EvoWiki is now a project of the RationalWiki Foundation, to learn how to participate please visit the EvoWiki project page.

The frequency of leap seconds indicates a young earth

From EvoWiki

Jump to: navigation, search



Leap seconds have had to be inserted into the year 22 times between 1970 and 1999, showing that the earth is slowing 0.77 seconds per year. At this rate, the earth would have slowed to a stop if it were billions of years old.



  1. So-called "leap seconds" have nothing to do with any change in the Earth's rotation. Rather, leap seconds are a consequence of the fact that human timekeeping systems are arbitrary human constructs which don't match up exactly against the Earth's rotation. Just as those every-four-years leap days are not a sign that the Earth is slowing down in its orbit around the Sun, so it is that leap seconds are not a sign that the Earth's rotation is slowing down.
  2. If the earth's movement around the sun were slowing down, we wouldn't need a constant rate of leap seconds but an increasing rate.
  3. The earth's rotation (not to be confused with its movement around the sun) is slowing down, but not at such a great rate and not in this direction. The length of a day now is very slightly more than 24 hours. Therefore the year will have fewer days in the far future (because the days get longer and the year stays the same), and one will have to remove more and more leap seconds.
  4. The claim grossly exaggerates the rate of change of Earth's day. In reality, it only decreases by 1.7 milliseconds per century, whereas the claim states it decreases by 77000 milliseconds per century. This is wrong by four orders of magnitude and a factor of 4.
  5. This claim is substantially identical to Moon is receding at a rate too fast for an old universe and Earth's rotation is slowing, indicating a young earth.
  6. Creationists who use this claim fail to, or refuse to appreciate how slow the rate of slowing actually is... 450 million years ago, days in the Ordovician period were around 22 hours long.
  7. add more responses

Fallacies contained in this claim

External Links


  1. NIST Time and Frequency Division, n.d., Frequently Asked Questions. [2]

Further Reading


Personal tools