The mythology of modern dating methods Amateur social free cams online
And, to make matters worse, evolutionary scientists delight in presenting a litany of methods (such as radiometric dating, to choose just one example) that, they say, documents beyond reasonable doubt the truthfulness of their conclusions.
What is the humble Bible believer to think when accosted by these evolutionary scientists and their absolute dating methods?
For many Bible believersyoung and old alikeone of the most puzzling and problematic topics in the Bible/science arena is the claim by evolutionary scientists that they have proved the Earth to be 4.6 billion years old.
From cradle to grave, we are exposed to authoritative claims, the purpose of which is to reinforce in our minds this so-called fact of science.
HIGHLIGHTS: * Debunks isotopic-dating claims, such as the ones about discrepant dates being rare, dates being self-checking as to accuracy, the majority of dates being concordant, the million-billion year ages obtained validating this magnitude of ages, alleged “younging up” in dates, etc. *Proves that isotopic dates DO NOT converge on an assumed age of 4.5 billion years for earth. True or False: If isotopic dating methods were invalid, we would necessarily expect to find as many “zero” dates, and “future” dates, as those that seem to indicate million-to-billion year values?
*Documents isotopic dates far in excess of the 4.5 Ga figure. Has it been proven that there exists a “younging-up” trend in isotopic dates? Even if the “younging-up” trend in isotopic dates does in fact exist, does this constitute ipso facto proof for the validity of the dating methods?
Special emphasis is on demonstrating that discrepant results are not the exception, but the rule, and that arguments used to justify A detailed survey of the following dating methods in actual use: K-Ar, Ar-Ar, Fission track, Rb-Sr, U-Pb, Pb-Pb, Sm-Nd, Re-Os, Lu-Hf, La-Ce, etc.