YouTube Does it damage children to teach them biblical creationism? What are the costs of denying evolution, one of biology’s core tenets? Here’s a video feed of their debate. Below that are highlights from their exchanges: YouTube Update Thursday, Feb. Recap And Analysis Interest in points raised in the debate has generated spirited responses and criticisms online. You can read about some of those views in a new post from Thursday. The debate saw Nye and Ham discussing natural laws and scientific research, along with astronomy, geology and the number of animal species on Earth — but with markedly different views. Both of them talked about Mount St. Helens and the Grand Canyon, for instance, without agreeing on those landmarks’ places in history.
Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon Dating
Theodosius Dobzhansky We do not know how the Creator created, what processes He used, for He used processes which are not now operating anywhere in the natural universe. This is why we refer to creation as special creation. We cannot discover by scientific investigations anything about the creative processes used by the Creator. The Fossils Say No! Faith in a God of self-giving love Haught Creationism is a religious metaphysical belief which claims that a supernatural being created the universe.
Radiometric Dating and Creation Science The topic of radiometric dating has received some of the most vicious attacks by young earth creation science theorists. However, none of the criticisms of young earth creationists have any scientific merit.
Nitrogen 14 years Also, alpha decay and beta decay use different processes. Therefore they may not be affected the same amount by an increase in the decay rate. So discordances between alpha and beta decay ages are an evidence of disturbed decay. To sum up, the following are the evidences one would expect from accelerated decay in the past: Carbon 14 ages should be much younger than other isotopic ages like K-Ar, U-Pb, et cetera. Alpha and beta ages should differ. And ages computed from elements with long half lives should be more affected than ages computed from elements with short half lives.
Evidence against a recent creation
Dating Here of some of the well-tested methods of dating used in the study of early humans: Potassium-argon dating, Argon-argon dating, Carbon or Radiocarbon , and Uranium series. All of these methods measure the amount of radioactive decay of chemical elements; the decay occurs in a consistent manner, like a clock, over long periods of time. Thermo-luminescence, Optically stimulated luminescence, and Electron spin resonance.
The foundation of old age dating methods, upon which the assumption of an old Earth (and evolution) rest, is radiometric dating. Culminating this lecture is the astounding and seemingly irrefutable evidence showing how radiometric methods are misinterpreted to give erroneously old dates.
Bruce Malone gave his life to Christ over 20 years ago, as the Lord miraculously preserved him through a close call with death. Since that time Bruce has looked for a deeper purpose in life and realized that rejection of Biblical truth, justified by belief in evolution, is the acid which is eating away at the moral foundation of our culture. Bruce spent 27 years working as a research leader for the Dow Chemical Corporation, has a degree chemical engineering, and is responsible for key innovations which have resulted in 18 patents.
But his passion is sharing the relevance and evidence for creation, so he retired early to become full time Director of Search for the Truth Ministries http: Bruce has spoken extensively at Colleges and Charities in 12 countries. Since Bruce has spoken over times to more than 20, people and over 30, books have been distributed to students and prisoners. Bruce brings science alive through stories and demonstrations, showing that Biblical creation is the most rational explanation for the world around us.
The purpose of both his books and lectures is to help the non-scientific layman understand the importance of creation while motivating and equipping them to share these truths. Bruce resides in Midland, MI with his wife Robin, and they have four children who are all actively serving the Lord. Click here to contact Bruce to arrange a speaking engagement at your church or organization.
Age Dating the Earth
Are There Gaps in the Genesis Genealogies? Many view the original New Answers Book as an essential tool for modern discipleship. Both of these books answer such questions as: Can natural processes explain the origin of life? Can creationists be real scientists? Where did Cain get his wife?
In support of Dalrymple’s claims, Harland et al. () demonstrate that K/Ar dating can be consistent with U/Pb, Rb/Sr and other methods. Young (, p. ) also points out that atmospheric Ar contamination cannot be used by creationists to explain away lunar K/Ar dates of 3 to 4 billion years old.
This article will explain how carbon dating is supposed to work and then show you the serious flaws with this process. It is derived from a transcript of Dr. His videos and materials are not copyrighted. Carbon dating was not invented until When the schools started to teach that the earth is billions of years old, back in , the reasoning was not because of carbon dating. Carbon dating had not even been thought of yet.
Creation Evidence Museum of Texas
There are a number of other interesting aspects to this study. These rocks were also studied using paleomagnetic methods and a pole was determined for the rocks. The pole position obtained for these rocks prior to any knowledge regarding the absolute age fell on a well-dated segment of the Gondwana Apparent polar wander path.
Bill Nye’s decision to debate Ham at the Creation Museum Tuesday night, then, was a puzzling one. Nye, “the science guy,” plays by the rules of the scientific method and accepts the.
Slowly and painstakingly, geologists have assembled this record into the generalized geologic time scale shown in Figure 1. This was done by observing the relative age sequence of rock units in a given area and determining, from stratigraphic relations, which rock units are younger, which are older, and what assemblages of fossils are contained in each unit. Using fossils to correlate from area to area, geologists have been able to work out a relative worldwide order of rock formations and to divide the rock record and geologic time into the eras, periods, and epochs shown in Figure 1.
The last modification to the geologic time scale of Figure 1 was in the s, before radiometric dating was fully developed, when the Oligocene Epoch was inserted between the Eocene and the Miocene. Although early stratigraphers could determine the relative order of rock units and fossils, they could only estimate the lengths of time involved by observing the rates of present geologic processes and comparing the rocks produced by those processes with those preserved in the stratigraphic record.
With the development of modern radiometric dating methods in the late s and s, it was possible for the first time not only to measure the lengths of the eras, periods, and epochs but also to check the relative order of these geologic time units. Radiometric dating verified that the relative time scale determined by stratigraphers and paleontologists Figure 1 is absolutely correct, a result that could only have been obtained if both the relative time scale and radiometric dating methods were correct.
Nonetheless, stratigraphy and radiometric dating of Precambrian rocks have clearly demonstrated that the history of the Earth extends billions of years into the past. Radiometric dating has not been applied to just a few selected rocks from the geologic record. Literally many tens of thousands of radiometric age measurements are documented in the scientific literature. Since beginning operation in the early s, the Geochronology laboratories of the U.
Add to this number the age measurements made by from 50 to other laboratories worldwide, and it is easy to see that the number of radiometric ages produced over the past two to three decades and published in the scientific literature must easily exceed , Three basic approaches are used to determine the age of the Earth. The first is to search for and date the oldest rocks exposed on the surface of the Earth.
A YOUNG EARTH
Radiometric Dating Radiometric Dating – A Brief Explanation Radiometric dating is the primary dating scheme employed by scientists to determine the age of the earth. Radiometric dating techniques take advantage of the natural decay of radioisotopes. An isotope is one of two or more atoms which have the same number of protons in their nuclei, but a different number of neutrons. Radioisotopes are unstable isotopes:
Flood Geology and the Grand Canyon: A Critique Carol A. Hill and Stephen O. Moshier Flood Geology and the Grand Canyon: A Critique Young Earth Creationist (Flood Geology) • Earth is about 6, years old † Radiometric methods for the dating of geological materials are flawed.
We have been told that dating methods, such as the rates of decay of radioactive elements, force an honest observer to an old-Earth conclusion. One of the most glaring problems with such reasoning is that it is based on assumptions that have proven to be incorrect. For years, that assumption has been shown to have serious problems DeYoung , and recent findings have made that assumption even more glaringly false.
The implications of such a discovery are profound. Stanford professor emeritus of applied physics Peter Sturrock stated: Further research, however, suggested that the information was not an experimental mistake. In December of , Jere Jenkins, a nuclear engineer at Purdue University, noticed that the decay rate of manganese dropped slightly just before and during a solar flare. Jenkins and Fischbach argue that this variation in decay rates is caused by interaction between solar neutrinos and the radioactive elements being observed.
This latest research brings to light the glaring flaw of such dating methods, showing that the core assumptions are not only questionable, they are verifiably false. The suggestion that decay rates may be affected by neutrinos is nothing new. The responses given by TalkOrigins do not include the new data from the latest research, and cannot dismiss the fact that the rates of radioactive elements are measurably variable, even though the neutrino interaction with them is little understood Since we can prove that certain radioactive elements have a rate that varies in the winter or summer, or during solar flares, then the assumption that decay rates are constant cannot honestly be maintained.