Other Young Earth Book Reviews Scientific Creationism Review Homepage
Creation Science Book Review:
Scientific Creationism, by Henry Morris
Review by Greg Neyman
© 2006, Old Earth Ministries
Review Published June 2006
Old Earth Ministries Science website
Chapter 2, Part 3: Origin of the Solar System
This section starts out with more material which shows how dated this book is. Morris says that evolutionary theory assumes that other solar systems have planets. He goes on to say that "No astronomer has ever yet been able to prove that any real planets exist anywhere outside our solar system." Keep in mind Morris wrote this text in 1974. As of 2006, there are over 180 confirmed discoveries of extrasolar planets.
Despite this rather embarrassing mistake, young earth creationist organizations still sell new copies of this book, and promote it to their followers. Why is this book still sold? Why has it not been updated? I know that the author, Henry Morris, is now gone home to be with the Lord, but surely his son, John Morris, the president of the Institute for Creation Research, is up to the task of updating this book. John Morris, and ICR, know that they are promoting false scientific facts in this book, yet they willingly continue to do so.
Chapter 1 - Evolution or Creation?
------------
Chapter 2 - Chaos or Cosmos
Part 1 - Origin of Matter, Energy, and Natural Law
Part 2 - The Beginning of the Universe
Part 3 - Origin of the Solar System
------------
Chapter 3 - Uphill or Downhill? (4 Topics)
Chapter 4 - Accident or Plan? (4 Topics)
Chapter 5 - Uniformitarianism or Catastrophism (4 Topics)
Chapter 6 - Old or Young? (4 Topics)
Chapter 7 - Apes or Men? (4 Topics)
Chapter 8 - Creation According to Scripture (14 Topics)
In the section that Morris makes this "no planet" claim, he is discussing the scientific models that describe the formation of our solar system, and claims that there is no evidence to back these up. This is true. There are prevalent theories on the topic, as well as competing theories. The discoveries of these extrasolar planets is helping astronomers study this topic in more detail. He goes on to say that "all previous theories of the evolution of the solar system itself have encountered overwhelming problems as new data have come in." Astronomers don't feel this way at all! There are problems, but none "overwhelming".
Morris goes on to list five evidences that the creation model best explains our solar system. He says that the planets are each different, as they fulfill a specific purpose. This can be explained by modern science outside of creationism. Second, Morris claims that only earth has a hydrosphere capable of supporting life. True, but modern science understands this too. And, there are other bodies with water, and evidence indicates there is extensive water on some moons. Third, only earth has an atmosphere capable of life. True, but modern science can explain why earth is the only one with a habitable atmosphere. Fourth, no evidence of life would be found away from earth. It is too early to say, as we have not explored everywhere in the solar system to confirm this. Fifth, there is evidence of decay and catastrophism on the other planets/moons, but not of evolutionary growth. Again, explained equally well by science. Yes, these facts fit the creation model, but they are explained by the evolutionary model as well.
Another example of the out of date material in this book is the statement "None of the planets has any measurable amount of liquid water." True, there are no planets with measurable amounts, but Jupiter's moon Europa, has an ice/water surface, and many scientists believe it could have several kilometers of liquid water under the ice layer. Saturn's moon Enceladus has an ice surface, and eruptions from water volcanoes have been observed, a clear indication there are bodies of water under the surface of this moon.
Morris makes a big deal about there being signs everywhere in our solar system of catastrophism (craters, asteroid fragments, etc). Yet, there are no signs anywhere of a building process, where planets build themselves. With an old solar system such as ours, we are well past the stage where this planet-building would be observed, thus his argument is empty. If we are to discover planets in the process of being built, we will have to look to extrasolar planets.
On page 31, Morris also makes a big deal about the moon and the earth being different material, thus scientists would have to explain their formation using different models. He goes on to say that this extremely important discovery should be emphasized in the classroom. It already is emphasized in our classrooms (where has Morris been?). Current theories of the earth capturing the moon, after the moon had been formed, are the most popular, and the giant impact hypothesis is also very popular. There are difficulties with this theory as well, but then again, that's why its a theory, and not a fact. As more discoveries are made, more will be known about our moon's formation.
Morris goes on to claim that since the moon and earth are different, then it would be foolish to think that the other planets had the same evolutionary origin. Morris is falsely assuming that evolutionary theory states the planets must be all identical, with identical rocks. Because of this false assumption, Morris makes way too much of a molehill in claiming that all the evolutionary models of the origin of our solar system are obsolete. The current theory of solar system formation is doing quite well, despite Morris' claim that they are all obsolete. To read about this, check out Solar Nebula. In fact, protoplanetary disks have been observed in the Orion Nebula, indicating that the current model for planet formation is indeed being confirmed by observational evidence.
Morris ends this section with several apparent difficulties of the evolutionary origin of the solar system. These include:
1. Angular Momentum. 98 percent of it is in the planets, although 99.8 percent of the mass is in the sun. This fails to take into account the correlation between age and rotation rate. Younger stars spin more rapidly, and slow as they age.
2. Inclination of orbits of Mercury, Pluto, and other bodies. What Morris calls "extreme inclination" for Mercury is a seven degree tilt. Pluto is at 17 degrees. These inclinations are small, and still fit the evolutionary Solar Nebula theory.
3&4. The retrograde axial rotation of several planets/moons. This misunderstanding stems from a misunderstanding of the basic science involved. For more, see Retrograde Planets.
Morris says these features defy explanation by the evolutionary model, yet I had no problems finding answers to these problems. While I agree with Morris that God is the creator of our solar system, science more than adequately explains their origin through the Solar Nebula theory. Problems remain, some of which will no doubt be solved through further research, but overall, the evidence is clearly in favor of an old solar system, in excess of four billion years in age. This fits with science, and there is no conflict between the Bible's creation account and an old earth.
If you are not a Christian, and you have been holding out on making a decision for Christ because the Church always preached a message that was contrary to what you saw in the scientific world, then rest assured that the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, and you can believe in Christ and receive salvation, while still believing in an old earth. Click here for more.
Are you a Christian who believes in young earth creationism? Now that we have shown the many difficulties of the young earth creation science model in this and many other articles, how does this impact your Christian life? If you are a young earth creationism believer, click here.