In part 1 of this expedition, I started to explore the first of two flood boundary hypotheses. I’m going to try and answer some questions (and give some new insight) in this post about the Pliocene/Pleistocene flood boundary before we move on to a different area.

Some Background Info

Okay, so about 60 years ago Morris/Whitcomb wrote their influential book The Genesis Flood. In their book, they questioned the reality of the geologic column. But today, there is a wide consensus from YEC geologists that the layering of rocks that we see in textbooks is correct. They just think that the dates scientists use are wrong.

So if the geologic column is accurate we should be able to find in the rocks, where the flood of Noah begins and where it ends. There are really 2 groups of people we will call the late-flood boundary people and the early flood boundary people. (There are other views shown here but they are uncommon)

Also, I want to point out that I am only using YEC journals, blogs, articles, and conference papers for my posts.

Late Flood Boundary vs Early Flood Boundary

Late Flood Boundary people believe that the flood ends at the Pliocene/Pleistocene line on the geologic column. The Pliocene/Pleistocene are the names of the different Epochs. Here is where it gets a little confusing. Sometimes people will refer to this as the Neogene/Quarternary or the Late Cenozoic, but it is all talking about the same thing. A helpful way of thinking about it is that this group of YECs just believes that the flood ended in the rocks that regular scientists think are 2.6 million years old.

The other group of people believes that the flood ended at the K-Pg boundary. K-Pg means the Cretaceous-Paleogene boundary. That is the famous area where people have speculated that an asteroid wiped out the dinosaurs. So this group of YEC scientists thinks that the flood ended in the rocks that normal scientists think are 66 million years old. These are the early flood boundary people because they think that the flood happened early in the fossil record.

Why is the Flood Boundary Important again?

Two of the most studied aspects of YEC Science are baraminology and flood geology. So locating the flood boundary is super important because where we put the boundary affects how we interpret the “created kind.”

What is the usefulness of the Paleobiology Database?

The database contains the geographic locations and rock layers for 1.52 million fossils. You can search the database by Animal and by Geologic Timeframe. Since we were exploring the Pli/Plei flood boundary in the first post, I used those two geologic sections for my search.

And in case you’re worried about the data being influenced by secular science. I’ll quote from a Marcus Ross article in the Journal of Creation. “So can a creationist trust the fossil occurrence data provided in the Paleobiology Database? Absolutely. The details of a fossil’s discovery are empirical data.”

r/Creation - Flood Boundary Hide & Seek: Part 2ish

Full Screen of Paleo Database

So what exactly is the problem with a Pliocene/Pleistocene flood boundary?

The big problem is called: The Biogeographic Distribution of Post-Flood Animals. Or in normal people talk- how did all of the animals leave the ark in Turkey/Iran and get to their various homes today?

And this isn’t a new problem. In Ken Ham’s New Answers Vol. 1 (p. 144) the author says that land bridges from the Ice Age (which lasted for 500 years after the flood) were the most likely way that animals got to where they belong. But Ham is an Australian and he knows that kangaroos are a bit of a problem.

r/Creation - Flood Boundary Hide & Seek: Part 2ish

Wallace Line

The living animals and the Pliocene/Pleistocene fossil animals that we find in Bali are completely different than the animals that we find in Australia. It is known as the Wallace Line that divides Australisian animals from Indonesian.

Another famous YEC is John Woodmorappe. In a presentation from 1990, he talked about the challenges of post-flood animal dispersal. He highlighted several places with endemic animals (endemic meaning only native to a particular place). For example, the Australian marsupials, the animals of Madagascar, flightless birds in Mid-Atlantic islands, and a few different groups of South American animals. His solution is anthropogenic dispersal; this is a clever way of saying, people on boats after Babel floated the various animals to their home locations and dropped them off.

Alright, alright so it’s hard to explain koalas and sloths crawling all the way from the mountains of Turkey. But What does this have to do with the Flood Boundary?

So I wanted to lay the groundwork by first showing that post-flood dispersal of animals is an important topic in YEC science. Now I’ll try and show explicitly why baraminology disproves a Pliocene/Pleistocene flood boundary.

I’m going to be borrowing a lot of my ideas from this 2020 Peer-Reviewed Article from Answers Research Journal. Please Read Here

  1. Baraminology assumes that if two different types of animals can breed and make baby they are the same kind.
  2. From the Bible, we know that Noah took 2 of every unclean kind on the ark.
  3. If the flood boundary is at the Pliocene/Pleistocene then we have a problem.
  4. We know that Foxes, Coyotes, and Wolves are the same kind. They can interbreed so they are the Dog Kind. But we have distinct Foxes, Coyotes, and Wolves on both sides of the flood boundary. To quote from the paper directly, “Kinds are capable of extensive physiological, morphological, and behavioral adaptions. There is no reason to expect the post-Flood descendants of a single surviving pair would diversify into exactly the same variations as those found before the flood.” (p. 242)

Now the YECs I’ve quoted have focused their research on North American animals. But the images from Part I of this expedition were of Kangaroos and Sloths. I highlighted those animals because YECs have been challenged by their post-flood dispersal in the past.

A Pli/Plei flood boundary means that all of these species are taken aboard the ark (since many species, not kinds are found on both sides) and then each species ends up returning to the same exact place that they came from- even though the flood destroyed their world- and they return to the place they came from and nowhere else. And according to Marcus Ross- this would have to happen “Thousands of times on every continent!” That is why he and many other YECs find this to be implausible.

Fine Print

I hope this wasn’t too repetitive and clarified some questions from the first post. I really appreciate the challenges to my ideas and the positive feedback. I have a lot of material I’ve collected over the last year that I’m converting into posts. I may not keep producing at 1 post a day, but it’ll be regular for a while.

Also, I want to reiterate I am a happy follower of Jesus. I am not trying to promote naturalistic materialism. I take the ideas of YEC seriously and I am digging into the peer-reviewed material from a variety of YEC sources.

Short answer: Often, yes.

Long answer + Backstory:

One of the advantages of disconnecting from Reddit and Social Media for a year is that I was able to spend a lot of time exploring the issues we so passionately discuss from multiple angles. When I read the post today by u/ImTheTrueFireStarter it brought back to mind a fascinating forum that I read….

r/Creation - Are Young Earth Creation Scientists playing the game wrong?

The Creation Project

The Creation Project is run by the Henry Center of Theological Inquiry in partnership with Trinity Evangelical. It has everything a Creationist could hope for- academic pedigree and a foundation of Conservative Evangelical Christianity. In a 2019 symposium, a group of scholars each represented five various stances on Creationism (the moderator was YEC).

r/Creation - Are Young Earth Creation Scientists playing the game wrong?

The Cover Art for Symposium

The YEC position was defended by the most underrated player on Team YEC: Marcus Ross.

r/Creation - Are Young Earth Creation Scientists playing the game wrong?

Dr. Marcus Ross (on left) Dr. Kurt Wise (on right)

The question that started the written debate was the following: “Is it really tenable to be a young earth creationist in the face of the overwhelming scientific evidence that counts against it?”

I was completely caught off-guard by Ross’s response and it really made me think a lot about my approach to Christianity, Creation, Science, etc. Seriously, read his essay In the conversation riffs off of Simon Sinek’s Infinite Game and discusses how creationists have been playing the wrong game for a long time. Here is a quote from Ross.

If I can rephrase, the question asks “How can young earth creationists keep playing the game of science? Don’t you know you’ve already lost?” I submit that this question misunderstands the kind of activity in which I am involved. Put simply, my goal as a young earth creationist and scientist is to discover the works of God through his created world, guided by his inspired Word.

Basically, Ross is saying that nature, science, growing in Christ- they are all infinite games. There is no Winning them. But YECs have been playing the games like they are a Finite Game. He’s going to step on some toes but here are three quotes…

  1. Listen to the Language

If we think about it, the misapplication of finite-game strategies to “win” the infinite game of discovery abounds in creation-evolution rhetoric. I won’t speak for the other positions, but at least within young earth creation, this has certainly been the case. As evidence, consider the scores of books and articles that claim to have “defeated,” “demolished,” and “refuted” evolution, or predicted its imminent collapse.

r/Creation - Are Young Earth Creation Scientists playing the game wrong?

Point Taken…

2. Withing Fruit

But this is an infinite game and I have observed that when opponent-focused strategies are employed over the long-term, the fruits of the Spirit wither.

Ouch. I’ve seen that in my life.

3. Anti-Evolutionism is Fruitless

Anti-evolutionism is of little use to us because showing that other positions are wrong does not necessitate that our position is right.

This can be applied to all sides of the debate in many ways….


I hope you take the time to read Dr. Marcus Ross’s essays and the various other responses that are linked once you get to the HTCU landing page. I don’t expect that one post like this changes the whole subreddit. I mean we do come here to debate and discuss and we enjoy it.

But just remember we are playing an Infinite Game.

Created Kind Puzzles

If you have watched any YouTube debates or presentations about created kinds you have probably heard about the most common examples: the Dog Kind, the Horse Kind, the Cat Kind, and the Triceratops kind. But when you press into the YEC material some interesting things emerge…for example, the alleged original kinds (from 4,340 years ago) are wayyyy different than what we see today, some animals are grouped in different kinds that look like they should be the same, and some kinds have way more diversity.

Let’s start with one of the favorites. Cows. Take a look below.

How many kinds do you think are represented?

r/Creation - Who goes where? The "Created Kind" Puzzle?

From Top Left: Musk Ox, Javan banteng, Gaur, American Bison

Answer: Two different Kinds. According to YEC studies a Musk Ox is actually a part of the sheep/goat kind. That’s weird right? But do you know what is weirder? Cow-Alopes.

Let’s go to the Ark Encounter in Kentucky and see what Ken Ham has to say about the “Cow-alope Kind”

r/Creation - Who goes where? The "Created Kind" Puzzle?

Sign from Ark Encounter Blog

r/Creation - Who goes where? The "Created Kind" Puzzle?

Cow Kind at Ark Encounter

Wow….that is pretty unexpected right? I mean the Ark Encounter does admit that the original cow kind looks awfully antelope-like. But that is not what I imagine when I think of a cow.

Okay let’s try another one.

How many kinds are represented below?

r/Creation - Who goes where? The "Created Kind" Puzzle?

From Top left: African Civet, Common Raccoon, Raccoon Dog, Red Panda

Answer: 4 Different Kinds. Yep, each one of these guys who we would naturally group together as the “Raccoon Kind” are actually 4 different kinds. According to AiG the African Civet is in the Viverridae Kind, the Raccoon is a Kind with Coatis, the Raccoon is in the Dog Kind, and the Red Panda is the lone guy in the Red Panda Kind. Strange…but how about this one?

r/Creation - Who goes where? The "Created Kind" Puzzle?

From Top Left: Honey Badger, Southern Sea Otter, New York Weasel, Saharan Striped Polecat

Answer: 1 Kind. That’s right. You would think that there is a badger, otter, and weasel kind. But nope all 22 genera and 59 species of these animals are in their own kind. That’s a lot of “Genetic Variability” built into the Mustelid kinds. In fact, it is surprising because I have never seen a badger give birth to an otter. But I guess it happened some 4,340 years ago according to Answers in Genesis.


I am a Christian and therefore a creationist. I am honestly exploring science and the Scriptures to understand human and animal origins. I have spent the last year investigating YEC science. As I read respected YEC scientists (Kurt Wise, Todd Wood, Marcus Ross, Matt McClain) the more the YEC position becomes less convincing.

The four names that I listed above are actual Ph.D. Paleontologists/Biologists. Each of them is a published scientist and contributes to the Genesis Is History YT Channel. Wood is a big name in YEC science. He has almost single-handedly carried the study of Baraminology forward over the past ten years with his CORE Group. Introductions aside, let’s get to the facts…

Surprise #1: Horse Evolution in the Textbooks is Sorta True

I’m going to quote directly from Todd Wood about Horse evolution.

“To be blunter than I could be in Answers (In Genesis), the evolutionists got that one right, and we creationists appear to have gotten it wrong.” Todd Wood 2009 Blog

Surpsise #2: Even Answers In Genesis / The Ark Encounter Admits Horse “Evolution” Is True Too

When the Horse Kind is shown on YEC talks the common animals featured are Donkeys, Zebras, and Horses. Something like this:

r/Creation - 3 Surprising Facts about Horse Baraminology

Normal Picture of Horse Kind

But if you visit the Ark Encounter you see this Sign:

r/Creation - 3 Surprising Facts about Horse Baraminology

Sign from Ark Encounter

r/Creation - 3 Surprising Facts about Horse Baraminology


Why is this surprsing?

Well, first of all, these animals look like horses, but they have 3 toes. Secondly, NEVER in the history of YEC science has any member of the horse evolution lineage been accepted prior to the 2000’s and many YEC organizations still refuse to admit Mesohippus is a horse. See Sarfati Article

Surprise #3: Various Horse Genera are Common in the Fossil Record and the Many Horse Fossils have DNA

There are over 10,000 horse fossils stored at the American History of Natural History Annex in New York City. That’s crazy. But even crazier is the level of preservation that we see with horse fossils throughout the U.S. If you are interested watch this YouTube video here.

You will find that Natural Trap Cave in Wyoming, Rancho La Brea, and Gypsum Cave, Nevada all preserve horse fossils (that don’t quite look like modern horses) in such unique conditions that there is actual DNA in the fossilized bones. These weren’t buried by the flood (even by YEC standards) so these are actual horses that existed post-flood.


Besides the data included above. Horses appear in the Bible 157 times. And every time that a horse appears it is described as a domesticated animal used for humans to ride on. It doesn’t appear that any of the Bible writers were familiar with a 3-toed sorta hybrid version of a horse.

So in summary, YECs want to suggest that a single horse kind came off of Noah’s Ark 4,340 years ago or so and diversified into all the horse kinds that have 2, 3, and 1 toes. But the more likely answer is that horses have been around for a lot longer than 6,000 years.

Flood boundary Hide & Seek

What are we looking for?

Where in the rocks of the earth is the Genesis flood. According to YEC, the flood covered the whole world for a year about 4,340 years ago. YECs also believe that almost all of the fossils we find buried around the world were created during the flood. So we want to find where the flood of Noah ended.

Why is this important? (Quotes from YEC geologists)

  1. “Placement of the Flood/ post-Flood boundary is crucial to understanding Earth’s geologic history” Roy Holt Paper
  2. “Where one places the end of the Flood determines how much of the fossil record is attributed to the Flood itself and how much to geological instability.” Steven Robinson paper
  3. “The placement of the Flood/post-Flood boundary in sedimentary rocks is important within Flood geology. The placement of the boundary affects our view of the Flood, such as its catastrophic extent, the detail of events, the amount and intensity of post-Flood geological events.” Michael Oard paper

So what are the options?

YECs believe that most of the rocks and fossils we have today are a result of the flood. But there are a couple of different views. Below is a picture showing the two most popular positions.

Orange arrow – Late Flood View – Blue Arrow – Standard K-Pg View

Those don’t actually seem that far apart. But lets look at the Geologic Scale of America

The black arrow is the Pleistocene\/Pliocene line

Wow. If we accept the Pliocene/Pleistocene boundary that means a LOT of rocks and fossils were laid down during the flood. Okay, let’s take a look at the Pli/Plei Boundary and see if that is the best candidate…

Here is our first clue. Let’s look at the fossil mammals that have been found on either side. To do this we’re going to use Then we are going to type in the Family name for Sloth and Kangaroo and then click on the appropriate time interval.

Now let’s take a look at two of the most commonly cited problem animals for post-flood dispersal: sloths and kangaroos.

Pre Flood Kangaroo

Post-Flood Kangaroo

Pre-Flood Sloth

Post Flood Sloth

Well, that’s awfully weird. So all the kangaroos from before the flood were in Australia and then they migrated back there? Same with the sloths?

You should try it out yourself. Plug away a bunch of different animals and you’ll find that they appear in one area before the flood and then back in the same area after the flood….puzzling.

But don’t take my word for it. Dr. Marcus Ross is a paleontologist who works with Is Genesis History? team. He is a YEC. Here are some of his papers where he explores the same problem.

Alright, well we can scratch the Plio/Pleio boundary off the list. On to the next one!

r/Creation - Dinosaurs of Eden by AiG is blatant misinformation for children

Author: Ken Ham (published, July 2020)

Dinosaurs of Eden is a children’s book published (July 2020) by AiG. The book is full of misinformation. In the book, Ken Ham makes numerous hypothetical claims but softens them with ambiguous adverbs (like “maybe” or “perhaps”). All the while, Ham attempts to portray him as the expert on dinosaurs. He is in the know and he understands the Bible. Without a doubt, any child reading his book will believe that the hypothetical suggestions (the “maybes” or “perhaps”) are intended to be truthful.

Below, I highlight the 5 most glaring examples of deception in the book:

1. Dinosaurs of Eden distorts the truth about dinosaur paleontology and diversity

Ken Ham compares paleontologists and geologists to the doubting scoffers of 2 Peter 3: 5-6. He argues that “They don’t WANT to believe.” (his emphasis, p. 53). He then references God’s fierce judgment. So he sets a tone for the young reader- “believe in the contemporary scientific dinosaur paradigm at your own risk. Mess up and believe in millions of years and God will get you.”

Earlier, Ham writes,

“Scientists have made up over 600 names of dinosaurs but there were probably less than 50 kinds of dinosaurs. Many names are given to a piece of bone or a skeleton in a different country or a different size dinosaur…at most 100 dinosaurs were on Noah’s ark.” (p. 29)

The author implies that scientists are simply arbitrarily naming bits of bone or adding names to dinosaurs of different sizes. His suggestion is plainly false. His statement misrepresents the thorough process which paleontologists follow to name a new species. It also misrepresents the diversity and differences within various “kinds” of dinosaurs. Most puzzling. He contradicts his own published data! In Dinosaurs of Eden he states that there were probably 50 dinosaur kinds. On an AIG post from 2000, he states that there were probably 55 dinosaur kinds. But on this 2018 presentation at the Ark Encounter, Georgia Purdom states that there are between 60 and 80 dinosaur kinds!

Those numbers are literally double from what AiG presented in July 2020. Did we somehow lose half of the dinosaur kinds in a year?

r/Creation - Dinosaurs of Eden by AiG is blatant misinformation for children

Screenshot from Aig video

Another example of misrepresenting dinosaur research is on p. 45-46. Here, Ham presents a hypothetical interview between a “secular scientist” named Mr. Scientist and a child. After a series of questions about animal extinction, the child asks Mr. Scientist a challenging question.

Q: Well then can you tell me what happened to the dinosaurs?

A: Dinosaurs! What happened to them? We don’t know! We haven’t really got a clue! It’s a mystery! They died out millions of years ago!

Of course, for many decades there was lack of consensus about the various factors into dinosaur extinction. But even laypeople know that scientists did have a clue- lots of clues. And over the last ten years, studies of the Chixiclub crater have provided a strong, strong case for dinosaur extinction as a result of an asteroid. I’m sure that most people are aware of the theory, but if not here is a Smithsonian article and a NOVA video that document the recent core-drills that were done in the crater. Although other YECs may disagree with the asteroid extinction theory, some accept it was a part of the global flood disaster. And regardless, no YECs believe that scientists say that they have “no clue” how dinosaurs went extinct.

2. Dinosaurs of Eden claims that dinosaurs and humans coexisted within the last 4,300 years as recently as 1405 AD (possibly even the present!).

Ham believes that dinosaurs were created on Day 6 of the universe, roughly 6,000 years ago. Also, humans were made on that day. Then all dinosaurs diversified over 1,500 years. Then 4,500 years ago a global flood destroyed all but a remnant (50/55/60/80??) kinds of dinosaurs. But, Ham doesn’t think that dinosaurs went extinct. He attempts to show that dinosaurs persisted throughout history alongside humans- possibly even into the modern era.

First, Ham suggests that the story of St. George “maybe” was a true story about a knight killing a dinosaur (see image below). The Welsh flag which has a dragon is another “proof” in support of this theory. ( p. 10)

Ham suggests that there is “LOTS of evidence that dinosaurs lived with man during the past 4,300 years.” (p. 33-34) For example, he suggests that descriptions of a dragon in 1405 A.D. England were likely a dinosaur. Specifically, he suggests Dilophosaurus or Cryotophosaurus.

He suggests that a Utah Indian petroglyph is a sauropod (fully debunked by P. Senter here). In reference to the sketchy petroglyph, Ham states clearly, “evolutionists won’t accept the obvious- Indians saw dinosaurs!” (p. 34).

Later, he suggests that it would not surprise him if the mythical Mokele-Mbembe of Congo folklore is a living dinosaur. Possibly a sauropod. He implies that a seismosaurus or some small population of sauorpod continues to live in 2020. No evidence exists for this claim. At all.

Another example, of dino-human coexistence, is his Tower of Babel description. Ham states. “As people dispersed (across the world) they likely took some of their favorite animals with them. Perhaps some took dinosaurs.” Suggesting that humans had animals in some fashion captive. (p. 43)

In summary, the”LOTS of evidence” that Ham provides proving dino-human coexistence are stories from mythology, cryptozoology, and unsourced fictional accounts.

r/Creation - Dinosaurs of Eden by AiG is blatant misinformation for children

p. 10- St. George killing a “dragon”

2. Dinosaurs of Eden reads modern discoveries of paleontology onto Old Testament Scripture.

Ham quotes Isaiah 27:1 …” and he will slay the dragon that is in the sea.” And Psalm 74:13 …” you broke the heads of the sea monsters on the waters.”

He states that they were, “probably the great sea reptiles like mosasaurs or Plesiosaurus.”

He then states that Isaiah 30:6 …” and the flying fiery serpent” may be a reference to flying reptiles like Pteranodon.

Ironically on the same page, Ham quotes Proverbs 30:5- “Every word of God proves true.”

Ham ignores the context of the Bible verses that more closely align with serpents or snakes. He also ignores the fact that no Jewish scholars, or Christians for the past two thousand years imagined that those verses referred to dinosaurs, marine reptiles, or pteranodons. He does not provide any alternative explanation and lays a foundation that will be confusing for a child. For a full explanation of biblical usage of “Leviathan and flying serpents” read here.

3. Dinosaurs of Eden claims that dinosaurs were all created vegetarian

Ham argues that dinosaurs like T-rex were created vegetarian, not carnivorous. To do so, Ham compares T-Rex teeth to Pandas and Marine Iguanas. Ham essentially conflates all from canine teeth that appear sharp. He completely ignores paleontology, physiology, basic dentition, and the study of microwear on tooth enamel. The most egregious comparison is when he notes that even children need a fork and sharp knife to cut up vegetables like carrots and potatoes. (p. 17) For the most detailed rebuttal of his theory see this article: Dino-Dang: The Melon Rex Myth; Senter

5. Dinosaurs of Eden lies about research on dinosaurs and feathers

r/Creation - Dinosaurs of Eden by AiG is blatant misinformation for children

Ham equates feathers with evolution

Some may argue that the prior four examples are not intentionally deceitful. However, the final example cannot be understood in any other way.

Ham writes,

**”**Evolutionists believe dinos evolved into birds. Once, they found a fossil with feathers on it in China. If such a fossil really existed they would say it is a transitional form. But when they studied it closely they found out it didn’t have feathers at all…A different fossil that actually had feathers was found to be part of a bird fossil that had been glued together with a part of a dinosaur one!” (p. 49)

Ham then states,

“Many evolutionists believe blindly that the Bible is not true and God doesn’t exist. They go so far as to say that the hummingbirds you see at the feeder are actually living dinosaurs.” (p. 49)

He even uses 1 Corinthians 15: 39 to try and illustrate that birds and reptiles do not share the same “flesh.”

r/Creation - Dinosaurs of Eden by AiG is blatant misinformation for children

p. 49

The other examples in this post were irritating, but the deceit of Ken Ham in this section is blatant. Ham uses the example of the fraudulent archeoraptor fossil (that was disproved by other “secular scientists”) to cast doubt on the existence of feathered dinosaurs. He injects atheism and anti-theist attitudes towards the Bible into a conversation about dinosaurs and feathers. His intentions are clear, you cannot believe in the Bible and believe that dinosaurs had feathers. He is wrong.

Ham ignores the fact that many YECs are open to the idea. Popular young YouTube Guzman1611 has a video with YEC Dr. Matt McClain here that describes dinosaurs and feathers. There is a 2018 YEC article on Dinosaurs and Feathers here that argues for feathered dinosaurs. Phillip Senter used YEC baraminology here to show dinosaurs were feathered. The YEC biologist whose work he cited is Todd Wood. You can read Todd Wood’s response here. Todd Wood does disagree with Senter’s conclusion that dinosaurs and birds are related phylogenetically, BUT he still believes that dinosaurs had feathers. See Wood’s blog post here.


Why would Ham write such a misleading book- for Children! I think it relates to his views of culture and Christianity. Notice the divisive ideas Ham inculcates in his readers. People who believe in millions of years have no faith. People who believe in evolution do not fear God. People who “trust” science and not God’s word are your enemies. Throughout the book, “evolutionists” and “secular science” are referred to as “They.” His language communicates the idea that the people who think dinosaurs went extinct 65 million years ago are against God and against the Bible, and against the truth. It is us against them.

Ken Ham uses short snippets of Bible quotes as a blunt instrument throughout the book. Ham cherry-picks Bible verses that often have ZERO relationship to the subject within the original context of the Biblical narrative. The Bible is treated as a book of propositional facts. Sadly, Ham’s book teaches a child to look at science with suspicion and, perhaps, even resentment. Ham wants the debate to remain distinctly divided. He has no patience for a Christian worldview that is informed, complimented, or integrated with 21st-century science.

Conservative Christian historian Mark Noll laments the milieu of YEC and science in his book, The Scandal of the Evangelical Mind. Noll notes that the strategies of YECs confuse the ongoing dialogue between Christianity and empirical science. His book documents the evolution of Western evangelicalism over the last 100 years. I find his assessment of YEC and it impact on young Christian minds to be an apt closing to this post. Please read:

Creation science has damaged evangelicalism by making it much more difficult to think clearly about human origins, the age of the earth, and mechanisms of geological or biological change. But it has done more profound damage by undermining the ability to look at the world God has made and to understand what we see when we do look. Fundamentalist habits of mind have been more e destructive than individual creationist conclusions. Because those habits of mind are compounded of unreflective aspects of 19th-century procedure alongside tendentious aspects of fundamentalist ideology, they have done serious damage to Christian thinking (p. 196).

tldr; Ken Ham watched too many episodes of The Flintstones growing up

Categories: YEC

Chalicotheres are Perissodactyls. Perissodactyl is the scientific name for odd-toed ungulates. Odd-toed ungulates are animals like horses, rhinos, and tapirs that are hooves, but put all of their weight on their third toe in the middle.

Chalicotheres are unique animals. But they are not like some bizarre lemur that has adapted to an island environment. Chalicotheres are a Super Family- meaning there are three different families of chalicotheres. Or in YEC terms – chalicotheres represent three different kinds. AiG is aware of chalicotheres. In fact, they wrote a blog post in 2014 about the animals. They even feature a model chalicothere at the Ark Encounter!

r/Creation - Chalicotheres are problematic for YEC

Noah feeding a chalicothere

Paleontologists discovered the strange mammals back in the late 19th century. But ever since the 2000’s paleontologists keep finding more and more fossils of chalicotheres. The animals are found in a variety of environments, on almost every continent, and across a wide range of strata. See fossil info here. So where is the problem for YECs?

First, ALL chalicothere fossils are post-flood. Even if you think that the flood boundary is in the late-Cenozoic (which has problems), they are all post-flood. Even the AiG blog post admits that they are post-flood animals. YECs assume the Ice age occurred in the 250 years after the flood.

This is a lot of info, so let me be specific with the problems chalicotheres present for YEC:

  1. Two chalicotheres disembarked from Noah’s ark 4,400 years ago in Mesopotamia. Then in the next 250 years, chalicotheres diversified into dozens of species, spread out across the entire world, into a diverse array of habitats, and then suddenly died. All of them. Without a single one surviving. And presumably without any human ever getting to see one of these creatures. There are hundreds of chalicothere fossils all over the world. If fossilization (after the flood) is so rare, how many chalicotheres were alive? Hundreds of thousands? Millions?
  2. Some might argue that the Ice Age wiped them out. But not all chalicotheres would have been impacted by The Ice Age because according to this Ice Age Map the chalicotheres in Africa and Asia would have been fine.
  3. Chalicotheres were found in China, Germany, Greece, Pakistan, Kenya, Florida, California, Texas, South Africa, Mongolia, Mexico, Ethiopia. All OVER the world. But the only fossils we have are buried in sedimentary rock after the flood. What fossilized all of these animals? YECs admit that the global flood didn’t bury ANY of the hundreds of chalicothere fossils.
  4. YECs like to point out the problems with dinosaur fossils that have been discovered with soft-material. But why haven’t we found ANY soft material in the chalicothere fossils? They were all buried in the last 4,100 years or so.

tldr; big slothy horse makes it seem like earth longer than 6,000 years old

How old is the Earth?- New YouTube video from Dr. Tremper Longman

Who is Tremper Longman?

Tremper Longman is the Distinguished Scholar of Biblical Studies at Westmont College. He has written numerous conservative commentaries in the NIV Application series and he was one of the senior translators for the popular New Living Translation.

Longman is a conservative evangelical, not a fringe Christian. His newest book Confronting Old Testament controversies is a response to some more liberal Christian writers (like Peter Enns). Longman is such a highly regarded scholar that his OT Survey is standard material in conservative seminaries like Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and Liberty University.

In this video, Longman argues that the Bible (Genesis in particular) is “not interested in talking about things like the age of the earth.” The interviewer (Preston Sprinkle) asks him one of the most insightful questions I have ever heard of an OT scholar at the 26:40 mark:

Preston: If the overwhelming scientific evidence was for a young-earth would it change the way you read Genesis?

Longman: No. The Bible is simply not interested in talking about these things.

Watch if for yourself!

Tremper Longman on the Age of the Earth