Thousands not Billions: Challenging the Icon of Evolution, Questioning the Age of the Earth

technically difficult to read (I have BS in Zoology, DDS dentistry) yet parts were challenging to read. This is not an objection. I liked that, and it was very necessary. Just a warning to readers who are not technologically oriented.

A good book. I wish more supposed "objective scientists" would actually read and consider the material in this book. Yet another testament yo the fact that there is no need to muster up the ridiculous kind of faith that is necessary in order to believe the bleak and phony religion of Atheism.

Great book arrived in perfect condition

In my experience, when schools teach about "evolution", teachers cram the information down students' throats and rush them to study for the test, or to write a paper confirming what the the teacher expounded. Thus, there is no time, the evolutionists' hope goes, to think and examine the many holes in the theory of evolution.For those who are bothered by the numerous inconsistencies, but have no time to do in-depth searching for the truth, this book, along with James Perloff's Tornado in a Junkyard, offer eye opening information in clear, concise, and easy to understand, books that are also extremely interesting, and fast, reads.

So, let me just start off by saying the following:1. Young-earth creationists will like this book and think that it shows the unreliability of modern dating methods.2. Evolutionists will dismiss it immediately.3. Open-minded people who are perhaps on the fence on the issue of the earth's age will benefit from the point of view and the challenges the RATE group's 8 years of research present.It is clear that the reviews so far of 'Thousands not Billions' support my hypothesis.Now, on to the book.Here's a list of the chapters:Ch 1: A Brief History of Radiation StudiesCh 2: Overview of Radioisotope DatingCh 3: Carbon-14 DatingCh 4: Helium Retention in Zircon CrystalsCh 5: Radiohalos in GraniteCh 6: Fission Tracks in ZirconsCh 7: Discordant Radioisotope DatesCh 8: Radioisotope Dating Case StudiesCh 9: Theories of Accelerated Nuclear DecayCh 10: A Proper Reading of Genesis 1:1-2:3Ch 11: RATE ConclusionsQuotes from Ch 11, with summaries by me:"For some years there has been a growing realization that carbon-14 atoms are found where they are not expected." -Pg 175 Since C-14 only has a half-life of 5,730 years, there should not be any measurable amount of it in substances over 100,000 years old. However, measurable amounts of C-14 have been found in what are assumed "ancient" materials, such as coal and diamonds. Diamonds I think are the most significant, since they are assumed to be like a billion years old, and they are also the hardest natural substance on earth, so they know there isn't any contamination in the system. So the fact that there exists carbon-14 in diamonds that are supposedly a billion years old should raise some flags to people."The New Mexico zircons studied by the RATE team have a radioisotope age of 1.5 billion years. If this were true, then the internal helium atoms should long ago have escaped from the zircons. Instead, however, the RATE scientists and others find high concentrations of helium still present inside the zircon crystals." -Pg 176 Zircons, unlike diamonds, are not a closed system, and helium atoms that are produced in the zircons escape over time into the surroundings. However, the helium should no longer be present if the zircons are really a billion years old or older.Another important aspect of the RATE research is the discordance among results when multiple dating methods are used on the same rock. Several different dating methods should all give the same date for a specific rock if they really are accurate measures. However, RATE has found that very different dates are given for a rock, depending on which method is used.Another thing that's really interesting is that RATE team had the Mt. Ngauruhoe site in New Zealand dated using several different dating techniques. The site formed only a few decades ago, but dates ranging from 0.27 million years (K-Ar) all the way up to 3,908 million years (Pb-Pb) were determined for the rock. This should also show the amazing unreliability of radiometric dating methods. If dating methods are shown to be grossly inaccurate for rocks of known age, how can we trust them for rocks of unknown age?I also really liked the chapter on interpreting the creation account of Genesis 1:1-2:3. It is a popular view among Christians that the creation account is poetry and not narrative. RATE did some analysis of the Hebrew verb forms of both poetry and narrative all throughout the Old Testament, and the results were overwhelmingly in favor of Genesis 1 being narrative, based on the type of verb forms found in the chapter. (Poetry generally uses imperfect, while narrative uses preterit.)Anyway, I would have liked to see a little more explanation/elaboration of research. But I do realize that this book is meant to be for the general public. RATE has produced two technical volumes from their 8 years of research that I think people who are advanced in science will benefit from more.Note: I think it's worth noting that the RATE team contracted out the dating of the materials in their research to well-respected professional laboratories, so the idea that their data is not reliable is totally ridiculous and unfounded.

Excellent. Semi-technical, just as advertised. I have a degree in biology and chemistry and a Masters in Education. The material was organized and written in a manner that was just right: not watered down, but not beyond the understanding of a person with a good science background. I also have the two technical books of which this is a summary. I like how they left all the documentation in the other two books. It made this book a much easier and faster read. You get all the key points without having to plow through all the data. And for anyone who wants the data/details behind it all, there are the other two books. I applaud the RATE group for making these resources available in this manner. Well Done !!

I have long wished for someone from the scientific community to compare the worldly view of the age of the earth against the Creation view in layman's terms that I could understand. Thank you for my wish granted!

Great book on the clear gaps in current rock dating techniques. I could follow all of the logic well even though this is not my field of study. I am a Mechanical Engineer so I do have more of a technical mind. However, I believe the explanations are simple enough for anyone to understand. After reading this book you will have a clear understanding why arguments for a young earth are more scientifically based than what you may have been led to believe in your public school.

Important practical work that challenges the orthodoxy of deep time without skirting over the difficulties that these ideas throw up. Hopefully this will inspire further research to see if these problems can be overcome without recourse to abandoning known physical processes. If you believe the earth is billions of years old, read this and refute it on scientific evidence.

I recommend this book by Donald Deyong - This books is using scientific language that is challenging in areas but the bottom line is - it is a very detailed study and destroys the false hypothesis of evolution. Thanks - Bob Jones

enjoyable reading.

I found review no2 to be completely misleading. as I read the book I found that the prevailing evidence was for a young earth. further the writer did deal with meteorites on page 180 he pointed out that there was implied large scale nuclear decay is found in the light spectra from distant stars. ifind in many cases I have come across reputation is first place & the evidence is not given the attention it deserves. I am not Christian so have no axe to grind but thought I may understand better how honest people could hold this belief when evolution is taught as fact even in papers like the sun. the evidence revealed in this book seems to be so strong that I would say it could not be refuted & the suggestions for future study which should be taken up by all scientists looks good to me. I hope it circulated well. lastly if I do become a Christian this book will have played a large part in my decision. i am looking into other subjects from creation viewpoint. i recommend thousands not billions book to those who are open minded in dealing with evidence

The sub-title to the book is "Challenging an Icon of Evolution. Questioning the Age of the Earth." Evolution needs billions of years to work, this is true. But the science stands against a young earth. My degree is in physics and I have the main text-books on the age of the earth including Dalrymple.Unfortunately, the study fails to include moon rocks and meteorites. The critical issue is that moon rocks and meteorites are not disturbed unlike earth rocks. On the earth plate tectonics do disturb the earth. Even their own studies of earth rocks indicate ages in the millions. They also fail to look at the age of the universe. For an up-to-date and accessible book indicating an old earth see  Ancient Earth, Ancient Skies: The Age of Earth and Its Cosmic Surroundings  by Dalrymple who also authored the standard textbook on  The Age of the Earth . Ancient Earth, Ancient Skies: The Age of Earth and Its Cosmic SurroundingsThe Age of the Earth