Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Counterexamples to an Old Earth

2015-03-30T22:03:02Z

PacWalker: /* History */ Oopsie.

[[File:Moon2.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|"Tidal friction causes the moon to recede from the earth at 4 cm per year. It would have been greater in the past when the moon and earth were closer together. The moon and earth would have been in catastrophic proximity (Roche limit) at less than a quarter of their supposed age."<ref>[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth]</ref> see: [http://creation.com/the-moon-the-light-that-rules-the-night Recession of the moon from the earth] ]]
It takes only one counterexample to disprove the theory of an [[Old Earth]]. Most of the "evidence" for an [[Old Earth]] is based on claims that lack testability, as in [[radiometric dating]], and hence would not even satisfy minimum requirements for admissibility in a court of law. If each of the following 45 counterexamples to an Old Earth has merely a 10% chance of being valid, then the probability that the Earth is billions of years old is only 1%. In other words, '''''the Earth must be young with a likelihood of 99%'''''.<ref>The same analysis can be applied to the [[Young Earth]] theory, but no valid counterexamples have been found in centuries of atheist attempts. In addition, there are over 100 proofs of a young [[earth]] and [[universe]] (Please see: [http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth ''Age of the earth: 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe'']).</ref>
<ref>The same analysis can be applied to the [[Young Earth]] theory, but no valid counterexamples have been found in centuries of atheist attempts. In addition, there are over 100 proofs of a young [[earth]] and [[universe]]).</ref>

In addition, much additional scientific evidence points to a [[Young earth creationism|young]] [[Age of the Earth|age of the earth]] and the universe, and the biblical creation organization [[Creation Ministries International]] published articles entitled ''[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe]'' and [http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?] which summarize some of the evidence for a young age of the earth.

The motivation for [[atheist]]s to insist on falsely teaching that the Earth is old is to pull students away from [[God]]'s immediate presence, and to turn them away from [[Jesus Christ]]. Also, atheists are motivated, and biased, by the fact that their [[evolutionism|evolutionist]] theories require the world to be an implausible billions of years old.

== Counterexamples ==
The growing list of counterexamples to the theory of an [[Old Earth]] includes:

=== History ===

# The oldest direct evidence of life -- written documents, clothing, remnants of civilizations, tree rings, etc. -- is most definitely older than about 3000 B.C. and certainly also older than 4000 B.C., the approximate date of origin for the Earth based on a literal reading of the [[Bible]].

=== Astronomy ===
# The oldest star in the universe is only 6000 light years away from Earth, precisely as predicted by the [[Bible]] and a Youth Earth model.<ref>http://www.astrobio.net/pressrelease/6012/the-oldest-star-in-the-known-universe</ref>
# The [[moon|Moon's]] orbit is a very strong counterexample: the moon is receding from the [[Earth]] at a rate<ref>[http://creation.com/the-moon-the-light-that-rules-the-night Recession of the moon from the earth]</ref><ref>"Measurements show that the Moon is receding from Earth at a rate of about 3.8 centimeters per year." [http://eclipse.gsfc.nasa.gov/SEhelp/ApolloLaser.html Measuring the Moon's Distance] ''Apollo Laser Ranging Experiments Yield Results'' by Fred Espenak, GSFC Planetary Systems Laboratory (LPI Bulletin, No. 72, August, 1994).</ref> that would have placed it too close to the Earth merely four billion years ago, causing instability in its orbit, tidal catastrophes on Earth, and other problems that would have prevented the Earth and the Moon being as they are today. Additionally, the [[moon]]'s orbit is becoming increasingly and unexpectedly eccentric, suggesting a lack of long-term stability,<ref>http://arxiv.org/abs/1102.0212</ref> which further disproves the theory of an [[Old Earth]].
# [[Spiral galaxies]] appear to be young, and only implausible proposals of the existence of [[dark matter]] can reconcile the spirals with a belief in an old universe.
# The expansion of the universe is accelerating, which would not occur if the [[Big Bang]] were billions of years ago; the acceleration suggests that the Big Bang (or creation) was recent.<ref>Some insist there is hokey, unseen "[[dark energy]]" and "[[dark matter]]" to try to explain the acceleration.</ref>
# The planetary orbits in the Solar System - including Earth's - are unstable and unsustainable over the long periods claimed by Old Earth believers.<ref>[http://www.newsweek.com/id/201582 Newsweek: "An embarrassing little secret of astronomy ...."]. (Newsweek has inexplicably taken down its article, but it is quoted by Google and other links)</ref><ref>[http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v459/n7248/full/nature08096.html Existence of collisional trajectories of Mercury, Mars and Venus with the Earth] by J. Laskar & M. Gastineau, ''Nature'' 459, 817-819 (11 June 2009). Believers in an Old Earth speculate that the instability would not result in problems in a billion years, but other computer simulations could be developed to demonstrate multi-body instability for the solar system far more recent than that.</ref>
# At least one [[spiral galaxy]] spins in the direction opposite to the spin of its tail, suggesting an age too young to have generated the tail and contradicting the theory that the tails of spiral galaxies were formed over a long period of time.<ref>[http://www.unisci.com/stories/20021/0207023.htm "Hubble Shows Galaxy Rotating In The Wrong Direction"]</ref>
# The primary reaction in the [[Sun]] is the fusing of [[hydrogen]] to make [[helium]], but the ratio of these is too high for the Sun to have been burning for millions of years.<ref>[http://zapatopi.net/kelvin/papers/on_the_age_of_the_suns_heat.html On the Age of the Sun’s Heat]</ref>

=== Biology ===

# Blue-eyed people are known to be only 6,000 to 10,000 years old. Moreover, the number of blue-eyed people is disappearing, further suggesting that humans have not been long in existence.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/18/world/americas/18iht-web.1018eyes.3199975.html</ref>
# "[http://creation.com/bugs-in-brine DNA in “ancient” fossils]. DNA extracted from bacteria that are supposed to be 425 million years old brings into question that age, because DNA could not last more than thousands of years."<ref>[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth]</ref>
# The intelligence of humans is rapidly declining, whether measured by SAT scores,<ref>''See, e.g.'', David G. Savage, "The Long Decline in SAT Scores," Educational Leadership 290 (Jan. 1978). [http://www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/journals/ed_lead/el_197801_savage.pdf]</ref> music, personal letters,<ref>E.g., Civil War letters.</ref> quality of political debates,<ref>E.g., contrast the Lincoln-Douglas debates with debates today.</ref> the quality of news articles,<ref>''The Federalist'' was written for the newspaper audience in the late 1780s, but is far too intellectual for newspapers today.</ref> and many other measures. This means that if one goes back far enough, intelligence would measure at ridiculous heights, if humans were even tens of thousands of years old.
# The age of onset of [[puberty|sexual maturity]] is rapidly changing, suggesting that life is in a short-term rather than long-term equilibrium.<ref>For evidence of a rapidly changing age for sexual maturity in fish, see http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/46/3/235</ref>[[Image:Jellyfish.jpg|right|thumb|"[http://creation.com/fossils-questions-and-answers Living fossils] — [[jellyfish]], graptolites, coelacanth, stromatolites, Wollemi pine and hundreds more. That many hundreds of species could remain so unchanged, for even up to billions of years in the case of stromatolites, speaks against the millions and billions of years being real."<ref>[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth]</ref>]]
# The high observed rate of [[extinctions of species]]<ref>[http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-10-26/animals-face-extinction-threat-as-conservation-efforts-slow-report-says.html One in five species are at risk of extinction]</ref> and harmful [[genetic mutation]]s suggest a relatively short period for the existence of life rather than a long one.
# "[http://creation.com/fossils-questions-and-answers Living fossils] — [[jellyfish]], graptolites, coelacanth, stromatolites, Wollemi pine and hundreds more. That many hundreds of species could remain so unchanged, for even up to billions of years in the case of stromatolites, speaks against the millions and billions of years being real."<ref>[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth]</ref>
# The age of onset of graying of hair or balding is rapidly decreasing, with many teenagers now experiencing baldness or premature graying ([[CNN]]'s [[Anderson Cooper]] began graying as a teenager and was fully gray long before age 40);<ref name="Graying">http://articles.sfgate.com/2006-06-18/living/17299704_1_hair-taylor-hicks-american-idol</ref> many celebrities (such as [[American Idol]] winner Taylor Hicks graying in his 20s)<ref name="Graying"/> and athletes (such as Cal Ripken, Jr. graying and balding in his mid-30s)<ref>"There's a man, close-cropped gray hair, looks older than 35": Sports Illustrated's description of Cal Ripken at 35. [http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1163438/index.htm#ixzz12ONbgydd] By age 50 he was bald too.</ref> increasingly experience premature graying or balding.
# The age of onset of [[cancer]] is markedly decreasing,<ref>http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/109865519/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0</ref> suggesting rapid changes inconsistent with an alleged long existence to life.
# The number of natural, pure-bred bred dogs declines over time as dogs naturally crossbreed; a short period of time is suggested by the fact that there are over 100 different natural, pure breeds of dog thriving today.
# Lack of genetic diversity among the ''Homo sapiens'' species. Were evolution and the old earth true, the human population would show a much larger genetic variance.<ref>http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/descent.html#rpafAHIwKHS7</ref> Some scientists have calculated that a troop of 55 chimpanzees contains more genetic diversity than the entire human race; this demonstrates that chimpanzees descended from a large initial population while humans descend from a much smaller one, which indeed we know to have been two people.
# Frequent occurrences of numerous deaths of birds and fish, which if extrapolated over millions of years would result in little or no such life today.<ref>http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/story?section=news/technology&id=7884786</ref>
# The separation between salt and freshwater fish, coupled with their inability to survive in the opposing environment, shows a lack of millions of years of evolution to enable them to spread to the opposing environment.
# Furthermore, the separation of land and aquatic life and a similar inability for the organisms to survive in the other environment shows a lack of millions of years of evolution to enable them to spread to the opposing environment.
# Biodiversity on Earth is declining too rapidly to be consistent with a long-term (Old Earth) equilibrium, with the Living Planet Index (LPI) showing "a global decline of 27% between 1970 and 2005. The terrestrial index declined by 25%, freshwater by 29% (this index is calculated to 2003 due to the lack of data available for latter years), and marine by 28%."<ref>http://www.zsl.org/science/research-projects/lpi,1162,AR.html</ref>
# The [[Bible]] makes references to the [[dinosaurs]]. There is no explanation for this if dinosaurs supposedly lived hundreds of millions of years ago. <ref>http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/93-dinosaurs-and-the-bible</ref>

=== Geology ===

Geological counterexamples to an Old Earth include:
[[Image:Roth-01.gif|right|thumb|250px|"[[Paraconformity|Paraconformities]] — where one rock stratum sits on top of another rock stratum but with supposedly millions of years of geological time missing, yet the contact plane lacks any significant erosion; that is, it is a “flat gap”. E.g. Coconino sandstone / Hermit shale in the [[Grand Canyon]] (supposedly a 10 million year gap in time)."<ref>[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth]</ref>. See: [http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth] ]]
# The interior of the earth is as hot as the sun -- far hotter than atheists thought -- and such heat would have dissipated and the radioactivity decayed if the earth were old.<ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22297915</ref>
# The magnetism of the Earth is vanishing so quickly that it will disappear in 1,500 to 2,000 years;<ref>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3693932/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/earths-magnetic-field-weakening/</ref> extrapolating backwards does not permit an Old Earth.
# [[Paraconformity|Paraconformities]] — where one rock stratum sits on top of another rock stratum but with supposedly millions of years of geological time missing, yet the contact plane lacks any significant erosion; that is, it is a “flat gap.” E.g. Coconino sandstone / Hermit shale in the [[Grand Canyon]] (supposedly a 10 million year gap in time).<ref>[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth]</ref> See: [http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth].
# The frequency of large [[earthquakes]] (more than 6.99 on the Richter scale) doubles roughly every 40 years,<ref>http://www.earth.webecs.co.uk/</ref> rendering long-term stability impossible. Large earthquakes have increased by more than 20% in only the last decade.<ref>http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/year/eqstats.php Meanwhile, there is a claim that the global risk of big earthquakes has not increased over the last hundred years [http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/12/12/1118525109.abstract Peter M. Shearer, Philip B. Stark: ''Global risk of big earthquakes has not recently increased''] [http://www.pnas.org PNAS], Dec 19, 2011, doi: 10.1073/pnas.1118525109</ref> "Researchers are left scratching their heads, trying to understand possible reasons for the uptick in seismic activity in Oklahoma."<ref>http://journalrecord.com/2014/06/16/stc-mining-in-ok-eqs-energy/#ixzz3BKBRvmOW</ref>
# The continued existence of fragile natural arches without having collapsed a short time period for erosion and stresses on them.<ref>http://www.naturalarches.org/big9.htm</ref>
# An extrapolation of time between the collapse of weaker arches<ref>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/11/AR2008081102290.html</ref> with still-standing stronger arches supports a young earth age.
# The massive [[Great Lakes]] and freshwater lakes near the equator could not exist for millions of years, and several of these lakes are rapidly receding in volume; the third largest saltwater lake, Oroumieh Lake, could completely evaporate within the next five years.<ref>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110525/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_iran_environmental_disaster</ref>
# The existence of inland saltwater lakes at high altitudes, such as [[Mono Lake]] and the [[Great Salt Lake]], suggest a recent global [[flood]].
# The relative purity of underground well water, which should be a muddy slurry had millions of years of erosion taken place.
# The plentiful supply of high concentrations of underground well water, which would be expected based on familiar principles of [[entropy]] to dissipate over a long period of time.
# Earthquakes alter the Earth's rotation several times each century;<ref>http://www.redorbit.com/news/science/2010872/japan_quake_changed_earths_rotation/</ref> extrapolating by orders of magnitude in time would have resulted in the occurrence of much larger earthquakes that would have destabilized the rotation<ref>A similar analysis may be performed for the likelihood of devastating collisions with meteors as time is extrapolated by orders of magnitude.</ref>
# The lack of erosion between rock layers.<ref>http://www.amazon.com/review/R1WTZL8GG4H9K0</ref><ref>http://www.knowthebible.net/id115.html</ref>
# Levels of contamination in water are rising, as water proceeds through the [[water cycle]] it becomes progressively more contaminated. If earth (and life) had existed for billions of years, a limit would have long been reached where water (essential to life) was too contaminated for life to continue.
# All [[carbon dating]] of water supplies, even the most ancient and the deepest underground reservoirs, result in relatively young ages,<ref>http://www.betalabservices.com/PDF/Geyh.pdf</ref> and no water has been found suggesting an Old Earth.
# The ratio of strontium isotopes in seawater, which should change due to long-term erosion, has varied by only 0.35% throughout history. In fact, its value today is exactly the same as in the oldest samples, which are claimed to be from 500 million years ago.
# The relatively recent separation of the still-moving continents from one land mass -- denied for 100 years by [[atheist]]s before they accepted it -- suggest a young earth or at least a relatively recent cataclysmic event.
# Fresh tracks of motion by stationary rocks are still visible in some areas, which have baffled Old Earth scientists for more than 60 years; Old Earth magazines refer to them as "self-moving rocks."<ref>http://www.usnews.com/science/articles/2011/02/18/rafting-for-rocks?s_cid=rss:rafting-for-rocks</ref>
# Beaches have long been eroding far too quickly for the Old Earth theory; "between 80 and 90 percent of the sandy beaches along America’s coastlines have been eroding for decades," sometimes by as much as 50 feet per year.<ref>http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-causes-beach-erosion</ref>
# Land is sinking into the oceans at a rate of at least 7 inches per century,<ref>http://www.app.com/article/20110319/NJNEWS/103190327/Global-warming-rising-seas-threaten-New-Jersey-expert-says</ref> which would have rendered most of the United States under water if the Earth were not young.
# The flow of water in the [[Colorado River]] has been declining since the early 20th century, even after usage is considered, and the man-made Lake Mead is at risk of drying up on the next decade.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/13/us/13mead.html</ref>
# Erosion of rock is far faster than atheist geology previously thought [http://news.sciencemag.org/climate/2014/01/scienceshot-fastest-mountain-erosion-record]. Secular science now admits that mountains don't last long but strangely silent on the obvious implication. Also in the same article: extra soil created by erosion scrubs greenhouse gas CO2 from atmosphere.

[[Image:516XZRGNCKL AA240 .jpg|right|300px]]
[[William R. Corliss]] also provides scores of anomalies which challenge the [[Old Earth]] [[paradigm]].<ref>[http://www.science-frontiers.com/sourcebk.htm#Geology Geological Catalogs] (Science Frontiers)</ref> An accomplished author,<ref name="sf">[http://www.science-frontiers.com/ Science Frontiers] (Corliss' web-site)</ref>
Corliss has written 13 books for the [[National Aeronautics and Space Administration]] (NASA), a dozen educational booklets for the [[Atomic Energy Commission]] (AEC), and a dozen articles for the [[National Science Foundation]] (NSF).<ref>Corliss, 2002</ref> The science magazine ''[[New Scientist]]'' had an article which focused on the career of William Corliss.<ref>Adrian Hope, ''Finding a Home for Stray Fact'', New Scientist, July 14, 1977, p. 83</ref> ''New Scientist'' wrote regarding Corliss's work: "All I can say to Corliss is carry on cataloging."<ref>Quoted on the [http://www.science-frontiers.com/sourcebk.htm Science Frontiers web-site]</ref> [[Arthur C. Clarke]] described Corliss as "[[Charles Fort|Fort]]'s latter-day - and much more scientific - successor."<ref>Clarke, Arthur C. (1990) ''Astounding Days: A Science Fictional Autobiography''. Gollancz. Page 110</ref>

=== Science & Discovery ===
# A stalemate of significant and valid discoveries in the last several decades.<ref>Though there has been some progress in this timeframe, many of the "discoveries" are liberal propaganda, or are scientifically weak.</ref>

=== Biblical testimony ===

The Bible contains multiples pieces of evidence showing its authenticity including [[Bible history]], [[Biblical archaeology|Bible archaeology]] and [[Bible prophecy]]. Competent and honest [[Bible exegesis]] indicates the earth is approximately 6,000 years old.<ref>[http://creation.com/should-genesis-be-taken-literally Should Genesis be taken literally?]</ref>

''See also:'' [http://creation.com/history-questions-and-answers How reliable is biblical chronology?]

== Recommended books ==

*[[William R. Corliss]], Anomalies in Geology: Physical, Chemical, Biological (A Catalog of Geological Anomalies), 1989. ISBN 915554-23-2
*William R. Corliss Neglected Geological Anomalies, 1990. ISBN 915554-24-0
*William R. CorlissInner Earth: A Search for Anomalies (A Catalog of Geological Anomalies), 1991. ISBN 915554-25-9
*William R. Corliss, Carolina Bays, Mima Mounds, Submarine Canyons (A Catalog of Geological Anomalies), 1988. ISBN 915554-22-4

== External links ==
*[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth -101 evidences for a young earth and universe] by [[Creation Ministries International]]
*[http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-8-how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?] - ''Refuting evolution'' - Chapter 8 by Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] at [[Creation Ministries International]]
*[http://www.preteristcentral.com/Debunking%20Old%20Earth%20Creationism%20&%20a%20Regional%20Flood.html Debunking the Old Earth Theory]

== Footnotes ==

<references/>

== See also ==
{{Counterexamples}}
*[[Literalist Bible chronology]]
*[[Radiometric dating]]
[[Category:Counterexamples]]
[[Category:geology]]

Age of the Earth

2015-03-30T22:01:59Z

PacWalker: der grammer

[[File:Blue Marble.jpg|thumbnail|200px|right|The historical and scientific evidence strongly indicates that the [[earth]] is approximately 6,000 years old.<ref>
*[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth: 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe]
*[http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?]
*[http://creation.com/young-age-of-the-earth-universe-qa ‘Young’ age of the Earth & Universe Q&A]
*[http://creation.com/jesus-age-earth Jesus on the age of the earth]</ref>]]
''See also [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]].''

The '''Age of the Earth''' has been a matter of interest to humans for millennia. All verifiable evidence indicates that the Earth is only about 6,000 years old. Yet with circular reasoning and implausible assumptions, [[liberals]] insist that the Earth is approximately 4.54 billion years (4.54 × 109 ± 1%).<ref>[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe]</ref><ref>[http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?]</ref><ref>[http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml polling]</ref>

Old Earth advocates rely on one flawed assumption to the exclusion of other evidence, similar to how an investigator may mistakenly rely on one faulty eyewitness's opinion to the exclusion of all else. In fact, eyewitness testimony is proven to be less reliable to than other indicators, just as the assumption by Old Earth proponents that the [[Radiometric dating|rate of radioactive decay]] has always been constant is flawed. In fact, the rate of radioactive decay would slow down greatly as the universe cools.

Moreover, a large number of physical processes, such as neutron capture and fluctuations in solar radiation, affect the rate of radioactive decay of elements in the Earth's crust and render radioactive dating measurements unreliable, depending upon the specific methods used.<ref>http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0899536205000138#bib6</ref> Even so, such an error will not cause a calculation of the age of the Earth based on radiometric dating to be off by up to five [[order of magnitude|orders of magnitude]].

Much scientific evidence points to a [[young earth creationism|young age]] of the earth and the universe and the biblical creation organization [[Creation Ministries International]] published articles entitled ''[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth 101 evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe]'' and [http://creation.com/how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?] which summarize some of the evidence for a young age of the earth.

== Historical views ==
[[Image:Landscape.jpg|right|300px]]
=== Widespread Historical Acceptance of Biblical Account ===
For most of recorded history humans of many backgrounds, such as St. Barnabas and St. Irenæus,<ref>Burnet, p. 259.</ref> viewed the age of the Earth to be around 6,000 years.<ref>Burnet, p. 258.</ref>

Saint [[Cyril]], who came into Great Moravia (present day [[Slovakia]] and Moravia in [[Czech Republic]]) from [[Byzantine Empire]] in 863 [[AD]] as Christian [[missionary]], wrote in his poem ''Proglas'',<ref>{{cite web
|title=Proglas
|publisher=sme.sk
|url=http://zlatyfond.sme.sk/dielo/93/Filozof_Proglas
|language=Slovak
|access date=05.05.2012
|quote=The parchment version of Proglas in Cyrillic from 13th century was discovered in 1858 by Russian Slavic scholar Hilferding}}</ref> dedicated to his works on translation of the four [[Bible|biblical]] [[Gospel]]s to Slavonic language, the following sentence that brings testimony about the perception of the age of the world that time:
{| class="wikitable"
| rowspan="4" |{{cquote|To the holy Gospels I am the Foreword: for as it was promised by the prophets long ago, Christ comes to gather the nations, for He sheds light on the world entire. That is what has happened ''in our '''seventh''' millennium.''}}
!''The seventh millennium'' since the [[Creation]] was calculated as follows:
|-
| '''5 508''' years that had passed since the Creation till [[Jesus Christ]]’s birth plus
|-
| '''863''' (the year when Constantine and Methodius had come to Moravia)
|-
|results in figure of '''6 371'''.<ref>{{cite web|title=Proglas, the foreword to the Old Church Slavonic translation of the four Gospels|publisher=The Centre for Information on Literature, Slovakia|url=http://www.litcentrum.sk/36106|access date=05.05.2012|quote=Explanations: '''in our seventh millennium''' – it means the seventh millennium since the Creation. It was calculated as follows: 5 508 years that had passed since the Creation till Jesus Christ’s birth plus 863 AD (the year when Constantine and Methodius had come to Moravia) added to the year 6 371 -- that is seventh millennium.}}</ref>
|}
Prior to the onset of [[totalitarian]] and [[uniformitarianism |uniformitarian]] (i.e. long-age) [[scientism]] promoted by [[Charles Lyell|Lyell]], [[Darwin]], [[T. H. Huxley|Huxley]], and others in the 19th century, when most people and scientists in [[Europe]] and [[North America]] had a [[Christian]] or [[biblical]] worldview, the [[atheist]]ic [[evolution]]ary concept of billions of years for the age of the earth was unknown to mainstream [[Western civilization|Western]] [[science]] beyond cursory [[philosophical]] speculations.<ref name="YECBritannica">{{cite web |title=Encyclopaedia Britannica: supporting a young earth! |publisher=creation.com |url=http://creation.com/encyclopedia-britannica-supporting-a-young-earth |quote=The concept of billions of years for the age of the earth was unknown to science (or to the church[4]) before the rise of uniformitarianism in the 19th century. This is strong evidence that modern long-age views of creation do not originate in Genesis, but are a misguided attempt by some Christian leaders to try to reconcile what God has said with the atheistic pronouncements of evolutionary ‘science’.|accessdate=November 8, 2014}}</ref>

For example, in his 1619 book the ''Harmonices Mundi'' (The Harmony of the World), [[Johannes Kepler]], [[mathematician]] and [[astronomer]], wrote that he does not care if his book will need to wait a century for a reader, as [[God]] has waited '''six thousand years''' for him as an [[Scientific observation|observer]].<ref>{{cite book |title=The Harmony of the World |author=Johannes Kepler |publisher=American Philosophical Society |year=1997 |pages=IX, XXXVII, 391, 410 |url=http://books.google.com/books?id=rEkLAAAAIAAJ&q=six+thousand#v=snippet&q=six%20thousand&f=false|quote=O, Almighty God, I am thinking Thy thoughts after Thee! ... The book is written, to be read either now or by posterity, I care not which. It may be well to wait a century for a reader, as God has waited six thousand years for an observer.}}</ref> 

In 1771, the first edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica, the oldest English-language general encyclopedia that was first published as a 3-volume set in Scotland, included a table of world events under the heading ‘Astronomy’ on page 493. These events begin with the [[creation]] of the world in the year 0, which they dated at 4007 years before Christ.<ref name="YECBritannica"/><ref>{{cite web |title= Encyclopaedia Britannica: supporting a young earth! |publisher= creation.com |url=http://creation.com/media-center?fileID=Rj4PFM_od9U |quote= The notion that the world in billions of years old has only been popular for about 200 years. Before that time most scientists understood that Noah's Flood was responsible for laying down the rocks which today are associated with millions of years. Richard Fangrad and Calvin Smith discuss the details. |accessdate=November 8, 2014}}</ref> 

In 1830, Dr. Hales published a list of 120 historical authorities from various cultures who had decided on an official [[date of creation]]. These ranged from 6984 B.C. to 3616 B.C.<ref>Batten 2002 quotes from "Young’s Analytical Concordance of the Holy Bible", 1879 8th Edition, 1939, which relates this, and reproduces the selection of the dates from Young.</ref>

Included in Hales' list is [[James Ussher]], who calculated the '''famous date of 4004 B.C.''' for creation. Young Earth creationists still consider this date to be close to the actual date.

=== Evolutionists vs. Kelvin ===
In 1778 George-Louis Lecrerc, Count of [[Buffon]], who rejected [[Christianity]], adopted [[Evolutionism|evolutionary thought]] and thus searched for [[materialistic]] explanations for the origin of earth<ref name="Larson">{{cite book
|author=E.J. Larson
|title=Evolution: The Remarkable History of a Scientific Theory
|publisher=Modern Library
|location=New York
|year=2006
|pages=13-18, 39
|isbn=0-8129-6849-2
|url=http://books.google.no/books?id=xzLRvxlJhzkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Larson+Evolution:+The+Remarkable+History&hl=en&sa=X&ei=PbZfVJugD83vaJengLgI&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=rejected%20Christianity%20&f=false}}</ref>, proposed that the Earth was about 74,832 years old.<ref name="ingv">INGV</ref>
[[James Hutton]], while not proposing a date, dismissed the Biblical account and claimed in 1785 that there was not evidence of a beginning at all.<ref name="ingv" />
[[Charles Lyell]] supported Hutton's idea in 1830, in ''Principles of Geology''.<ref name="ingv" />

In 1854 [[Hermann von Helmholtz]] estimated an age of between 20 and 40 million years.<ref name="ingv" />
Around the same time [[Lord Kelvin]] put his mind to deriving an age, and came up with a range between 20 million years and 400 million years. He later refined that down to between 20 million and 40 million years.<ref name="ingv" /> More recent discoveries of radioactivity and mantle convection explain why the assumptions Helmholtz and Kelvin made resulted in dates that are much lower than current uniformitarian estimates.

The 1911 edition of the [[Encyclopedia Britannica]] discussed dates up to 500 million years.<ref>Encyclopædia Britannica, pp 650-651.</ref>

By about 1930, J. H. Jeans was arguing for an age of the Earth of around two billion years.<ref>Universal History of the World, p.76.</ref>

=== The Scientific Dogma of 4.5 billion years ===
In his 1956 paper named ''Age of Meteorites and the Earth'', Claire Patterson, using ''“certain assumptions which are apparently justified,”'' introduced for meteor age a figure of '''4.55 ±0.07 × 109yr.''' and commented that since earth lead meets the requirement for definition of ''“the isotopic evolution of lead for any meteoritic body,”'' it is therefore ''“believed that the age for the earth is the same as for meteorites”'' and that ''"this is the time since the earth attained its present mass"''.<ref>{{cite web |title= Age of meteorites and the earth |author= Claire Patterson |url=http://www.mantleplumes.org/WebDocuments/Patterson1956.pdf |accessdate= }}</ref> In spite of cautions and skepticism advised by the authors, this figure gradually became a scientific dogma that rarely anyone has dared to question.<ref>{{cite journal |author=Ralph W. Matthews |title=Radiometric dating and the age of the Earth |date=December 1982 |publisher=Creation |volume=5 |issue=1 |pages=41–44 |quote=In spite of cautions and skepticism advised by the authors this number has been widely and enthusiastically accepted and is usually quoted as if the evidence was decisive and conclusive. It has assumed something of the status of a universal constant to which all other data must be fitted, thus it has become common practice to assume that data which does not fit this result is either wrong or unintelligible. |accessdate=December 30, 2014}}</ref> Henry Morris explains that the unprovable assumptions are not the only problem with radiometric dating. One huge concern is that the results published are only a selected sample, chosen especially to agree with preconceived ideas about the earth, life, and [[evolution]].<ref>{{cite web |title=Once upon a time … A Review of The Mythology of Modern Dating Methods by John Woodmorappe |author=Michael J. Oard |url=http://creation.com/once-upon-a-time |accessdate=November 9, 2014}}</ref>

When in 1972 N.H. Gale tried to corroborate this established figure, he discovered that U-Pb ages ''"showed apparent large excess of radiogenic lead compared with the amount expected from the decay of Uranium in the meteorites over 4.5AE. ... For each of the 4 meteorites there was an excess of radiogenic lead not supported by uranium decay over 4.5AE.”'' After short analysis:
*''“The superior modern analytical methods used made it impossible that analytical contamination could explain the result.''
*''The circumstances ... make it extremely unlikely that terrestrial contamination could explain the results for this meteorites.''
*''... a considerable excess of radiogenic lead in most fractions ...is difficult to attribute to contamination,“''
rather than starting to reckon with possibility to challenge the established figures and methods, after recalling that ''“Patterson was the first to show that several stony meteorites yield a ... model of 4.5AE,”'' he proposed the new explanation for discovered discrepancy: ''"discordant results can be attributed to contamination."'' Consequently, his research of the Earth’s age turned into calculation of ''"the correct sample ratios"'' from ''"observed ratios"'' so that the Table in his paper could finally show the “correct” preconceived age, established in this field of research.<ref name=GALE>{{cite web |title=U-Pb studies of the appley bridge meteorite |author=Gale, N.H., Arden, J. and Hutchison, R. |publisher=Nature Phys. Science |year=1972 |volume=240 57 |url=http://www.springerlink.com/content/r741164v5162r447}}</ref>

Using [[circular logic]] -- assuming that decay rates remained constant despite necessarily changing physical characteristics as time approached the origin -- Old Earth proponents insist that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old based on an assumption of constancy in [[Potassium-argon dating|Potassium-argon (K:Ar) decay rates]] and other radiometric methods.<ref>Peck, 2000, p.376.</ref>

In 1978, ''Geotimes'' magazine published by American Geological Institute quoted John Eddy, a famous astronomer, who argued that due to ''“some new and unexpected results“'' scientists could live with bishop Ussher’s 4004 B.C. value for the age of Earth and Sun, a fortiori since there is not much in the way of [[Scientific observation|observational]] [[Scientific evidence|evidence]] in [[astronomy]] to conflict with his calculations.<ref>{{cite journal |author=John Eddy quoted by R.G. Kazmann |title= It’s About Time: 4.5 Billion Years (report on Symposium at Louisiana State University)|publisher= Geotimes magazine (from 09/2008 renamed to Earth magazine) of American Geological Institute |year=1978 |issue=23 |pages=18-20|quote=I suspect that the Sun is 4.5 billion years old. However, given some new and unexpected results to the contrary, and some time for some frantic recalculation and theoretical readjustment, I suspect that we could live with bishop Ussher’s value for the age of Earth and Sun. I don’t think we have much in the way of observational evidence in astronomy to conflict with that.}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=Jon Covey |title= Age of the Universe |publisher= Creation In The Crossfire |date= January 3, 2013 |url=http://www.creationinthecrossfire.com/documents/AgeOfUniverse/AgeOfTheUniverse.html |accessdate=December 30, 2014 |quote= Evolutionary astronomers confidently argue the universe is 12-20 billion years old, although there is no certainty about any astronomical observations. John Eddy, a famous astronomer, once said that there isn’t much in the way of observational astronomy that proves the universe is old. He said that with “frantic theoretical readjustment” if new evidence showed that astronomers have been wrong, they could live with Bishop Ussher’s date of 4,004 B.C.}}</ref>

== Geology ==

[[Image:516XZRGNCKL AA240 .jpg|right|300px]]
[[William R. Corliss]] is a cataloger of scientific [[Anomaly|anomalies]] (observations and facts that challenge prevailing scientific [[paradigm]]s) and has published many works on the subject.<ref name="sf">[http://www.science-frontiers.com/ Science Frontiers] (Corliss' web-site)</ref>
He also wrote 13 books for the [[National Aeronautics and Space Administration]] (NASA), a dozen educational booklets for the [[Atomic Energy Commission]] (AEC), and a dozen articles for the [[National Science Foundation]] (NSF).<ref>Corliss, 2002</ref> The science magazine ''[[New Scientist]]'' had an article which focused on the career of William Corliss.<ref>Adrian Hope, ''Finding a Home for Stray Fact'', New Scientist, July 14, 1977, p. 83</ref>
''New Scientist'' wrote regarding Corliss's work: "All I can say to Corliss is carry on cataloging". <ref>Quoted on the [http://www.science-frontiers.com/sourcebk.htm Science Frontiers web-site]</ref> [[Arthur C. Clarke]] described Corliss as "[[Charles Fort|Fort]]'s latter-day - and much more scientific - successor."<ref>Clarke, Arthur C. (1990) ''Astounding Days: A Science Fictional Autobiography''. Gollancz. Page 110</ref>

Corliss's work on geological anomalies catalogs scores of anomalies which challenge the [[old-earth]] [[paradigm]].<ref>[http://www.science-frontiers.com/sourcebk.htm#Geology Geological Catalogs] (Science Frontiers)</ref>

== Bibliography ==
* Burnet, Thomas, [http://www.sacred-texts.com/earth/ste/ste36.htm The Sacred Theory of the Earth, chapter V], 1691.
* Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th edition (1911). [http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/User:Tim_Starling On-line page facsimiles].
* Hammerton, J.A. (Ed.), "Universal History of the World" (8 volumes) The Educational Book Co., London, c1930.
* Batten, Don, [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/417 Old-earth or young-earth belief: Which belief is the recent aberration?], ''Creation'' 24(1):24–27, December 2001.
* [http://www.ingv.it/~roma/SITOINGLESE/activities/geomagnetismo/analysistheory/historicalresearch/age.html The age of the Earth] (Istituto Nazionale di Geofisica e Vulcanologia (INGV)).
*Peck WH, Valley JW, Wilde SA, and Graham CM (2000) Ion microprobe Evidence for Pre-4.4 Ga Continental Crust and Low Temperature Water/Rock Interaction. ''Geol. Soc. Am. Abstr'', vol 32, no. 7.

== External Links ==
*[http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth Age of the earth] by [[Creation Ministries International]]
*[http://creation.com/refuting-evolution-chapter-8-how-old-is-the-earth How old is the earth?] - ''Refuting evolution'' - Chapter 8 by Dr. [[Jonathan Sarfati]] at [[Creation Ministries International]]
*[http://creation.com/young-age-of-the-earth-universe-qa Age of the Earth and Universe] by [[Creation Ministries International]]

== Notes ==
<references />
[[Category:Geology]]

Calculus

2015-03-30T21:52:44Z

PacWalker: /* Derivatives */ correcting interwiki link to point to page on maths, not financial instruments

{{Template:Math-h}}

::The word "calculus" has historically had a much more general meaning than at present. It means "a method or 'trick' for calculating something". (The word means "little stone" in Latin, referring to the use of pebbles for counting.) Among the types of calculus are:
:::*'''[[Propositional calculus]]'''—a notation for proving theorems about logical expressions.
:::*'''Predicate calculus'''—a notation for proving theorems about functions in [[set theory]].
:::*'''Lambda calculus'''—a notation for proving theorems about recursive functions and computability in [[computer science]].
:::*'''Residue calculus'''—a trick for evaluating integrals of complex functions around a closed loop, by examining the singularities of the function inside the loop.
:::*and, of course, '''Differential''' and '''Integral''' calculus—the common modern meaning of the term, and the subject of this article. These two forms are sometimes collectively called '''infinitesimal calculus'''.

'''Calculus''' (that is, the "infinitesimal calculus", see above) is the [[mathematics|mathematical]] subject that studies rates of change of functions. There are two main branches of calculus—[[derivative|differential]] calculus, and [[integral]] calculus. There are subfields of these: single [[variable]] calculus, [[exterior calculus]], and multi [[variable]] calculus.

Calculus has numerous applications in many fields, such as [[engineering]], [[physics]], [[chemistry]], [[biology]], and [[economics]]. Many physical properties can be explained and/or modeled through the use of calculus.

[[Isaac Newton]] was one of the most famous inventors of calculus, however there are several others who developed calculus simultaneously including [[Gottfried Leibniz]].<ref>Calculus, 5th edition, by James Stewart, Nelson Canada</ref> The [[Calculus Controversy|disagreement]] over the originator of calculus created rifts within the European mathematical community for years.

==Integrals==
{{Main|Integral}}
Integration is primarily defined as the method to calculate the area in an xy-plane above the x-axis. There are two fundamentally different kinds of integrals.

===Indefinite Integrals===
{{main|Indefinite integral}}
The antiderivative of a function is often called the ''indefinite integral''. It is called indefinite because the limits of integration are not specified. So, for example, the derivative of <math>\frac{x^3}{3}+7</math> is <math>x^2</math>. From this it follows that the antiderivative of <math>x^2</math> could be <math>\frac{x^3}{3}+7</math>. But note that the "7" in that formula was a [[red herring]]. Adding any constant to a function doesn't change its derivative, so the antiderivative of <math>x^2</math> could have any constant added to it. This arbitrary constant is usually written '''C''' and is called the "constant of integration". The indefinite integral could be written:

:<math>\int x^2\ \mathrm{d}x = \frac{x^3}{3} + C\,</math>,

The Fundamental Theorem of Calculus says that the area under the graph of <math>x^2</math> between a and b is the difference in the values of <math>\frac{x^3}{3}+C</math> between a and b. Note that the constant of integration cancels out.

===Definite Integrals===
{{main|Definite integral}}
This kind of integral is called a ''definite integral'', written with the limits <math>[a,b]</math>:

:<math>\int_a^b f(x)\,dx = F(b) - F(a)</math>

The above is a simplified "intuitive" treatment of calculus and of this theorem. The actual "rigorous" proof, "rigorous" definitions of derivative and integral, and statement of the conditions under which the theorem is true, are beyond the scope of this article. Definite integrals are strongly connected to the [[Fundamental Theorem of Calculus]].

==Derivatives==
{{Main|Derivative}}
Derivatives are defined as the instantaneous rate of change of differentiable functions. Derivatives themselves can be functions that give the slope of the instantaneous rate of change of a function at any differentiable point. The slope of a tangent line is another way of defining a derivative. A tangent line touches a graph at only one point (locally). So its slope can be interpreted as the instantaneous rate of change of that graph.

===Power Functions===

== External Links ==
[http://www.wannalearn.com/Academic_Subjects/Mathematics/Calculus/ Calculus Tutorials]

==See also==
*[[Fundamental Theorem of Calculus]]
*[[Derivative]]
*[[Integral]]

==References==
<references/>

[[Category:Mathematics]]
[[Category:Calculus]]

College Level Examination Program

2015-03-30T21:49:20Z

PacWalker: /* CLEP v. AP */ AP does cover some subjects outside typical GE, such as music theory, various cultures, languages, etc., as well as visual art nd probably others I'm forgetting.

The '''College Level Examination Program''' (CLEP)<ref>http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/clep/about.html</ref> is an alternate pathway to bypass and test out of lower division coursework at participating universities. Instead of taking an introductory course, students with sufficient CLEP scores are either able to take a higher level course or, in the case of [[general education]] (GE) requirements, do not need to take the GE course.
Through programs like CLEP, students are able to accelerate their college education at a fraction of the cost and ensure their graduation in four years or less.

== Subjects Available ==

The 36 CLEP exams are in the following categories:<ref>http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/clep/exams.html</ref>

* 6 exams in Composition and Literature (including both American and English Literature)
* 6 exams in foreign languages (Spanish, German and French, levels I and II for each)
* 12 exams in Economics (2), American Government (1), History (5) and Social Sciences (4)
* 4 exams in Mathematics:
:* College Mathematics (simple math for students not majoring in math, science or engineering)
:* College Algebra (material often covered in high school algebra courses)
:* Precalculus (graphical representations of functions, trigonometry, etc.)
:* Calculus
* 3 exams in Science
* 5 exams in Business (accounting, law, computers, management and marketing)

==Recognition==
Nearly 3,000 [[college]]s recognize this program, but their rules for granting credit vary widely. Some colleges do not recognize this program so it is important to check first prior to investing the time and money in this examination. But even if your preferred college does not accept this as credit, it can look very good on an application, particularly by a [[homeschool]] student who may have relatively little classwork information. At least one ''Conservapedian'' student was able to skip a year of college (and save a year's worth of college tuition plus the opportunity cost of a year's wages) based on CLEP exams.
===California State Bar===
All persons who wish to qualify for the bar exam by [[California Law Office Study Program|reading law]] must have completed college coursework or demonstrated intellectual equivalent. Scores of 50 or higher from certain CLEP exams are accepted by the Bar Examiners to fulfill this requirement. All applicants must take the English Composition exam, with or without essay, and two additional exams from a specified list of Humanities, Mathematics, Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences and History.<ref>http://calbar.xap.com/applications/CalBar/info/prelegal.html#test Pre-Legal Education Requirements]. The State Bar of California. Accessed 16 January 2010.</ref>

===Christian Colleges Granting Credit for CLEP===
{|class="wikitable"
!College!!CLEP Policy
|-
|[[Bob Jones University]]||Insert link here
|-
|[[Cedarville University]]||Insert link here
|-
|[[Grove City College]]||[http://www2.gcc.edu/registrar/advising/CLEP_Guidelines_2009-10.pdf CLEP Guidelines]
|-
|[[Liberty University]]||Insert link here
|-
|[[Messiah College]]||Insert link here
|-
|[[Pensacola Christian College]]||Insert link here
|-
|[[Pepperdine University]]||[http://collegesearch.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=3921&profileId=6 Test Scores]
|-
|[[Wheaton College]]||Insert link here
|-
|}
Thomas Aquinas College and [[Patrick Henry College]] do ''not'' grant credit for CLEP exams or many other forms of transfer credits.

==Testing==
CLEP testing occurs around once a month at participating college sites and military bases. Most exams are 90 minutes, with a few exceptions. Also, unlike AP exams, the vast majority of subject tests are completely multiple choice, making it easier to score higher. Unlike the SAT exams, no points are deducted for incorrect answers on a CLEP exam, '''''so a student should provide an answer to every question even if it requires guessing'''''.

The base fee for a test is $72 (as of 2009) with an additional $10 charge if the exam has a writing section. As part of the military's focus on education, '''''there is no charge to service members or veterans for taking CLEP exams'''''<ref>Reimbursement is available if any fees are charged by a testing center. See the CLEP website for details.</ref> and many bases have on site testing facilities. Testing centers are also allowed to collect a fee to cover the costs of test administration. While the College Board recommends that the administrative charge be around $15, each center has the discretionary authority to set its own administrative charge.

A student can control who sees his score in two ways. First, if the exam goes so poorly that a student doubts he passed and wants to cancel his score, then '''''he should notify the administrator before the end of the exam time period and refuse to complete it for scoring.'''''<ref>http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/clep/scores.html</ref> Once the student completes the exam and receives a score, then the score becomes part of a permanent CLEP transcript and cannot be canceled. The student, however, can still control who receives his CLEP transcript, and can send a copy of his transcript only to the colleges that he selects. Since CLEP scores are typically used to obtain credit rather than obtaining admission, a failing CLEP score would typically be ignored without any adverse consequences.

CLEP scores are on a range from 20 to 80, with 50 (about 60%) typically being the threshold for passing. Some schools might require a higher score, however, as a condition of awarding credit. Grove City College, for example, requires a score of 60 on the Economics CLEP exams before awarding college credit for them.

==CLEP v. AP==
As a standardized test is used to award credit, CLEP is similar to another [[College Board]] program, [[Advanced Placement]] (AP). However, unlike AP, there is no course targeted towards preparation for the exam. The AP exam is offered only in May of each year, and there are cumbersome and expensive requirements to sign up for the exam beforehand. In contrast, CLEP testing is available at most colleges on a monthly or even weekly basis. Due to the greater access of CLEP sites, more people are able to take the tests, making the CLEP an attractive and inexpensive option.

Although AP test centers are required to be available to [[homeschoolers]], the process for participation by homeschoolers can be difficult depending on the local [[public school]]. Early planning and substantial fees are required.

Another difference between the CLEP and AP exams is subject breadth. With 36 CLEP subjects and 31 AP subjects, both tests have a similar number of subjects. While both AP and CLEP exams cover topics outside typical general education, many topics are only covered by one exam set or the other. CLEP exams also have less [[testing bias]] than AP exams.

== References ==
<references/>

== See also ==
*[[Harvard University]]
*[[University]]
*[[Swansea University]]
[[category:Education]]
[[category:Colleges and Universities]]

College Level Examination Program

2015-03-30T21:44:55Z

PacWalker: Insure: provide insurance. Ensure: make certain.

The '''College Level Examination Program''' (CLEP)<ref>http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/clep/about.html</ref> is an alternate pathway to bypass and test out of lower division coursework at participating universities. Instead of taking an introductory course, students with sufficient CLEP scores are either able to take a higher level course or, in the case of [[general education]] (GE) requirements, do not need to take the GE course.
Through programs like CLEP, students are able to accelerate their college education at a fraction of the cost and ensure their graduation in four years or less.

== Subjects Available ==

The 36 CLEP exams are in the following categories:<ref>http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/clep/exams.html</ref>

* 6 exams in Composition and Literature (including both American and English Literature)
* 6 exams in foreign languages (Spanish, German and French, levels I and II for each)
* 12 exams in Economics (2), American Government (1), History (5) and Social Sciences (4)
* 4 exams in Mathematics:
:* College Mathematics (simple math for students not majoring in math, science or engineering)
:* College Algebra (material often covered in high school algebra courses)
:* Precalculus (graphical representations of functions, trigonometry, etc.)
:* Calculus
* 3 exams in Science
* 5 exams in Business (accounting, law, computers, management and marketing)

==Recognition==
Nearly 3,000 [[college]]s recognize this program, but their rules for granting credit vary widely. Some colleges do not recognize this program so it is important to check first prior to investing the time and money in this examination. But even if your preferred college does not accept this as credit, it can look very good on an application, particularly by a [[homeschool]] student who may have relatively little classwork information. At least one ''Conservapedian'' student was able to skip a year of college (and save a year's worth of college tuition plus the opportunity cost of a year's wages) based on CLEP exams.
===California State Bar===
All persons who wish to qualify for the bar exam by [[California Law Office Study Program|reading law]] must have completed college coursework or demonstrated intellectual equivalent. Scores of 50 or higher from certain CLEP exams are accepted by the Bar Examiners to fulfill this requirement. All applicants must take the English Composition exam, with or without essay, and two additional exams from a specified list of Humanities, Mathematics, Natural Sciences, and Social Sciences and History.<ref>http://calbar.xap.com/applications/CalBar/info/prelegal.html#test Pre-Legal Education Requirements]. The State Bar of California. Accessed 16 January 2010.</ref>

===Christian Colleges Granting Credit for CLEP===
{|class="wikitable"
!College!!CLEP Policy
|-
|[[Bob Jones University]]||Insert link here
|-
|[[Cedarville University]]||Insert link here
|-
|[[Grove City College]]||[http://www2.gcc.edu/registrar/advising/CLEP_Guidelines_2009-10.pdf CLEP Guidelines]
|-
|[[Liberty University]]||Insert link here
|-
|[[Messiah College]]||Insert link here
|-
|[[Pensacola Christian College]]||Insert link here
|-
|[[Pepperdine University]]||[http://collegesearch.collegeboard.com/search/CollegeDetail.jsp?collegeId=3921&profileId=6 Test Scores]
|-
|[[Wheaton College]]||Insert link here
|-
|}
Thomas Aquinas College and [[Patrick Henry College]] do ''not'' grant credit for CLEP exams or many other forms of transfer credits.

==Testing==
CLEP testing occurs around once a month at participating college sites and military bases. Most exams are 90 minutes, with a few exceptions. Also, unlike AP exams, the vast majority of subject tests are completely multiple choice, making it easier to score higher. Unlike the SAT exams, no points are deducted for incorrect answers on a CLEP exam, '''''so a student should provide an answer to every question even if it requires guessing'''''.

The base fee for a test is $72 (as of 2009) with an additional $10 charge if the exam has a writing section. As part of the military's focus on education, '''''there is no charge to service members or veterans for taking CLEP exams'''''<ref>Reimbursement is available if any fees are charged by a testing center. See the CLEP website for details.</ref> and many bases have on site testing facilities. Testing centers are also allowed to collect a fee to cover the costs of test administration. While the College Board recommends that the administrative charge be around $15, each center has the discretionary authority to set its own administrative charge.

A student can control who sees his score in two ways. First, if the exam goes so poorly that a student doubts he passed and wants to cancel his score, then '''''he should notify the administrator before the end of the exam time period and refuse to complete it for scoring.'''''<ref>http://www.collegeboard.com/student/testing/clep/scores.html</ref> Once the student completes the exam and receives a score, then the score becomes part of a permanent CLEP transcript and cannot be canceled. The student, however, can still control who receives his CLEP transcript, and can send a copy of his transcript only to the colleges that he selects. Since CLEP scores are typically used to obtain credit rather than obtaining admission, a failing CLEP score would typically be ignored without any adverse consequences.

CLEP scores are on a range from 20 to 80, with 50 (about 60%) typically being the threshold for passing. Some schools might require a higher score, however, as a condition of awarding credit. Grove City College, for example, requires a score of 60 on the Economics CLEP exams before awarding college credit for them.

==CLEP v. AP==
As a standardized test is used to award credit, CLEP is similar to another [[College Board]] program, [[Advanced Placement]] (AP). However, unlike AP, there is no course targeted towards preparation for the exam. The AP exam is offered only in May of each year, and there are cumbersome and expensive requirements to sign up for the exam beforehand. In contrast, CLEP testing is available at most colleges on a monthly or even weekly basis. Due to the greater access of CLEP sites, more people are able to take the tests, making the CLEP an attractive and inexpensive option.

Although AP test centers are required to be available to [[homeschoolers]], the process for participation by homeschoolers can be difficult depending on the local [[public school]]. Early planning and substantial fees are required.

Another difference between the CLEP and AP exams is subject breadth. With 36 CLEP subjects and 31 AP subjects, both tests have a similar number of subjects. But CLEP subjects branch out beyond core GE areas and cover a broader spectrum of academic departments, in contrast with the AP exams. CLEP exams also have less [[testing bias]] than AP exams.

== References ==
<references/>

== See also ==
*[[Harvard University]]
*[[University]]
*[[Swansea University]]
[[category:Education]]
[[category:Colleges and Universities]]