Scientific creationism, also commonly referred to as Young Earth Scientific Creation (YEC), is quite a recent 20th century phenomenon that has its roots in the fundamentalist movement of the 1920s. The 20th century’s surge in geological evidence has consistently pointed towards an Earth with a long history. Geological evidence has run contrary to the traditional biblical understanding that there had really been a global, universal flood at the time of Noah. The reality being today is that a universal flood has been rejected not only by professional scientists but also by many Christian thinkers. However, the Canadian Seventh Day Adventist and amateur geologist George McCready Price (1870-1963), tried to argue that geology actually supported a young Earth as well as a universal flood. Noteworthy are his books The New Geology (1923) and Illogical Geology (1906) which proved to be convincing to Christians who lacked any training in geology. It wasn’t be long afterwards that Henry Morris (1918-2006) and John Whitcomb (1924- ) revised and updated his 1923 work The New Geology. Morris and Whitcomb soon released their own book The Genesis Flood in 1961. The duo argued that, on the basis of their interpretation of the Bible, the Earth was 6000 years old, that the fall of man transformed nature by initiating the operation of the second law of thermodynamics, and that Noah’s flood was the correct explanation for most of the geological evidence and fossilization that scientists observe today. However, the movement didn’t stop there as since the 1960s three major YEC organizations have accumulated quite a bit of influence. These notably being The Institute for Creation Research (ICR) (founded in 1972 by Henry Morris and now run by his son John), a larger international organization Answers in Genesis (founded by the Australian Ken Ham) and Creation Ministries International (founded in Australia in 2006). The evidence that YEC scientists have offered for their Young-Earth views have received little scientific response from mainstream scientists. This is because, on scientific grounds, their claims are unanimously seen to be absurd and problematic. Likewise the overwhelming consensus of professional biblical scholars view their YEC biblical interpretation as profoundly anachronistic as well as an unwarranted reading of the opening chapters of Genesis.