The faint-sun paradox

​The Faint-Sun Paradox is a problem for evolutionists and old earth advocates who believe in the 4.5 billion year time frame for the origin of the earth. This paradox occurs according to mainstream evolutionist models that postulate that the earth was below freezing 3.5 billion years ago, when life supposedly “evolved” according to the evolutionists. The sun would have been young at that time and would have emitted much less heat and radiation (as much as 30 percent less). This absence of heat would have caused temperatures below freezing on the earth and conditions too cold to support the evolution and existence of life on Earth. Of course, if the earth is young with a time frame of 6,000 years, there would be no faint-sun paradox. Evolutionists and old earth advocates have attempted to explain the paradox with a number of theories. One theory proposes a greenhouse effect in the early earth with a large amount of carbon dioxide on earth. However, geologic evidence from ice cores and computer modeling do not support the idea of excess carbon dioxide in the early earth. Other theories have been proposed to explain the paradox with little success. The faint-sun paradox is another example of how observational science does not support evolution and billions of years of time. Yet, instead of embracing the idea of a young earth and universe, mainstream evolutionists continue to look for evidence that supports a timeline in the billions of years for the Earth and the universe. The bias of mainstream scientific institutions toward standard old-earth models prevents the advancement of alternative models of origin for the earth and the universe that truly support the science that is actually observed in nature.