Biology Creationist arguments in relation to biology center on an idea derived from Genesis that states that life was created by God, in a finite number of "created kinds," rather than through biological evolution from a common ancestor. Creationists contend that any observable
speciation descends from these distinctly created kinds through inbreeding, deleterious mutations and other genetic mechanisms. Whereas evolutionary biologists and creationists share similar views of
microevolution, creationists reject the fact that the process of
macroevolution can explain common ancestry among organisms far beyond the level of common species. Popular arguments against evolution have changed since the publishing of Henry M. Morris' first book on the subject,
Scientific Creationism (1974), but some consistent themes remain: that
missing links or gaps in the fossil record are proof against evolution; that the increased complexity of organisms over time through evolution is not possible due to the law of increasing
entropy; that it is impossible that the mechanism of natural selection could account for common ancestry; and that evolutionary theory is untestable. The
origin of the human species is particularly hotly contested; the fossil remains of
hominid ancestors are not considered by advocates of creation biology to be evidence for a speciation event involving
Homo sapiens. Creationists also assert that early hominids, are either apes, or humans.
Richard Dawkins has explained evolution as "a theory of gradual, incremental change over millions of years, which starts with something very simple and works up along slow, gradual gradients to greater complexity," and described the existing fossil record as entirely consistent with that process. Biologists emphasize that transitional gaps between recovered fossils are to be expected, that the existence of any such gaps cannot be invoked to disprove evolution, and that instead the fossil evidence that could be used to disprove the theory would be those fossils which are found and which are entirely inconsistent with what can be predicted or anticipated by the evolutionary model. One example given by Dawkins was, "If there were a single
hippo or
rabbit in the Precambrian, that would completely blow evolution out of the water. None have ever been found."
Geology Flood geology Flood geology is a concept based on the belief that most of Earth's geological record was formed by the
Great Flood described in the story of
Noah's Ark. Fossils and
fossil fuels are believed to have formed from animal and plant matter which was buried rapidly during this flood, while
submarine canyons are explained as having formed during a rapid runoff from the continents at the end of the flood.
Sedimentary strata are also claimed to have been predominantly laid down during or after Noah's flood and
orogeny. Flood geology is a variant of catastrophism and is contrasted with geological science in that it rejects standard geological principles such as uniformitarianism and radiometric dating. For example, the
Creation Research Society argues that "uniformitarianism is wishful thinking." Geologists conclude that no evidence for such a flood is observed in the preserved rock layers Nevertheless, there continue to be adherents to the belief in flood geology, and in recent years new creationist models have been introduced such as
catastrophic plate tectonics and
catastrophic orogeny.
Radiometric dating Creationists point to flawed
experiments they have performed, which they claim demonstrate that 1.5 billion years of
nuclear decay took place over a short period of time, from which they infer that "billion-fold speed-ups of nuclear decay" have occurred, a massive violation of the principle that radioisotope decay rates are constant, a core principle underlying
nuclear physics generally, and
radiometric dating in particular. The scientific community points to numerous flaws in the creationists' experiments, to the fact that their results have not been accepted for publication by any peer-reviewed scientific journal, and to the fact that the creationist scientists conducting them were untrained in experimental
geochronology. They have also been criticised for widely publicising the results of their research as successful despite their own admission of insurmountable problems with their hypothesis. The constancy of the decay rates of
isotopes is well supported in science. Evidence for this constancy includes the correspondences of date estimates taken from different radioactive isotopes as well as correspondences with non-radiometric dating techniques such as
dendrochronology, ice core dating, and historical records. Although scientists have noted slight increases in the decay rate for isotopes subject to extreme pressures, those differences were too small to significantly impact date estimates. The constancy of the decay rates is also governed by first principles in
quantum mechanics, wherein any deviation in the rate would require a change in the fundamental constants. According to these principles, a change in the fundamental constants could not influence different elements uniformly, and a comparison between each of the elements' resulting unique chronological timescales would then give inconsistent time estimates. In refutation of young Earth claims of inconstant decay rates affecting the reliability of radiometric dating, Roger C. Wiens, a physicist specializing in isotope dating states: • "Only one technical exception occurs under terrestrial conditions, and this is not for an isotope used for dating. ... The artificially-produced isotope,
beryllium-7 has been shown to change by up to 1.5%, depending on its chemical environment. ... Heavier atoms are even less subject to these minute changes, so the dates of rocks made by electron-capture decays would only be off by at most a few hundredths of a percent." • "... Another case is material inside of stars, which is in a plasma state where electrons are not bound to atoms. In the extremely hot stellar environment, a completely different kind of decay can occur. 'Bound-state beta decay' occurs when the nucleus emits an electron into a bound electronic state close to the nucleus. ... All normal matter, such as everything on Earth, the Moon, meteorites, etc. has electrons in normal positions, so these instances never apply to rocks, or anything colder than several hundred thousand degrees." • "The last case also involves very fast-moving matter. It has been demonstrated by
atomic clocks in very fast spacecraft. These atomic clocks slow down very slightly (only a second or so per year) as predicted by Einstein's theory of relativity. No rocks in our solar system are going fast enough to make a noticeable change in their dates."
Radiohaloes In the 1970s, young Earth creationist
Robert V. Gentry proposed that radiohaloes in certain granites represented evidence for the Earth being created instantaneously rather than gradually. This idea has been criticized by physicists and geologists on many grounds including that the rocks Gentry studied were not primordial and that the radionuclides in question need not have been in the rocks initially. Thomas A. Baillieul, a geologist and retired senior environmental scientist with the
United States Department of Energy, disputed Gentry's claims in an article entitled, "'Polonium Haloes' Refuted: A Review of 'Radioactive Halos in a Radio-Chronological and Cosmological Perspective' by Robert V. Gentry." Baillieul noted that Gentry was a physicist with no background in geology and given the absence of this background, Gentry had misrepresented the geological context from which the specimens were collected. Additionally, he noted that Gentry relied on research from the beginning of the 20th century, long before radioisotopes were thoroughly understood; that his assumption that a
polonium isotope caused the rings was speculative; and that Gentry falsely argued that the half-life of radioactive elements varies with time. Gentry claimed that Baillieul could not publish his criticisms in a reputable scientific journal, although some of Baillieul's criticisms rested on work previously published in reputable scientific journals. More recently, creationist physicist Russell Humphreys has proposed a hypothesis called "white hole cosmology", asserting that the Universe expanded out of a
white hole less than 10,000 years ago; claiming that the age of the universe is illusory and results from
relativistic effects. Humphreys' cosmology is advocated by creationist organisations such as
Answers in Genesis; however because its predictions conflict with current observations, it is not accepted by the scientific community.
Planetology Various claims are made by creationists concerning alleged evidence that the age of the
Solar System is of the order of thousands of years, in contrast to the scientifically accepted age of 4.6 billion years. It is commonly argued that the number of
comets in the Solar System is much higher than would be expected given its supposed age. Young Earth Creationists reject the existence of the
Kuiper belt and
Oort cloud. They also argue that the
recession of the Moon from the Earth is incompatible with either the Moon or the Earth being billions of years old. These claims have been refuted by planetologists. In response to increasing evidence suggesting that
Mars once possessed a wetter climate, some creationists have proposed that the global flood affected not only the Earth but also Mars and other planets. People who support this claim include creationist astronomer Wayne Spencer and Russell Humphreys. An ongoing problem for creationists is the presence of
impact craters on nearly all Solar System objects, which is consistent with scientific explanations of solar system origins but creates insuperable problems for young Earth claims. Creationists Harold Slusher and Richard Mandock, along with Glenn Morton (who later repudiated this claim) asserted that impact craters on the Moon are subject to rock flow, and so cannot be more than a few thousand years old. While some creationist astronomers assert that different phases of meteoritic bombardment of the Solar System occurred during "creation week" and during the subsequent Great Flood, others regard this as unsupported by the evidence and call for further research. ==Groups==