 | Page modified 2005-01-18 by Brendan. |
In 1642 Cambridge University Vice-Chancellor John Lightfoot calculated a date for the creation of the universe of September 17, 3928 BC, based upon the genealogies in Genesis, Exodus, 1 and 2 Kings, and 1 and 2 Chronicles. This was corrected in 1650 by James Ussher, an Anglican archbishop in Ireland, making it October 3, 4004 BC. These dates and time scale were widely backed by the church for many years, driving many scientists and other people away from God!
In 1961 Henry Morris, a civil engineering professor and John Whitcomb, a theology professor, published a book entitled The Genesis Flood, in 1963 the Creation Research Society (CRS) was formed to push the young-earth teaching. By 1970 the teaching of evolution became legal in all states, the Institute for Creation Research was established in 1972 to push the idea of a young earth and God's creation of the earth. With these dates, the Earth must be 6,000 years old this year!
The Hebrew word yom is used in Genesis for day, and in Hebrew it has three meanings; (a) sunrise to sunset, (b) sunset to sunset, (c) a segment of time without any reference to solar days (anywhere from weeks to a year to several years to an age or epoch). It cannot be used for infinite time, but only for a specific time period.
How do the ages that are found by Science agree with these "ideas of young age" that are being pushed by the young earth creationists?
Astronomers have been able to measure the motion and speed of Galaxies and the even older, more power-packed bodies called quasars. What they see is that the farther away the object, the faster it is moving away. This set of facts tells us that the universe is expanding outward from a starting point in space and time. Confirmation of this expansion time measurement comes from observations of the temperature and smoothness of the cosmic background radiation. The latest results give dated accurate to within 15%.
The color and brightness of a star will tell how long it has been burning if we know it's mass. This is based upon models of stellar formation and upon nuclear physics experiments and theories. These estimates should be accurate to within 5%.
Heavy elements are produced only in supernovae. These giant exploding stars produce the heavy elements by neutron capture on a rapid time scale. Since we still have some of these long lived isotopes on earth, we can tell the age of the earth. Since shorter isotopes are not present, we also know that the earth is old and not young.
| Method | Age |
|---|---|
| Relaxation times of star clusters | more than 4 Billion Years |
| Erosion on Mercury, Mars, and the Moon | more than 4 Billion Years |
| Star stream interactions in galaxies | more than 8 Billion Years |
| Expansion of the Universe | 15.5 + 4.0 Billion Years |
| Color-Luminosity fitting of Stars | 18.0 + 2.4 Billion Years |
| Nucleochronology | 17.0 + 4.0 Billion Years |
| Deuterium abundance and mass density | 19.0 + 5.0 Billion Years |
| Anthropic Principles | 17.0 + 7.0 Billion Years |
| Mean age = 17 + 3 Billion Years | |
The most common dating method is 14C which has a Half-life of 5730 years decays by Beta emission (a high energy electron), in which a neutron changes into a proton to produce the product 14N.
Professor Willard Libby developed the 14C dating method, and received the Nobel prize for developing the technique in 1955(?). This method has been used for many years, and as long as representative samples are used, the method delivers excellent data, on samples with ages up to approximately 50,000 years.
To measure the very long times needed in the ages of the Earth and Universe, we use the very long lived naturally occurring isotopes such as:
| 235U, T1/2 = 7.04 x 108 yrs (704,000,000 yrs); | Eventually forming 207Pb |
| 238U, T1/2 = 4.47 x 109 yrs (4,470,000,000 yrs); | Eventually forming 206Pb |
| 232Th, T1/2 = 1.40 x 1010 yrs (14,000,000,000 yrs). | Eventually forming 208Pb |
One Stable Isotope of Lead is 204Pb which I have not found in any radioactive decay series of a naturally occurring Isotope.
Each of these decays to a different lead isotope which can be measured, giving a dating method that can be used to date the ages of not only the Earth, but almost any physical object that contains matter.
The Nucleochronology dating methods use the half-lives of long lived radioisotopes and their daughters to measure the long time periods involved in the ages of the earth, moon, and Universe.
| Age of the Earth | 4.57 Billion Years |
| Age of the moon | 4.25 Billion Years |
Based upon Earth's position relative to the sun, it should have an atmosphere 40 times as dense as it has! What happened to the atmosphere? The answer is our over sized moon! Something happened about 4.25 billion years ago.
The moon is moving away from Earth at a rate of several cm per year! This implies that the moon was in contact with the Earth approximately 4.25 billion years ago.
The moon is younger than the earth. Radioisotopic dating methods show that the Earth is 4.57 billion years old, and from Apollo samples brought back from the moon, it is only 4.25 billion years old.
The size of the moon also puts a drag on the earth's rotational velocity, and the Earth's rotation is definitely slowing down.
The moon also has a slightly, but significantly different chemical and Isotopic composition than does the Earth, proving that they did not form from the same dust cloud orbiting around the sun.
It is postulated that an impactor approximately the size of Mars (nine times the mass of the moon, and one-ninth the mass of Earth), hit the earth and blew the atmosphere (containing methane and ammonia) into space, but retaining the water, which is heavier.
Reply: The implication is that astronomers determine the distances of cosmic objects by only one method: the red-shifts of spectral lines. And because redshift measurements of distances may possibly be off by a large percentage, the distances reported by astronomers are considered unreliable. This, however, is not true. Astronomers use a wide variety of distance measuring tools. While disagreement does exist over which are the most reliable, the uncertainties hover around 10 to 15 percent.
Reply: This argument obviously belongs to the appearance-of-age category. The overlooked fact here is that star light and galaxy light give direct indications of their travel distances. The spectral lines (light waves at various frequencies) of stars and galaxies are broadened in direct proportion to the distance they travel. The random motions of gas clouds in space cause this effect. The radiation between spectral lines, called the continuum, grows redder as it travels through interstellar and intergalactic dust. This Reddening, like the effect of forest fire smoke on our view of the sun, is directly proportional to the distance the light has traveled. Both theory and observations confirm that the broadening and reddening effects are reliable indicators of light-travel time and Distance, even up to billions of light years.
Reply: The work of two Australian creationists has been widely publicized among proponents of a young universe. Barry Setterfield and Trevor Norman teamed up to propose that the reason the universe appears old is that light used to travel much faster than it does today. Given decay in light's velocity, the present value of the velocity of light would yield an inaccurate measure of the size and age for the universe. The basis for this claim is a misinterpretation of data from speed-of-light measurements made over many years. What the data actually show is the increasing refinement of measurements, not a change in velocity. The first calculation of the speed of light was attempted in 1675 by Olaus Romer, a Danish astronomer. His figure was about 3% higher than the modern measurements show. But the uncertainty in his measurements exceeded 3%. If Romer had had more percise data for one part of his calculation, his speed-of-light figure would have agreed with modern measurements to within 0.5%. Apparently the article describing this research was misunderstood by the Australians, and they took the 1675 speed figure as evidence for the speed of light decreasing by 0.5%.
Reply: This argument arises from the work of young-universe creationist Harold Slusher, who picks up the idea proposed in 1953 by Parry Moon and Domina Spencer who were trying to overthrow Einstein's theory of relativity. Their theory was that light could travel in a different type of space, a highly curved type of space, and therefore travel faster than it's fixed speed. They backed up their theory with no mathematics, or facts, and Slusher did not know how well proven Einstein's theory of relativity is accepted and understood by scientists.
Erosion measurements show that the continents are lowered by wind, rain, etc., at a rate of about 0.05 millimeters per year. At this rate, the continents (averaging about 800 meters in elevation) would disappear in about 16 million years. Since continents do still have considerable elevation, the earth must be younger than 16 million years.
Reply: The fallacy lies in its failure to acknowledge that lava flows, delta and continental shelf buildup (from eroded material), coral reef buildup, and uplift from colliding tectonic plates occur at rates roughly equivalent to, and in many cases far exceeding, the erosion rate. The Himalayas, for example, as a result of tectonic uplift, are rising at a rate of about 15 millimeters per year. The San Gabriel Mountains, just north of Los Angeles, are rising at an average rate of 9 millimeters per year. Lava flows have increased the land area of the state of Hawaii by several square miles since its admission into the United States in 1959. The amount of land mass added each year as a result of volcanoes and tectonics is roughly independent of the total continental land area. Therefore continental land area continues to increase until there is enough land area that the rate of erosion equals the rate of build up. The time required for the continents to build up from 0% of the global surface area to the present 30% (and equilibrium) takes about 2 billion years. Thus continental erosion is an argument for an old rather than a young earth.
In the 1950s measurements at Mauna Loa Volcano in Hawaii by a geophysicst found nickel on air filters, and he assumed that since it is rare in crustal material it must all be from meteorites. Using the data that meteorites are about 2.5% nickel, they calculated that some 14 million tons of space dust settles on the earth every year. Applied to a 4 billion year old moon, this would be 145 feet. Since we know that there is only about 2.5 inches on the moon, this has been used to give an age for the moon of only about 10,000 years by the young-universe creationists.
Reply: I have done 10 years of aerosol measurements at Mauna Loa myself, and the Nickel found on atmospheric aerosols is predominately of Crustal origin, not extraterrestrial. In fact the quantity of extraterrestrial material can be measured by an excess of Iridium and it is much less, amounting for only about 20 thousand tons of extraterrestrial dust falling on the earth per year. This number is in good agreement with that obtained from satellites, 23 thousand tons per year. If we use the best data available on the cosmic dust in fall rate we obtain an age of the moon of 4.25 billion years, in agreement with the radiogenic dates for the moon, not the young earth date of 6,000 years!
The earth's magnetic field has decreased steadily since measurements were first taken some 150 years ago. Based on the field strength of a typical magnetic star (certainly exceeding any conceivable value for Earth) and on the observed rate of decay, some creationists have calculated that the decay process must have begun on Earth on more than 10,000 years ago. Thus the earth's age must be 10,000 years or less.
Reply: The problem with this evidence is that Earth's magnetic field does not undergo steady decay but rather follows a "sinusoidal" pattern. That is, the field strength decays, builds up, decays, builds up, etc. The proof for this pattern lies in ancient geological strata found throughout the world. The rocks reveal that the earth's magnetic field reverses its polarity roughly every half million years. Each reversal lasts roughly 10,000 years. The earth's magnetic field originates in the core of the earth where the Iron-Nickel material that makes up the core is semi molten, and undergoes circulation patterns as heat from decaying radioisotopes is conducted away from the core. The Iron atoms, being magnetic align themselves with the earth's magnetic field, and volcanic lava rocks formed during volcanic eruptions show the direction and strength of the earth's magnetic field as it was when these rocks were cooled from the liquid magma.
Before the discovery of nuclear energy, the only explanation astronomers could offer for the enormous energy output of the sun and other stars was gravitational contraction.Given the diameter and energy output of our sun, we can calculate that its maximum age would be about 100 million years if it were generating energy only by this process. When some measurements indicated a very slight decrease in the sun's diameter, a number of young-earth creationists concluded that the sun's energy output must arise only from the gravitational collapse of the sun, rather than from nuclear fusion processes at its core. Therefore, they surmised that the sun's age must be less than 100 million years.
Reply: Again, the argument overlooks significant data. First, it has been shown that if a body of our sun's diameter were experiencing gravitational contraction, the temperature, pressure, and other conditions at its center would inevitably ignite nuclear fusion. Furthermore, various measured characteristics of the sun-including its effective temperature, luminosity, spectra, radius, outflow of neutrinos, and mass-all guarantee that the sun is burning by nuclear fusion and that this fusion has been proceeding for about 5 billion years. As for the observed decrease in the sun's diameter, the measurements cited were later found to be at odds with other visual measurements.
For a cluster of heavenly bodies to remain together (contained), the gravity of the system must be sufficient to overcome the velocities of the individual bodies within it. Armed with measurements of the velocities and masses for all the galaxies in a galaxy cluster, astronomers can calculate: (a) the dispersal time (time it takes for all the galaxies to leave the cluster) for clusters with total mass too small for gravitational containment; or (b) The relaxation time (time required for galaxies to assume randomized velocities) for clusters with total mass large enough for containment. Some creationists point out that when such calculations are applied to galaxy clusters, the lack of observed galaxy dispersal indicates an age for the clusters much less than a billion years.
Reply: The problem with this argument is that these calculations for dispersal and relaxation times assume not only that all the mass within the galaxy clusters is luminous but also that galaxies approximate point sources (those with diameters very much smaller than the average distances between them). On the contrary, sound evidence exists to conclude that most of the mass is non-luminous (that is, not shining by its own light production). And galaxies cannot be treated as point sources. In fact, their diameters are only about an order of magnitude smaller (that is, about ten times smaller) than the average distances between them within a given cluster. By comparison, however, essentially all of the mass within the star clusters is visible, and the stars within the clusters are point sources. The average distances between them are at least seven orders of magnitude greater (that is, about 10 million times greater) than their average diameters. When dispersal and relaxation time calculations are applied to star clusters in our galaxy, many clusters show their ages to be greater than 2 billion years.
Polonium 218 is a radioactive isotope with a half-life of only three minutes. Yet halos in granite crystals that appear to arise from the decay of polonium 218 show up in what seems to be basement or primordial rock deposits. If the halos arise from primordial polonium, then how did the surrounding rocks crystallize so rapidly that the crystals were ready to receive halo impressions from the decay of polonium? The answer according to young-earth creationist Robert Gentry, among others, is that geologists are wrong about their understanding of the processes shaping the earth shortly after its formation. Instead, they say, Go must have imposed the geological structures instantaneously. Therefore, measurements by geologists do not prove that the earth is old, nor can they be used to argue against a young earth.
Reply: There is no evidence proof of halos in basement or primordial rocks, and likewise no evidence that halos arise only from the decay of polonium 218. Geologist Jeffrey Wakefield actually visited all of Gentry's sample sites, in every case Gentry's samples came not from primordial granites as he had clamed, but rather from young dikes (igneous rock infusions into vertical fissures) that crosscut older igneous and sedimentary rocks. The decay of Uranium or Thorium all have 7 or 8 alpha emitters! Since any alpha emitter can make halos, these other isotopes could be responsible.
Within a relatively brief period of time (a few months to a few years) following the violent eruption of Mt. St. Helens, peat layers (the first stage in the formation of Coal) and sedimentary rock already had formed in the vicinity of the volcano. This phenomenon seemed to young-earth creationists to challenge the notion that geologic layers are deposited according to gradual uniformitarian processes taking place over millions and hundreds of millions of years. They concluded that geological processes provide evidences for a young earth and not for an old earth.
Reply: The problem lies in the assumption that all geological processes either take place gradually at relatively uniform (i.e., constant) rates or rapidly at rates pulsed by major catastrophes. The young-earth versus old-earth debate is pictured in this context as a battle between the principles of uniformitarianism and the principles of catastrophism, with one significant twist. Catastrophism as defined by geologists refers to the formation of geologic structures through a variety of catastrophes occurring at different times. Young-earth creationists define catastrophism as the formation of all Earth's major geologic structures by a single catastrophic event, namely the Genesis flood, occurringduring a ten-and-a-half-month period five to fifteen thousand years ago. The use of the Mount Saint Helens exemplifies the "either-or" fallacy (that is, it sets up an unfounded dilemma). Geology reflects the operation of both slow and rapid processes. Some geological features can only be explained by gradual processes over millions of years, such as: coral atolls, anthracite coal and certain conglomerate and metamorphic layers. In the case of coral atolls, scientists can measure the daily accumulation of band-like deposits over millions of years. From these deposits they can make many determinations, including the rate of slowing of the earth's rotation period. Such deposits establish that the earth's rotation period has been slowing down at exactly the same rate over the last 400 million years.
Isaac Newton's laws of motion enable us to calculate with considerable precision the dynamics of large rotating systems of stars. When Kevin Prendergast made such calculations twenty-five years ago, he discovered that a large system of stars will establish a spiral structure only in a few rotations and that after two or three more rotations the structure will collapse into a sphere or an ellipsoid. Since we know that galaxies take only a few hundred million years to rotate, the existence of a significant number of spiral galaxies in the universe today, according to certain young-universe creationists, proves they cannot be as old as the 9 to 15 billion years that astronomers claim. Instead, they must be less than 2 billion years old. If they are less than 2 billion years old, then astronomers cannot be trusted in their age calculations, and perhaps the universe is only thousands of years old.
Reply: The argument based upon evidence H overlooks the continuing research by Predergast and others. In the years following his initial computer modeling efforts, Pendergast discovered that ongoing star formation stabilizes the spiral structure. Specifically, he demonstrated that as long as new stars continue to form at a significant Rate within a galaxy, the spiral structure will be maintained. But as soon as star formation ceases, the spiral structure will collapse within the next two or three rotations. Prendergast's discovery beautifully dovetails with astronomers' observations of galaxies. In spherical and ellipsoidal galaxies, astronomers see no evidence of ongoing star formation, whereas in the spiral galaxies such evidence is abundant. And, the farther away astronomers look (that is, the farther back in time they see), the more spiral galaxies they observe. Since spiral galaxies still exist, the universe cannot be any older than about 25 billion years. Because only 6% of the galaxies near our own are spirals, the universe cannot be any younger than about 12 billion years.
The observation of a few footprints that appear to be human prints alongside a great many prints that were clearly made by dinosaurs has been interpreted by many young-earth creationists as proof that dinosaurs and men lived together. This fact would imply that the geological strata in which the prints were found could not have been deposited tens of millions of years ago but only in the last few thousand years. Therefore the dinosaurs and the strata of the earth are not relics from the past but have existed only for about ten thousand years.
Reply: The first assumption that must be addressed is that prints in close proximity necessarily establish contemporaneous existence. This fact is false. The earth's strata can be disturbed and redisturbed by events occurring at different times, especially in a river bed like that at Glen Rose, Texas, where most of the "human" footprints have been found. But this faulty assumption is not the main defect of the argument from evidence I. The more serious problem lies in the identification of the prints as human. There are Reasons to believe that these "human" prints were made by dinosaurs, their size, shape, features, ect. All indicate that these tracks were made by small dinosaurs, not "humans".
Comets orbiting the solar system, such as Halley's comet, are reported to disintegrate in about two thousand years on the average. Every time a comet swings close by the sun, the heat and light of the sun boil away a significant portion of the comet's mass. After a Few dozen revolutions, none of the comet remains. Since comets are observed orbiting the sun, the solar system must be only a few thousand years old.
Reply: Estimates cited in evidence J for the average lifespan of a comets date back to the 1970s. At that time no space-based measurements of comets were available, and what data did exist was weighted heavily by easy-to-see comets. The easiest comets to see are those that pass closest to the sun, and these comets suffer the most rapid disintegration. Hence, estimates previous to 1980 of the average lifespans for comets have since proven to be far too low. In 1986 five space craft visited Halley's comet and made the first accurate measurements of both its mass and its rate of disintegration. Astronomers determined that Halley's comet is massive enough to survive at least another 500 revolutions around the sun. With observations of Halley's comet going back to 240 BC, and knowing that it passes the sun every seventy-six years, we can calculate the approximate minimum lifespan for this comet at 40,000+ years. Halley's comet is Unusual in that it has such a short period of revolution. Much more typical are comets such as Kohoutek, which comes around the sun every 80,000 years, or Pons-Brooks and Griggs-Mellish, every 3,000,00 years. Five hundred revolutions for these comets would yield lifespans of 40 million and 1.5 billion years respectively.
In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. And God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day.
Initially, there was nothing, and then light was created. As it moved out, away from the creation point, it became mass as electromagnetic radiation was converted into mass in the form of the elementary particles such as electrons, protons and neutrons. This is the "Big Bang" event that is believed to have occurred at the beginning of time. As things were formed, they all began moving away from the creation point and outward in three dimensions. All scientists agree that Life on planet earth originated in the oceans, where the Spirit of God was hovering, or moving over the waters.
Then God said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters." And God made the expanse, and separated the waters which were below the expanse from the waters which were above the expanse; and it was so. And God called the expanse heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, a second day.
This is the beginning of the hydrological cycle that dominated the weather on Earth, the condensation and evaporation of water gives the storms their energy.
Then God said, "Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing after their kind, with seed in them, on the earth"; and it was so. And the earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed after their kind, and trees bearing fruit, with seed in them, after their kind; and God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, a third day.
This is the proper order of how life began on earth. There were plants before any animals could be present as they were the food for the animals, which initially were all herbivores living on plants. Note that it specifically stated that seeds were present so that the plants could reproduce and spread after their kind, in other words one species of plant could not change into another species of plant.
Then God said, "Let there be lights in the expanse of the heavens to separate the day from the night, and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days and years; and let them be for lights in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth"; and it was so. And God made the two great lights, the greater light to govern the day, and the lesser light to govern the night; He made the stars also. And God placed them in the expanse of the heavens to give light on the earth, and to govern the day and the night, and to separate the light from the darkness; and God saw that it was good. And there was evening and there was morning, a fourth day.
The sun and stars had been created earlier, but from our viewing point on earth nothing could be seen due to the heavy dense atmosphere. So at this point the atmosphere was made transparent so that sun light could reach the surface where plants needed the sun light for photosynthesis. The moon was also created at this point, and that explains the atmosphere clearing, from the collision that formed the moon. This would place the timing of the fourth day about 4.25 billion years ago (slide 7).
Then God said, "Let the waters teem with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth in the open expanse of the heavens." And God created the great sea monsters, and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarmed after their kind, and every winged bird after its kind; and God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth." And there was evening and there was morning, a fifth day.
We know that life began in the oceans not on land, so it makes sense that God would create creatures in the oceans first as well. The Great Sea Monsters could be the dinosaurs, as they began first in the oceans, and then moved on to land. When God saw how much they ate, and dominated the earth, God did not want them to destroy His prize creation, so he exterminated them by Flood Basalt volcanism (Daccon Flood Basalts, 65 MYr). Note that with creatures of the sea God used the same wording, that they would reproduce "after their kind".
Then God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures after their kind: cattle and creeping things and beasts of the earth after their kind"; and it was so. And God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. And God blessed them; and God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky, and over every living thing that moves on the earth." Then God said, "Behold, I have given you every plant yielding seed that is on the surface of all the earth, and every tree which has fruit yielding seed; it shall be food for you; and to every beast of the earth and to every bird of the sky and every green plant for food", and it was so. And God saw all that He made, and behold, it was very good. And there was evening and there was morning, the Sixth day.
Animals were created before man, who was introduced later to rule over and control the other animals. Man has been responsible for many species going extinct and is not controlled or threatened by any animal, Man is in charge of Planet Earth.
Thus the heavens and the earth were completed, and all their hosts. And by the seventh day God completed His work which He had done; and He rested on the seventh day from all His work which He had done. Then God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it, because in it He rested from all His work which God had created and made. This is the account of the heavens and the earth when they were created, in the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven.
Biologically we find that we are not discovering any new species, which would agree with the statement that God's creating of different life forms has ceased completely. All we see are slight variations occurring to compensate for changes in our environment, which is what Darwin's idea of evolution states.
The complexity of DNA and Biological molecules precludes that they could have been put together by chance! Not only this, but the way the electronic structure of the atom is set up, only certain molecules can make multiple bonds that are necessary for life as we know it! A combination of the polarity of molecules and the placement of multiple bonds that inhibit molecular rotation make it possible for the complex molecules necessary for life. This same combination also are responsible for the information coding in the DNA molecule, and give enzymes their activity. For example, the element Carbon was designed to have four bonds to other molecules unless a specific geometry is needed to retain information or chemical reactivity. It also is capable of making long chains needed for many biological molecules, no other element can do this!
Evidence for the Fine Tuning of the Universe
Evidence for the Fine-Tuning of the Galaxy-Sun-Earth-Moon System for Life Support
| Page modified 2005-01-18 by Brendan. |