In the previous articles in this series, we saw how successful Dr. Russell Humphreys’ Dynamic Decay Theory has been at explaining and predicting the magnetic fields of various planets in the solar system. When combined with the model of the Genesis Flood known as Catastrophic Plate Tectonics the fluctuations described in dynamic decay are themselves explained as a result of accelerated tectonic motion going on within the earth at this time.

The reason for this is that the model shows that the accelerated circular currents in the mantle would be bringing down crustal material much lower than possible standard plate tectonics. The presence of this material has been confirmed by observation to the surprise of secular geologists.

All of this motion had the secondary effect of stirring up additional motion within the outer core. This caused the Earth's magnetic field to fluctuate and even experienced several reversals. This also resulted in a net loss of field energy in addition to its normal decay. Consequently, unlike the other planets in the solar system the Earth’s magnetic field is lower than a straightforward decay would predict.

This provides a natural matchup of the two theories, and it provides a natural reason for the that have been observed in the Earth's magnetic field. It makes it a natural consequence of the Genesis Flood, helping to avoid claims of deception on the part of God, which is a common tactic used by atheists, and older earth theists alike.

Because carbon 14 is formed by cosmic rays interacting with nitrogen 14 in the atmosphere, its formation rate would have been slower before the flood because the earth would have had a stronger magnetic field. Furthermore, post-flood fluctuations before settling down would have increased the formation rate after the flood. Furthermore, the subsequent decay of the Earth's magnetic field would mean that any dates based on today's levels of carbon 14 would evidently be older than they actually are, even if by just a little bit and a lot as the actual date gets closer to the Food.

Dr. Russell Humphreys’ Dynamic Decay Theory for planetary magnetic fields has all of the properties of a good scientific theory. Not only does it do a great job of explaining what it was intended to while making excellent predictions, but it also explains things its competitors cannot. Furthermore, a sign of a good theory is that it works well with other theories that produce successful testable predictions, this theory does just that with catastrophic plate tectonics. One thing that is always a sign of a good scientific theory is that it explains things it was never intended to explain. This is what we have with Dynamic Decay Theory. Its only problem is that it does not work with the old earth models required for atheism to be a viable worldview.

References on Catastrophic plate tectonics

Help support these articles.

Earth's Mysterious Magnetism: and that of other celestial orbs

Starlight & Time by Dr. Russell Humphreys Ph.D.

No comments

Leave your comment

In reply to Some User