Basic HTML Version
OLDEST THING
(Continued from page 21)
But could something be wrong
with the bristlecone chronology and
the resulting calibration of radio–
carbon da ting? And what of the
common belief that God created the
earth and all living things about six
thousand years ago? How does this
square with a reputed 8,200-year
tree-ring chronology?
One explanation sometimes of–
fered is that the bristle-
cone pines must have
produced multiple rings
in many years, thus ap–
·pearing much older (by
growth-ring count) than
they really are. This ex–
planation might be true
for sorne trees in special
environments, but Dr. C.
W. Ferguson, the world's
leading authority on
bristlecone pine den–
drochronology, main–
tains that it is
missing
rings rather than mul–
tiple rings that pose the
greatest problem.
"Those who c l aim
we're dealing with mul–
tiple rings are sadly mis–
informed ," Ferguson
told
The P/ain Truth.
"The real problem is that
these bristlecones grow
in
an arid environment
where they sometimes
fail to add a distinguish–
able annual ring."
Moreover, for at least
the past three thousand
years, the carbon- 14 con–
tent of the rings is con-
sisten ! with what wou ld be
predicted on the assumption that
each bristlecone ring represents one
calendar year. Thus it would seem
un likely that the apparent antiqui ty
of the bristlecones is due to mu!tiple
rings.
"
Another possibility is thaL God
~
created the trees with the appear–
~
ance of age. After all, when God
~
created trees, they certainly would
~
have appeared to be at least severa!
~
years old-and perhaps much older.
~
But would God have created
thou–
~
sands
of false rings? " lf people are
The
PLAIN TRUTH December 1977
determined to make these bristle–
cones younger," observes Dr. Bryant
Bannister, director of the Labora–
tory ofTree-Ring Research, Univer–
sity of Arizona, "1 suppose they
might as well say God created them
with thousands of rings already
present. I personally don ' t believe it.
but I guess it's a philosophical posi–
tion that would be hard to dis–
prove."
Bannister tells of an incident in
Lebanon, when he was conducting
tree-ring research near a mountain
monastery. "One of the monks told
me a 6,000-ye<!r-old tree had re–
cently been blown down in a wind–
storm," recalls Bannister. " l was
skeptical, but we went over and
started to count the rings.
It
was
soon evident that the tree was not
nearly that old.
" ' l'm afraid this tree is only
about 2,000 years old,' I informed
the monk. 'On the contrary,' he re–
plied, 'it may
appear
by your count
to be only 2,000 years old, but you
must realize that it was decreed in
the beginning that this tree would
only add one ring every three
years! '
"It was obvious," adds Bannister,
"that nothing 1could say would ever
convince him that the tree was not
6,000 years old."
Of course. Bannister's example is
not really the appearance of
age
so
much as the appearance of
youth!
But the same kind of mentality is
involved whenever one claims a
tree's true age is other than what the
actual number ofrings indicates.
A more serious difficulty with the
apparent-age theory is
that sorne dead brist le–
cone logs have rings that
indicate the trees lived
and died seven or eight
thousand years
ago- be–
fore
the supposed date of
creation. If God created
the ear t h only 6,000
years ago, this would im–
ply that He also made
"fossil trees"- trees that
never actually grew but
were only "planted" by
God (perhaps to deceive
man into thinking the
earth was older?).
Whatever the merits
of the concept of cre–
ation with the appear–
ance of age, most people
would agree it should
not be pushed to the
point where God be–
comes a cosmic practica!
joker. God is not the au–
thor of confusion (1 Cor.
14:33), and His character
makes it impossible for
him to lie or devise a de–
ceptive creation (Titus
l :2).
Dr. Paul Damon, ch ief
scientist at the University of Ari–
zona Radiocarbon Laboratory, is
one of the principal investigators in
the bristlecone calibration of carbon
14. "1 kn0w people say carbon 14
can't be accurate because it dates
creatures long before 6,000 years
ago," observes Damon. "But
frankly, I think those who invoke
'apparent age' so they can keep be–
lieving the earth is only 6,000 years
old are intellectually dishonest. Paul
told Timothy to guard against the
pitfalls of 'endless genealogies' and
(Continued on page 45)
37