity of the astronomical (or Milankovitch) ice age theory, which posits that ice ages are caused by slow, gradual changes in Earth’s orbital and rotational motions, which in turn are thought to affect the way sunlight is distributed on the Earth. Then they use astronomical calculations to infer times in the supposed prehistoric past when these sunlight variations are thought to have resulted in ice ages, and then these ages are assigned to the peak δ18O values.



	Then they use these ages to calculate past rates of sea level rise. These calculated rates have led secular scientists to worry about possible future catastrophic global flooding.



	Oceanographer Wolfgang Berger asked:



	Just when can we expect to see a rapid rise of sea level, ten times higher than the present values of a few millimeters per year? We do not know. All we can say, from experience with the many millennia of the ice-age records in the deep sea, is that once melting starts, it stimulates further melting for centuries. Deglaciation keeps going once begun in earnest: a great example of the dilemma of the sorcerer’s apprentice.4



	What Berger is calling “experience” is just a Milankovitch interpretation of the seafloor sediment data. But if the Milankovitch theory is wrong, then the ages assigned to the seafloor sediments are completely fictitious, as are the calculated rates of past sea level rise!



	If the Milankovitch theory is wrong, then the ages assigned to the seafloor sediments are completely fictitious, as are the calculated rates of past sea level rise! Tweet: If the Milankovitch theory is wrong, then the ages assigned to the seafloor sediments are completely fictitious, as are the calculated rates of past sea level rise!

Is Global Sea Level Rising? http://www.icr.org/article/10403/

@icrscience



	Despite its popularity, there are many problems with the astronomical theory.5 Moreover, recent ICR research has raised serious doubts about a key argument for the theory presented in a well-known paper titled “The Pacemaker of the Ice Ages.”6 The argument is so important that last year the journals Science and Nature both ran articles commemorating the paper’s 40th anniversary.7,8 More than a year later, secular scientists have yet to respond to this new research. Of course, they would probably claim that there is additional evidence for the theory, so that the theory is confirmed even without the Pacemaker paper’s validity. But if the Pacemaker paper is not essential to the argument for the Milankovitch theory, then why are supporters of the theory so reluctant to candidly acknowledge the paper’s problems?



	Since the argument for a rapidly rising sea level inferred from seafloor sediments is logically invalid, then evidence for such a claim, if it exists, can only come from satellite and tide-gauge data. Given the history of data manipulation in this field,9 including these recent allegations regarding Indian Ocean data, such claims should be heavily scrutinized before being accepted as valid. 



	References


    
	
  1. 
		Parker, A. and C. D. Ollier. 2017. Is the Sea Level Stable at Aden, Yemen? Earth Systems and Environment. 1: 18. doi.org/10.1007/s41748-017-0020-z.
    2. 
	
  2. 
		Richard, K. ‘Adjustments’ to Create Spurious Sea Level Rise Have Now Infected the PSMSL Tide Gauge Data. Posted at notrickszone.com December 4, 2017, accessed December 12, 2017.
    3. 
	
  3. 
		Delingpole, J. 2017. Tidalgate: Climate Alarmists Caught Faking Sea Level Rise. Posted at breitbart.com on December 6, 2017, accessed December 12, 2017.
    4. 
	
  4. 
		Berger, W. H. 2012. Milankovitch Theory—Hits and Misses. Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, 16. Emphasis added.
    5. 
	
  5. 
		Oard, M. J. 2007. Astronomical troubles for the astronomical hypothesis of ice ages. Journal of Creation. 21 (3): 19-23.
    6. 
	
  6. 
		Hebert, J. 2016. Revisiting an Iconic Argument for Milankovitch Climate Forcing: Should the "Pacemaker of the Ice Ages" Paper Be Retracted? Part 3. Answers Reserach Journal. 9:229-255.
    7. 
	
  7. 
		Hodell, D. A. 2016. The smoking gun of the ice ages. Science. 354 (6317): 1235-1236.
    8. 
	
  8. 
		Maslin, M. 2016. Forty years of linking orbits to ice ages. Nature. 540 (7632): 208-210.
    9. 
	
  9. 
		McIntyre, S. and R. McKitrick. 2005. Hockey sticks, principal components, and spurious significance. Geophysical Research Letters. 32, L03710.
    10. 




	*Dr. Jake Hebert is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research and earned his Ph.D. in physics from the University of Texas at Dallas.



	Article posted on January 4, 2018.

    [body_edit] => 

	Some are concerned that global warming will cause the polar ice caps to melt, leading to an increase in global sea level. If such a rise in sea level occurred slowly, coastal peoples would have time to adjust to the change. But many are concerned that sea level could rise rapidly, leading to a humanitarian catastrophe.



	Although some scientists claim that satellite and tide-gauge data confirm a rapidly rising sea level, others are skeptical. In fact, two Australian scientists, Dr. Albert Parker and Dr. Clifford Ollier, have recently charged that Indian Ocean sea-level data for the last 140 years were manipulated to show a dramatic rise in sea level, even though the raw data showed that sea level had remained steady, or even dropped.1,2,3



	Indian Ocean sea-level data for the last 140 years were manipulated to show a dramatic rise in sea level, even though the raw data showed that sea level had remained steady, or even dropped. Tweet: Indian Ocean sea-level data for the last 140 years were manipulated to show a dramatic rise in sea level, even though the raw data showed that sea level had remained steady, or even dropped.

Is Global Sea Level Rising? http://www.icr.org/article/10403/

@icrscience



	Concerns over sea level rise are also being stoked by the way secular scientists interpret chemical wiggles within deep-seafloor sediments. These chemical wiggles (called oxygen isotope ratios) are thought to serve as “proxy” or “stand in” values for global ice volume: higher oxygen isotope ratios (denoted by the symbol δ18O) are thought to indicate ice ages, and lower values are thought to correspond to warmer “interglacial” periods.



	When water freezes to form ice, less of Earth’s total water is available to remain liquid. Since the total mass of water on Earth remains essentially constant, an increase in global ice volume should result in a decrease in global mean sea level, and vice versa. This means that δ18O values can presumably indicate past global sea levels.



	Most secular scientists assume the validity of the astronomical (or Milankovitch) ice age theory, which posits that ice ages are caused by slow, gradual changes in Earth’s orbital and rotational motions, which in turn are thought to affect the way sunlight is distributed on the Earth. Then they use astronomical calculations to infer times in the supposed prehistoric past when these sunlight variations are thought to have resulted in ice ages, and then these ages are assigned to the peak δ18O values.



	Then they use these ages to calculate past rates of sea level rise. These calculated rates have led secular scientists to worry about possible future catastrophic global flooding.



	Oceanographer Wolfgang Berger asked:



	Just when can we expect to see a rapid rise of sea level, ten times higher than the present values of a few millimeters per year? We do not know. All we can say, from experience with the many millennia of the ice-age records in the deep sea, is that once melting starts, it stimulates further melting for centuries. Deglaciation keeps going once begun in earnest: a great example of the dilemma of the sorcerer’s apprentice.4



	What Berger is calling “experience” is just a Milankovitch interpretation of the seafloor sediment data. But if the Milankovitch theory is wrong, then the ages assigned to the seafloor sediments are completely fictitious, as are the calculated rates of past sea level rise!



	If the Milankovitch theory is wrong, then the ages assigned to the seafloor sediments are completely fictitious, as are the calculated rates of past sea level rise! Tweet: If the Milankovitch theory is wrong, then the ages assigned to the seafloor sediments are completely fictitious, as are the calculated rates of past sea level rise!

Is Global Sea Level Rising? http://www.icr.org/article/10403/

@icrscience



	Despite its popularity, there are many problems with the astronomical theory.5 Moreover, recent ICR research has raised serious doubts about a key argument for the theory presented in a well-known paper titled “The Pacemaker of the Ice Ages.”6 The argument is so important that last year the journals Science and Nature both ran articles commemorating the paper’s 40th anniversary.7,8 More than a year later, secular scientists have yet to respond to this new research. Of course, they would probably claim that there is additional evidence for the theory, so that the theory is confirmed even without the Pacemaker paper’s validity. But if the Pacemaker paper is not essential to the argument for the Milankovitch theory, then why are supporters of the theory so reluctant to candidly acknowledge the paper’s problems?



	Since the argument for a rapidly rising sea level inferred from seafloor sediments is logically invalid, then evidence for such a claim, if it exists, can only come from satellite and tide-gauge data. Given the history of data manipulation in this field,9 including these recent allegations regarding Indian Ocean data, such claims should be heavily scrutinized before being accepted as valid. 



	References


    
	
  1. 
		Parker, A. and C. D. Ollier. 2017. Is the Sea Level Stable at Aden, Yemen? Earth Systems and Environment. 1: 18. doi.org/10.1007/s41748-017-0020-z.
    2. 
	
  2. 
		Richard, K. ‘Adjustments’ to Create Spurious Sea Level Rise Have Now Infected the PSMSL Tide Gauge Data. Posted at notrickszone.com December 4, 2017, accessed December 12, 2017.
    3. 
	
  3. 
		Delingpole, J. 2017. Tidalgate: Climate Alarmists Caught Faking Sea Level Rise. Posted at breitbart.com on December 6, 2017, accessed December 12, 2017.
    4. 
	
  4. 
		Berger, W. H. 2012. Milankovitch Theory—Hits and Misses. Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, California, 16. Emphasis added.
    5. 
	
  5. 
		Oard, M. J. 2007. Astronomical troubles for the astronomical hypothesis of ice ages. Journal of Creation. 21 (3): 19-23.
    6. 
	
  6. 
		Hebert, J. 2016. Revisiting an Iconic Argument for Milankovitch Climate Forcing: Should the "Pacemaker of the Ice Ages" Paper Be Retracted? Part 3. Answers Reserach Journal. 9:229-255.
    7. 
	
  7. 
		Hodell, D. A. 2016. The smoking gun of the ice ages. Science. 354 (6317): 1235-1236.
    8. 
	
  8. 
		Maslin, M. 2016. Forty years of linking orbits to ice ages. Nature. 540 (7632): 208-210.
    9. 
	
  9. 
		McIntyre, S. and R. McKitrick. 2005. Hockey sticks, principal components, and spurious significance. Geophysical Research Letters. 32, L03710.
    10. 




	*Dr. Jake Hebert is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research and earned his Ph.D. in physics from the University of Texas at Dallas.



	Article posted on January 4, 2018.

    [typeID] => 9
    [visible] => t
    [pdf] => 
    [publishURL] => global-sea-level-rising
    [publishDate] => 0000-00-00
    [authorAsterisk] => t
    [domainID] => 1
    [publication] => 
    [volume] => 
    [issue] => 
    [page] => 
    [author] => Jake Hebert, Ph.D.
    [rand] => 1073800346.512719
)
-->
Is Global Sea Level Rising?
Some are concerned that global warming will cause the polar ice caps to melt, leading to an increase in global sea level. If such a rise in sea level...
BY: JAKE HEBERT, PH.D.
Propane Eaters Spur Creation Questions
Asphalt volcanos really do exist on the ocean floor. They leak natural gas, oil, and the same type of black glop we use for road pavement. They have...
BY: BRIAN THOMAS, PH.D.
More Creation Science Update
A New Jellyfish
One of the more fascinating animals in God’s creation is the ubiquitous and strange jellyfish. They are members of the subphylum Medusozoa,...
BY: FRANK SHERWIN, D.SC. (HON.)
Bavarian Turtle Fossil Supports Marine Mixing
A new discovery of a foot-long marine turtle fossil was announced in central Bavaria, southern Germany.1 The species, dubbed Solnhofia parsoni,...
BY: TIM CLAREY, PH.D.
Do Land Plants Have Algal Relatives?
Evolutionists recently reported observations about a plant group called the Zygnematophyceae (a class of green algae). They claimed to know more about...
BY: FRANK SHERWIN, D.SC. (HON.)
The Latest
NEWS   ACTS & FACTS   PODCASTS
NEWS
Creation Advocate Mike Riddle Goes Home to Be with the Lord
by Randy J. Guliuzza, P.E., M.D., and Jake Hebert, Ph.D.* Following a lengthy illness, Mike Riddle, founder and president of Creation Training Initiative...
BY:  VARIOUS AUTHORS

NEWS
When DNA Stop Signs Change Their Message
Imagine an intersection where the red stop sign suddenly means, “Right turn only.” Most drivers wouldn’t reach their destinations...
BY: JONATHAN K. CORRADO, PH.D., P. E.

NEWS
August Wallpaper
"The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament shows His handiwork"  (Psalm 19:1, NKJV) ICR's August 2026...
BY: STAFF WRITER

NEWS
Helium in Exoplanet's Atmosphere: Apparent Evidence of Youth
The prestigious journal Science has published evidence that a planet orbiting a red dwarf star has an atmosphere.1,2 This extrasolar planet,...
BY: JAKE HEBERT, PH.D.

CREATION PODCAST
Christian Geologist: I Studied Rocks for 13 Years - What I Found...
Geologist Dr. Tim Clarey spent 13 years digging into rock layers from every continent on Earth, and what he found doesn't match what most people were taught...
BY: STAFF WRITER

NEWS
Giant Fossil Shark Consistent with Extreme Pre-Flood Longevity
Paleontologists recently rediscovered the largest known set of vertebrae from the giant fossil shark Otodus megalodon, popularized by The Meg movies...
BY: JAKE HEBERT, PH.D.

NEWS
Faster Chemistry Is Not the Same as Life
A pile of metal, wires, and computer chips will not assemble itself into a working airplane. The parts may have useful properties, but they still need...
BY: JONATHAN K. CORRADO, PH.D., P. E.

NEWS
Fearsome Cleveland Fossil Is Still a Fish
According to evolutionary theory, fish went through a variety of forms until they evolved into the fish we see swimming today. Recently, what conventional...
BY: FRANK SHERWIN, D.SC. (HON.)

NEWS
Let the Fossils Speak for Themselves
When conventional scientists call a fossil an early step in animal evolution, the claim may rest more on a reading of the fossil than on the fossil...
BY: JONATHAN K. CORRADO, PH.D., P. E.

CREATION PODCAST
Christian Biologist: My Colleagues Will NOT Be Happy I’m Sharing...
Trey sits down with Dr. Michael Boyle to talk about his time in mainstream science, what ultimately led him to the Institute for Creation Research, and...
BY: STAFF WRITER

Shop Related Products
Ancient and Fossil Bone Collagen Remnants
$29.99
Guide to Human Origins
$19.99
$24.99
Dinosaurs and the Bible
$4.99
Discovering Dinosaurs - Download
$4.99
$9.99
Discovering Dinosaurs
$7.99
$9.99