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
Mars 'Water-carved' Canyon Actually Etched by Lava
For decades, the media and Hollywood have promoted the idea of life on Mars, yet scientific observations have shown that the red planet is utterly inhospitable.1...
BY: BRIAN THOMAS, PH.D.
Earth: A Special Place
Secularists like to consider earth as just one of many millions of planets, occupying an obscure place in an insignificant galaxy in a sea of nothingness....
BY: JOHN D. MORRIS, 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] => 641819733.3866401
)
-->
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.
More Creation Science Update
New Fossil Discovery Upends Animal Evolution...Again
Reptiles belong to a group of animals called amniotes that also include birds and mammals. A new Australian fossil discovery of a clawed amniote demonstrates...
BY: FRANK SHERWIN, D.SC. (HON.)
Built by Homo sapiens?
Preserved wood was recently found in Kalambo Falls, Zambia, where evolutionary anthropologists from Aberystwyth University and the University of Liverpool...
BY: FRANK SHERWIN, D.SC. (HON.)
Retina Design
There’s certainly nothing uncomplicated about the eye, simple1 or otherwise. Some of us remember learning about basic vision from...
BY: FRANK SHERWIN, D.SC. (HON.)
The Latest
NEWS   ACTS & FACTS   PODCASTS
ACTS & FACTS
Creation Kids: Galaxies
Hi, kids! We created a special Acts & Facts page just for you! Have fun doing the activities while learning about the wonderful world...

APOLOGETICS
Is Truth Real? If So, Can We Know It?
by Patrick C . Marks, D. Min., and Brian Thomas, Ph.D.* Truth matters. Without truth, no one can say for certain that anything is right or wrong,...
BY:  VARIOUS AUTHORS

ACTS & FACTS
Where Research and Revelation Align: Training Tomorrow's Scholars
As students prepare for a new school year, families are considering more than schedules, supplies, and classrooms. They are thinking about how the minds...
BY: JAMES GADBERRY

ACTS & FACTS
Glacier National Park: Flood Sediments, Slides, and Ice Age Sculptures
Glacier National Park (GNP), Montana, resides at the northern tip of the USA Continental Divide, abutting against Waterton Lake National Park at the...
BY: TIM CLAREY, PH.D.

ACTS & FACTS
Are Biblical Truth and Authority Less Important Than ''Salvation...
If an acquaintance at your church asked you to accompany them to share the gospel with a coworker who’d expressed deep guilt for his sins, would...
BY: RANDY J. GULIUZZA, P.E., M.D.

ACTS & FACTS
Molluscan Methuselahs: Fossil Crassostrea Oysters
Both before and after the global Flood in the days of Noah, people routinely lived for centuries (Genesis 5 and 11). Research at ICR is finding that...
BY: JAKE HEBERT, PH.D.

ACTS & FACTS
Polar Bears Thrive across the Arctic by Adaptive Flexibility
Every form of cellular life was created with specific traits and behaviors that enable it to thrive on our planet. For example, as global weather patterns...
BY: MICHAEL J. BOYLE, PH.D.

ACTS & FACTS
The Push for Feathered Dinosaurs: A Little Background
Editor’s note: ICR warmly welcomes paleontologist Dr. Gabriela Haynes to our science faculty. Her testimony of a shrinking faith brought back...
BY: GABRIELA HAYNES, PH.D.

NEWS
Tiny Cells, Precise Engineering
Even the smallest living cells face a big design problem. How do they keep the right shape while many parts inside them are moving? A recent study in...
BY: JONATHAN K. CORRADO, PH.D., P. E.

NEWS
Fast-Changing Cactus Flowers Still Point to Design
Cactus flowers have a striking range in size—they can be smaller than a grain of rice or longer than a school ruler. Such variation points to...
BY: JONATHAN K. CORRADO, PH.D., P. E.

Shop Related Products
Adam or Apes
$12.99
Discovering Dinosaurs - Download
$4.99
$9.99
Ancient and Fossil Bone Collagen Remnants
$29.99
Guide to Human Origins
$19.99
$24.99
Living in Light of Genesis
$15.99