‘Millions of years’ are missing
Jonathan Sarfati interviews biologist and geologist
Ariel Roth
Dr Ariel A. Roth was born in Geneva, Switzerland, and grew up in Europe, the Caribbean
and North America. He holds a B.A. degree in Biology from Pacific Union College,
a Master’s degree in biology and a Ph.D. in zoology from the University of
Michigan. He has taken additional training in geology, mathematics and radiation
biology at various campuses of the University of California.
Dr Roth is a former director of the Geoscience Research Institute in Loma Linda,
California. During his career he held numerous university positions, including professor
of biology and chairman, Loma Linda University, where he directed a university team
for underwater research on coral, which was sponsored by the U.S. National Oceanic
and Atmospheric Administration. He has authored over 150 articles on origins issues
and for 23 years edited the journal Origins (GRI).
It is amazing how many of the recent discoveries in science raise serious questions
about the validity of the general evolutionary scenario.
Ariel roth is a highly qualified scientist and well known as a doubter of evolution.
With his record, he must smile at those who claim, ‘No qualified scientist
doubts evolution.’ So I asked, why does he? First of all, he answered
in general terms:
‘First, evolution does not even seem to be true. It requires a tremendous
acceptance of one incident of extreme good luck after another to even imagine that
life arose all by itself and then even more implausible improbabilities to evolve
to advanced forms such as humans. Christians should not advocate error. Our knowledge
of physics, chemistry, and probability dictates that the evolutionary scenario is
essentially impossible.’
Then he explained some specifics:
‘There are legions of problems ranging from the precision of the forces of
physics, the intricate complexity of biochemical systems of the first life, to the
higher characteristics of our minds such as consciousness, reason and goodness.1 While there are many things
that we don’t know, it is amazing how many of the recent discoveries in science
raise serious questions about the validity of the general evolutionary scenario.’
Geological evidence against evolutionary long ages
But a particular area of interest for Dr Roth is the existence of ‘flat gaps’
or ‘paraconformities’ in the fossil record. What on earth (literally)
are they? Consider the geological column in many text books, where many rock layers
are supposed to have formed over billions of years. Dr Roth explains that in many
places:
There are major gaps in the layers; rock layers that should be present are missing
at these localities.
‘First, there are major gaps in the layers; rock layers that should be present
are missing at these localities. Second, the layers below and above the gaps are
flat. The brown layer at the right in the diagram (right) represents a layer missing
to the left of the illustration. The jagged green line on this diagram shows the
expected erosion surface contrasted with the flatness of the contact plane between
the layers.’
Diagram of rock layers showing a flat gap or paraconformity—this is the red
line in the middle of the diagram. To the right is a brown layer that was laid down
before the overlayer—evolutionists assume that it took millions of years to
deposit, which is thus the duration of the gap between the underlayer and the overlayer.
Note the top surface is jagged because of erosion, so we would expect the gap plane
to be just as jagged if it really had been exposed for millions of years (jagged
green line), yet the gap is flat.
Valley of the Colorado River viewed from Dead Horse Point in Utah. The arrows point
to two alleged gaps where about 10 and 20 million years is supposedly ‘missing’
(‘Ma’ in diagram = mega-annum = million years). The canyon is 600 m
(2,000 ft) deep.
|
So why is this a problem? First, he explains what we would expect if there really
were millions of years between the two layers:
‘An outstanding feature of erosion is the highly irregular surface (topography)
it creates as streams and rivers keep cutting deeper gullies, canyons, and valleys
into the landscape. Even Australia, which tends to be very flat, has a lot of irregular
topography in many areas. Erosion tends to produce highly irregular surfaces over
most of our continents.’
These flat gaps are so common that they pretty much challenge the validity of the
whole geologic time scale.
But what do we find instead?
‘The problem these flat gaps especially pose for the long geologic ages is
the lack of erosion of the underlayer expected at these gaps. Over the many millions
of years postulated for these gaps, you would expect pronounced irregular erosion,
and the gaps should not at all be flat.
‘In fact, according to average erosion rates, many or all of the layers should
be gone. Since they are there and flat, this indicates that the millions of years
postulated for these gaps never occurred. These flat gaps are so common (see the
pictures at right and below for some examples), that they pretty much challenge
the validity of the whole geologic time scale.’
Dr Roth explains further as:
‘The striking contrast between the flat pattern of the layers, especially
the tops of the underlayers of the many paraconforities, compared to the eroded
highly irregular topography of the present surface of the region, illustrates the
problem these gaps pose for the long geologic ages. If the many millions of years
had actually occurred, why are not the tops of the underlayers highly irregular
as is the case for the present topography of the region? It looks like the millions
of years suggested for the geologic column never occurred. Furthermore, if geologic
time is missing in one locality, then it is missing around the whole earth.’
Dr Roth summarizes the problem for long ages:
‘The problem these gaps pose for the long geologic ages is that on the surface
of our restless earth, over the proposed millions of years of weathering, tectonic
activity, and drifting of continents, you have either deposition or erosion of the
sedimentary layers. If you have deposition there is no gap because, the layers just
keep building up. If you have erosion the contact surface (underlayer), should be
highly irregular, and not flat. Because these gaps are flat, little time has occurred
at the gaps.’2
Christian faith
Dr Roth is also a Christian. He explains, ‘Fortunately, I grew up in a wonderful
Christian home. However, I did not accept Christ as my Saviour until I realized
that He had forgiven my sins and that He was there to help me.’ So how does
a scientist come to this conclusion? Ariel explains:
‘Science, in its present secular ethos, has failed to come up with significant
explanations for the marvels of the universe and life that have been discovered.
Questions that the scientific data pose indicate that there has to be a very perceptive
Creator. And such a Creator would be expected to leave some communication, and the
Bible is the only reasonable candidate. The picture I get by combining the data
of nature with the Bible makes the most sense.
‘Besides that, scientific evidence like the flat gaps I mentioned previously
strongly support biblical history. That is, only a few thousand years ago, it took
only six days for God to create the various basic forms of life. Subsequently, a
worldwide flood was responsible for depositing much of the fossil record. This is
the most logical conclusion I can come to.’
Three ‘gaps’ in the Grand Canyon in Arizona, which is about 1,600 m
(5,300 ft) deep. The Ordovician, Silurian, and other geological layers are ‘missing’
at the lower gap, which is over 100 million years of evolutionary time missing.
|
View in northeast Utah, north of Vernal. Note the 20-million-year ‘gap’
between the Cretaceous Cedar Mountain Formation (above) and colourful Jurassic Morrison
Formation (below).
|
How important is biblical creation to Christianity?
Photo by John Hartnett
Knife-edge contact between Coconino Sandstone (top) and Hermit Shale (below), Grand
Canyon, supposedly represents a time gap of about 6 million years, but shows no
sign of such prolonged erosion.
While some people claim that it’s divisive3
to talk about creation, according to Dr Roth, Christianity depends on biblical
creation:
‘The first 11 chapters of Genesis are not allegorical, as too often surmised.
They are presented as the history of our earth. A basic problem in suggesting that
this history is not factual, is that the leading biblical personalities such as
Peter, Paul, Christ, and God, all treat the biblical account of beginnings as factual.4
‘God Himself in the Ten Com mand ments instructed that the Sabbath should
be kept holy because He rested on the seventh day after He had created everything
in six days. It would be a strange kind of God who would create over millions of
years and then command keeping the Sabbath holy because He created all in six days
[Exodus 20:8–11]! If you cannot trust the leading personalities
of the Bible, there remains little reason to believe the rest of the Bible and Christianity.’
Then there is the problem of death and suffering, as Ariel explains:
‘Evolution, with its selfish competition and the destruction of all but the
fittest, is in sharp contrast to God’s goodness as seen in His concern and
forgiveness for the weak sinner. The evolution and creation views are going in opposite
directions, and the harsh evolutionary system cannot be adequately reconciled to
the goodness engendered by Christianity.’
References and notes
- Dr Roth: ‘I discuss many of these in my new book,
Science Discovers God: Seven Convincing Lines of Evidence for His Existence.’
Return to text.
- For further discussion see: Roth, A.A. Those gaps in the sedimentary
layers, Origins (GRI) 15:75–92, 1988. For a briefer
version see: Roth, A.A., Implications of paraconformities, Geoscience Reports
36:1–5, 2003. The topic is also discussed on pages 222–229
of Roth, A.A., Origins: Linking Science and Scripture, Review and Herald
Publishing Association, Hagerstown, Maryland, USA, 1998. See also his paper
Flat gaps in the rock layers that challenge the long geologic ages, Journal
of Creation 23(1), 2009. Return to text.
- Cf. Batten, D., But it’s divisive!’
CMI Prayer News, October–December 2004; <creation.com/divisive>.
Return to text.
- Sarfati, J., Genesis: Bible authors believed
it to be history, Creation 28(2):21–23, 2006;
<creation.com/gen-hist>. Return to text.
| They say time is money. Well, this site provides over 30 years of information. That’s a lot of money and time. Would you support our efforts to keep this information coming for 30 more years?  | | |
|
