While there are many fine scientists making incredible strides in the Intelligent Design movement-which generally adheres to the concept of deep time and a very old earth-this blog stands on the overriding principle that the Bible means what it says. Consequently I support the “young earth” view of earth’s history. I think there’s room for a possible middle ground, for example, in which six literal days on the earth may have simultaneously accompanied the equivalent of long stretches of time in outer space, since time is not absolute and rigid. More importantly when God does a miracle, as at the hands of Jesus Christ, it can be instantaneous. Water did not take millions of years to turn to wine at the wedding party. Lepers didn’t “get better” gradually. Jesus was raised to life on the third day.
Please forgive me for any ugly ads or gaps inserted by WordPress software!
Institute for Creation Research’s Dr. Jeff Tomkins was recently featured in a question-and-answer session with host Trey Bowling discussing strong scientific confirmations for the young earth position, and for faith in creation over evolution*. For my own instruction and yours I here summarize the first of his most important points. I may come back to this interview in following weeks to continue the summary.
When thinking of the age of the earth, says Tomkins, people generally are referring to things like geology and astronomy, but there are lots of indications of the earth’s age to be seen in biology which are commonly overlooked. Of these, six would be considered in this video, he says. Trey remarks that a lot of people assume biology supports a long evolutionary timeline. He asks why people generally see it that way, and why Dr. Tomkins sees things differently.
Tomkins observes that Darwin based his theory on the concept of deep time, something amateur geologists were suggesting in his day. Men such as Hutton and Lyle were advancing the idea in the 1800s and the late 1700s. This was an aid to Darwin who was noticing that the fossil record had some major challenges to his theory. He had observed that angiosperms or flowering plants buried in what were considered relatively recent sediments appeared suddenly in the fossil record. They were fully formed and had no transitional forms. Darwin called this fact “an abomination” and an abominable mystery. This consternation is seen in a letter he wrote to botanist Joseph Hooker who was not in agreement with Darwin’s ideas.
Tomkins asserts that biology does not support a long evolutionary time frame. Geologists in Darwin’s time were beginning to move away from catastrophism (and I would add that they are now moving back to their own version of it). Until that point geologists commonly believed that the sedimentary layers found around the world were the result of a global Flood as recorded in Genesis.
Darwin needed plenty of time to support his theory which would be implausible if the earth were young. Tomkins notes that all the different kinds of creatures found on the earth are evidence for Biblical creation as found in Genesis. Everything was created within its own kind, says Genesis, and it reproduces its own kind. Darwin saw this but took advantage of the fact that there is variation within kinds. He extrapolated this variation and asserted that variation along with other natural forces leads to macro-evolution-change from one kind of creature to another over millions of years.
Tomkins notes that we don’t see macro-evolution today. Chickens remain chickens and rabbits remain rabbits. There is, of course, great diversity within kinds-such as the dog kind-and domestic dogs can still be bred with wolves and coyotes. However, we don’t see dogs evolving into anything else.
CHOICES AND LACK OF CHOICES. What is most commonly misunderstood in trying to interpret biological evidence? asks Trey. What are they misunderstanding? Tomkins answers that they aren’t “misunderstanding” anything-they’re just indoctrinated into evolution. I would add they are commonly making choices from their hearts on what they would prefer to believe: it’s a heart issue and not just one of information. “You have to take the idea of deep time and project it onto biology“, says Tomkins, because the evidence of biology does not give the idea of deep time.
BIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE. Trey asks Dr. Tomkins what biological evidence is he personally convinced works against a deep time framework, and why? Tomkins begins his answer with the subject of soft tissue and biomolecules being found in fossils alleged to be many millions of years old; in some cases, hundreds of millions. “We see this all the way through the rock record. From the top of the Cenozoic all the way down to the bottom of the Cambrian we see soft tissue”.
Tomkins explains how the first soft tissue was found in T-Rex bones by accident, by Mary Scheitzer and her team. Thinking a mistake had been made they started a study over, and found soft, stretchy tissue. This led to a whole series of experiments in which soft tissues were found in a Hadrosaur – especially collagen. They were able to pull it out of the bones and stretch it. They also found blood vessels which were entirely intact. They found blood cells within blood vessels. Pictures of all these things are available.
Another discovery was bone cells called osteocytes. These cells have small, delicate projections called filipodia. These were discovered intact in dinosaur bones-things which surely shouldn’t be present if these bones were tens of millions of years old, says Tomkins.
Tomkins recalls a visit to the Creation Museum in Glenrose, Texas, where a technician cut off a piece of sauropod bone and found filipodia and osteocytes “all over the place”. Tomkins observed them himself. Now, says Tomkins, many scientists around the world are looking and making similar finds.
Trey asks what the scientific reaction to this phenomenon has been. They first called it “Mary Scweitzer’s dangerous discovery”. It was a challenge to the whole idea of deep time and so Darwinism. Scientists have put forth a number of responses which have all been completely debunked, says Tomkins. The truth, says Tomkins, is that these fossils have only been around since the time of the Flood of Noah’s day, when they were all buried, sometimes in mass graveyards. In some places such as the Dinosaur National Monument you see dinosaurs heaped on top of each other-buried on mass. Something very catastrophic clearly happened.
One of Tomkins personal favourite soft-tissue discoveries is tubeworm casings found at the bottom of Cambrian rocks. Tubeworms are alive today. They burrow into mud at the bottom of the ocean and form a casing around their burrows. They are pretty much the same today as they were at the bottom of the Cambrian, supposedly hundreds of millions of years ago. Tubeworm casings are found in these “ancient:” rocks which, even in the words of secular researchers, are “soft and pliable”. It should be turned into minerals by now after 500 million years, says Tomkins, “…but it’s not, because it’s very recent”.
Tomkins relates a conversation he once had with a PhD geologist over lunch. The man asked Tomkins, “Do you know what the trade secret of paleontology is? It’s that when you dig up a lot of fossils, they stink”. The clear implication is that they are still decomposing.
THE SOURCE VIDEO
*YouTube video “Christian PhD: They do NOT Want You Knowing about These Discoveries”, published September 8th, 2026.
ICR’s YouTube channel is @icrscience
