Expert: John Shea - 12/24/2009

Question
I know several people who are young earth creationists, who are trying to convince me that the Biblical timeline of early man as presented in the Bible is literally true.  This would mean that, after the universal flood which ended about 2349 BC, the three sons of Noah and their wives (not to mention the animals on the Ark) repopulated the earth.  The creationists claim that all the historical and scientific facts we have confirm this view of history, and if the prevailing anthropological view of early man is different, it is only because these facts are being interpreted differently.  So my question is, is there any evidence, historical, anthropological, genetic, archaeological, etc, that confirms the Creationist account?  Secondly, is this even a possibility mathematically, geographically; i.e. can it in any way 'fit the facts'?

Answer
There is no scientific evidence whatsoever to support the hypothesis that the origins of the universe, earth, life, humans followed the account set down in Genesis.
As an orgin myth goes, it's fine, neither better nor worse than any other one.  The Genesis story just happened to get incorporated into the sacred literature of two big proselytizing religions
(Christianity and Islam), and so more people have an emotional investment in it than, say, creation myths of the Iroquois, the !Kung San (SW Africa), or the Aranda (Australia).
This "young earth" creationism business is just something (largely) Christian fundamentalists concocted to accommodate new discoveries in geology and paleotology from the 19th Century onwards.  If it were correct, sustained research would result in the discovery of ever more consistent supporting evidence. In fact, the opposite has happened.
Donald Prothero's book, Evolution: What the Fossils Say and Why It Matters is a good source to read about this.
Sincerely
John Shea