Careful scientists have closely analyzed Robert Gentry's research and methodology, and recommend that his findings be thoughtfully considered. It should be kept in mind that he used the latest technology to carry on his studies.
Yet those findings are truly astounding. The major basement rocks of our planet did not originate from the gradual cooling of molten lava, as evolutionists maintain, but came into existence in their present solid form! God created everything; the evidence clearly points to it. This is science vs. evolution—a Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts.
This material is excerpted from the book, ORIGIN OF THE EARTH. (See BOOKSTORE) An asterisk ( * ) by a name indicates that person is not known to be a creationist. Of over 4,000 quotations in the books this Encyclopedia is based on, only 164 statements are by creationists.
You will have a better understanding of the following statements by scientists if you will also read the web page, Origin of the Earth.
Reputable scientists have found the research work of Robert Gentry to be beyond reproach, and his conclusions unimpeachable. Here are some of the statements they have made:
PROFESSIONAL QUALITY OF HIS DATA—"Robert V. Gentry writes lucidly of his meticulous experimentation with radioactive halos in ancient minerals. Many scientists with international reputations, such as Truman P. Kohman, Edward Anders, Emilio Segre, G.N. Flerov, Paul Ramdohr, Eugene Wigner, E.H. Taylor, etc., have commented favorably in regard to Gentry's integrity and the professional quality of his data."—*W. Scott Morrow, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Chemistry, Woofford College, quoted in Creation's Tiny Mystery [CTM], p. xi.
IN THE TRADITION OF GALILEO—"Robert V. Gentry is a scientist in the tradition of Galileo. He, his work, and his Weltanschauung [overall conception of life and the world] do not deserve the premature obituary that my evolutionary colleagues are preparing for it."—*W. Scott Morrow, Ph.D., Associate Professor of Chemistry, Woofford College, quoted in CTM, p. xi.
NOT WORTH THE EFFORT—"To date there has been only one effort to dispute Gentry's identification of polonium halos. As it turned out, that effort might better never have been written; the authors, having been impelled more by the worry that polonium halos, `would cause apparently insuperable geological problems,' than by a thorough grasp of the evidence."—*Talbott 1977, quoted in CTM, p. 47 [italics his].
THE SILENCE IS DEAFENING—"I have been patiently scanning the `letters' section of Science since the publication, by you and your colleagues, of your findings on radiohalos. The silence is deafening—I think it can be interpreted as `stunned silence' . . Your results will not greatly trouble the engineer, whether he is a mining engineer, a geophysical engineer, or a ground-water engineer. But the impact on the science of geology, in possibly changing the accepted views as to the duration of geologic time, will be felt for many years.
"We are indebted to you and your colleagues for your painstaking observation, the careful wording of your paper, and the courage you have manifested in presenting evidence that contravenes the conventional wisdom of the geological profession."—*Raphael G. Kazmann, Professor of Civil Engineering, Louisiana State University, 1977 letter to R.V. Gentry, quoted in CTM, p. 60.
FUNDAMENTAL INFORMATION—"Thank you for the reprints. It is apparent that you and your coworkers are unearthing fundamental information which will be difficult, if not impossible, to include in the accepted, uniformitarian-evolutionary, scheme."—*Raphael G. Kazmann, Professor of Civil Engineering, Louisiana State University, 1977 letter to R.V. Gentry, quoted in CTM, p. 60.
THE PROBLEM WITH POLONIUM—"The polonium halos, especially those produced by Polonium 218, are the center of a mystery. The half-life of the isotope is only 3 minutes. Yet the halos have been found in granitic rocks . . in all parts of the world, including Scandinavia, India, Canada, and the United States. The difficulty arises from observation that there is no identifiable precursor to the polonium; it appears to be primordial polonium. If so, how did the surrounding rocks crystallize rapidly enough so that there were crystals available ready to be imprinted with radiohalos by alpha particles from Po? This would imply almost instantaneous cooling and crystallization of these granitic minerals, and we know of no mechanisms that will remove heat so rapidly; the rocks are supposed to have cooled over millennia, if not tens of millennia."—*R.G. Kazmann, 1979, summary of R.V. Gentry's symposium presentation at Louisiana State University, April 1978, quoted in CTM, p. 61.
THE AGES BECOME MILLENNIA—"If isotope ratios are to be used as a basis for geologic dating, then presently accepted ages may be too high by a factor of 10,000, admitting the possibility that the ages of the formation are to be measured in millennia. Thus ages of the entire stratigraphic column may contain epochs less than 0.-1% the duration of those now accepted and found in the literature."—*R.G. Kazmann, 1979, op. cit., quoted in CTM, p. 62.
GOOD AND CORRECTLY REPORTED—"I do not believe that Gentry's contentions can be regarded as of a `rather startling nature.' However, some of his experimental findings (like those of his predecessors) are quite difficult to understand, and the ultimate explanations could be interesting and even surprising. Many persons probably do not take them seriously, believing either that there is something wrong with the reported findings or that the explanations are to be found in simple phenomena which have been overlooked or discarded . . I believe it can be said that Gentry is honest and sincere, and that his scientific work is good and correctly reported. It would be very hard to believe that all, or any, of it could have been fabricated."—*Truman P. Kohman, Department of Chemistry, Carnegie-Mellon University, quoted in CTM, p. 236.
SHAKE THE VERY FOUNDATIONS—"His [Gentry's] conclusions are startling and shake the very foundations of radiochemistry and geochemistry. Yet he has been so meticulous in his experimental work, and so restrained in his interpretations, that most people take his work seriously . . I think most people believe, as I do, that some unspectacular explanation will eventually be found for the anomalous halos, and that orthodoxy will turn out to be right after all. Mean while Gentry should be encouraged to keep rattling this skeleton in our closet for all it is worth."—*Edward Anders, Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, quoted in CTM, p. 236.
DONE THOROUGHLY—"We made sure that [Gentry] carried out his investigations very thoroughly . . Therefore his data deserves serious attention."—*G.N. Flerov, Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, quoted in CTM, p. 236.
PROBABLY NO NEED TO DOUBT—"The very careful and time taking examinations of Dr. Gentry are indeed very interesting and extremely difficult to explain. But I think there is no need to doubt `currently accepted cosmological models of Earth formation' . . Anyhow, there is a very interesting and essential question and you could discuss it, perhaps with cautious restrictions against so weighty statements like the one above in quotes. It would be interesting and good if more scientists would have more knowledge of the problems."—*Paul Ramdohr, Emeritus Professor of Mineralogy, Heidelberg University, Heidelberg, quoted in CTM, p. 236.
THOROUGHNESS, CARE, AND EFFORT—"I can attest to the thoroughness, care and effort which Gentry puts into his work . . In a general way these puzzling pieces of information might result from unsuspected species or phenomena in nuclear physics, from unusual geological or geochemical processes, or even from cosmological phenomena. Or they (or one of them) might arise from some unsuspected, trivial and uninteresting cause. All that one can say is that they do present a puzzle (or several puzzles) and that there is some reasonable probability that the answer will be scientifically interesting."—*E.H. Taylor, Chemistry Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, quoted in CTM, p. 236.
WORLD'S LEADING AUTHORITY—"Mr. Anderson is correct when he states in his letter that Dr. Robert Gentry is the world's leading authority on the observation and measurement of anomalous radio-active haloes. Because of his recognized capabilities, Dr. Gentry's research was funded by the Foundation during the early 1970's."—*Francis S. Johnson, Assistant Director, National Science Foundation, 1982 letter to Robert S. Walker, U.S. Representative from Tennessee, quoted in CTM, p. 255.
NEARLY 20 SCIENCE REPORTS—"Mr. Gentry has been a guest Scientist at ORNL [Oak Ridge National Laboratory] for the past 13 years. During this time, he has published nearly 20 scientific reports, some of which have received national recognition."—Jim Sasser, U.S. Senator from Tennessee, 1982 letter to W.S. Heffelfinger, Department of Energy, quoted in CTM, p. 261.
MEETING THE SCIENTISTS—"In my recent defense of Act 590 of 1981 (better known as the Creation-Science Law), I had the opportunity to become acquainted with several of the world's leading scientists who testified on behalf of both the State and the American Civil Liberties Union. Of all the scientists involved on both sides of the lawsuit, no one impressed me anymore than Robert Gentry, who for the past several years has been a guest scientist at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Oak Ridge, Tennessee."—Steve Clark, Attorney General, State of Arkansas, 1982 letter to Dale Bumpers, U.S. Senator from Arkansas, quoted in CTM, pp. 172, 265. OUTSIDE MOST EXPERTISE—"Robert V. Gentry is widely regarded as one of the most conscientious and scholarly creationists. His research on radioactive halos is in a field outside the expertise of most scientists."—*Karl Fezer, Concord College, in a 1985 statement, quoted in CTM, p. 182.
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Forward to the first major topic in the next series: THE AGE OF THE EARTH which will provide you with a remarkable number of evidences pointing to a young age for our planet