Evidence against a recent creation

Metrics details. The creationist—evolutionist conflict is perhaps the most significant example of a debate about a well-supported scientific theory not readily accepted by the public. The analysis revealed numerous fallacies including the direct ad hominem —portraying evolutionists as racists, unreliable or gullible—and the indirect ad hominem , where evolutionists are accused of breaking the rules of debate that they themselves have dictated. Poisoning the well fallacy stated that evolutionists would not consider supernatural explanations in any situation due to their pre-existing refusal of theism. A ppeals to consequences and guilt by association linked evolutionary theory to atrocities, and slippery slopes to abortion, euthanasia and genocide. False dilemmas , hasty generalizations and straw man fallacies were also common.

Radiocarbon Dating & Calibration

The purpose of this index is to list all the claims of young earth creationists, and provide rebuttals to those claims. Although the idea for this index came from the TalkOrigins. Many arguments will have additional arguments against the young earth claims which do not appear on the Talk Origins site. In addition, some arguments used on the Talk Origins site will not be used here.

The Talk Origins Archive website also confirms this; however, it also says that it is a (compared with) other then-current dating techniques: excusably, perhaps.

Antievolutionists often express outrage over alleged incivility from those who oppose their efforts to evade the establishment clause of the First Amendment. But they have no difficulty in dishing out the abuse themselves. Here is a sample from the Invidious Comparisons thread that documents egregious behavior on the part of the religious antievolution advocates. These critics include embryologists, paleontologists, biochemists, molecular biologists, medical doctors, philosophers, and even lawyers.

Unfortunately, the North American science-and-religion establishment has largely turned a deaf ear to these critics, preferring instead to abandon classical theology and embrace metaphysical materialism and moral relativism. But I see the situation as analogous to the last years of Soviet communism. A small, powerful elite controls all the official information outlets while the evidence against the official position swells quietly, like a wave building offshore.

Someday soon, to the surprise of many people in academia and the media, the wave will break. I predict that the Darwinist establishment will come apart at the seams, just as the Soviet Empire did in Request new password. The Talk. Origins Archive is a collection of articles and essays, most of which have appeared in talk.

The primary reason for this archive’s existence is to provide mainstream scientific responses to the many frequently asked questions FAQs that appear in the talk.

[FAQs]: The s FAQ archive (1 of 2)

Chapter Summaries. The Fact of Evolution? The fossil record is often cited as proof that Evolution has drastically changed species over very long time intervals. The fossil record provides snapshots of the past that, when assembled, illustrate a panorama of evolutionary change over the past four billion years.

The s Archive is a collection of articles and essays, most of which have dating methods and discussions of creationist criticisms and attempts to date.

Claim CD :. Source: Brown, Walt, CreationWiki response: Talk. Origins quotes in blue. First of all, according to Talk. Origins’ own source, the “dates” are not linear with distance as plate tectonics would predict. There is a definite upward curve in the data.

Young Earth Creation Science Argument Index

Scientists use certain elements present in a certain abundance to calculate an approximate age for rocks. One of the decay ratios used is Uranium decaying through a series of alpha and beta decays to Lead. The number in superscript preceding the element name indicates the atomic mass, the sum of its protons and neutrons. Alpha decay releases a Helium nucleus two protons and two neutrons from the parent atom to create two atoms: the released Helium and a daughter product that has an atomic number two less than the original and an atomic mass four less than the original.

Using the amount of the remaining Uranium, the amount of Lead that has built up, and the original amount of Lead which is not created by any known decay process, scientists can calculate an approximate age based on the decay rate of Uranium and the ratios of Uranium to Lead and Lead to Lead. Some creationists claim that there is too much helium in Earth’s crust for the earth to be any more than two million years old Sarfati,

They have their work cut out for them, however, because radiocarbon (C) dating is one of the most reliable of all the radiometric dating methods. This article.

Judson and S. Roger C. Also a few entries from including Wesley R. Elsberry’s talk. Absolute age The age of an object as established by some precise dating method, such as radiometric dating compare with relative age. Fred Bervoets – Dinodata glossary. Absolute dating A means of estimating the age of rocks with some degree of accuracy using measurements of radioactive isotopes. Alpha decay The process of radioactive decay in which the nucleus of an atom emits an alpha particle.

The new atom’s atomic number is lower by two and its atomic mass number is reduced by four.

Radiometric dating gives unreliable results ( s)

There are at least 3 ways that the age of the Universe can be estimated. I will describe The age of the chemical elements. The age of the oldest star clusters.

Although the idea for this index came from the listing of G The U-Th-Pb method, properly corrected for neutron capture gives recent dates.

Art for me is many things. In our society, particularly in current times, I believe that art is an affirmation of our humanity; a symbol of perseverance in the face of adversity. It is the light at the end of a tunnel; a much-needed light to counteract the darkness that has engulfed many a homeland. One can control the art but not the reaction to it.

Both reactions, in my view, pave the way for progress as one is made to think and question. The materials we choose, the methods of production and the sources of art produced all reflect the interests that commands our attention. The artist, the subject and the means by which it is rendered are inseparable. When did your interest in art begin? What prompted you to embark on a career in art?


The Rise of Mammals This diagram shows the enormous increase in the variety of mammals since the Cretaceous period. Biology and Evolutionary Theory This collection of articles and essays offers scientific responses to the many questions and rebuttals that have appeared in Talk. Origins, a Usenet newsgroup devoted to the discussion and debate of biological and physical origins.

Hosted by Talk.

Radiometric dating techniques indicate that the Earth is thousands of times older than Talk Origins–an archive dedicated to creation-evolution issues.

To browse Academia. Skip to main content. Log In Sign Up. Download Free PDF. Response to Some Claims in ‘Fallacies in Evolution’. Dave Burke. The consistency of decay rates gives us confidence in the probabilistic nature of half-life. Both are extremely reliable. The subtitle of this work was “An attempt to explain the former changes of the Earth’s surface by reference to causes now in operation.

However, modern geology and biology have long since moved beyond these simple concepts, recognizing that while the earth’s history is a slow process of gradual change, this process has been punctuated by periodic natural catastrophic events. For example, in the late twentieth century, J. Harlan Bretz demonstrated that the Scablands in eastern Washington state were formed from a large flood, which in turn resulted when a glacial lake broke through an ice dam.

Similarly, in , Luis Alvarez proposed that an asteroid impact was responsible for the extinction of dinosaurs 65 million years ago.

TalkOrigins Archive

By Kirk Reynolds. The global flood as described in the Bible has been attacked by Christians as well as non-Christians. Those Christians who do not hold to a literal reading of Genesis are willing to believe in the old age of the earth as proposed by evolution.

Cohen suggests the origin dates back to s New of babble meaning unintelligible speech is from the ancient membership voting method (which Brewer says in is.

Other Links:. Former creationist Glenn Morton examines several famous young-earth creationist arguments and provides data to illustrate their flaws. A Radiometric Dating Resource List. Tim Thompson has collected a large set of links to web pages that discuss radiometric dating techniques and the age of the earth controversy. This value is derived from several different lines of evidence.

Unfortunately, the age cannot be computed directly from material that is solely from the Earth. There is evidence that energy from the Earth’s accumulation caused the surface to be molten. Further, the processes of erosion and crustal recycling have apparently destroyed all of the earliest surface. The oldest rocks which have been found so far on the Earth date to about 3. Some of these rocks are sedimentary, and include minerals which are themselves as old as 4. Rocks of this age are relatively rare, however rocks that are at least 3.

While these values do not compute an age for the Earth, they do establish a lower limit the Earth must be at least as old as any formation on it.

Cliches and Expressions of origin

An Essay on Radiometric Dating. Radiometric dating methods are the strongest direct evidence that geologists have for the age of the Earth. All these methods point to Earth being very, very old — several billions of years old. Young-Earth creationists — that is, creationists who believe that Earth is no more than 10, years old — are fond of attacking radiometric dating methods as being full of inaccuracies and riddled with sources of error. When I first became interested in the creation-evolution debate, in late , I looked around for sources that clearly and simply explained what radiometric dating is and why young-Earth creationists are driven to discredit it.

Teaching Documents about Geochronological Methods, Links for Palaeobotanists, Annotated links to internet resources, especially for Richard Harter, The s Origins Archive: Radiometric Dating and the Geological Time Scale.

Radiocarbon dating can easily establish that humans have been on the earth for over twenty thousand years, at least twice as long as creationists are willing to allow. Therefore it should come as no surprise that creationists at the Institute for Creation Research ICR have been trying desperately to discredit this method for years. They have their work cut out for them, however, because radiocarbon C dating is one of the most reliable of all the radiometric dating methods.

This article will answer several of the most common creationist attacks on carbon dating, using the question-answer format that has proved so useful to lecturers and debaters. Answer: Cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere are constantly converting the isotope nitrogen N into carbon C or radiocarbon. Living organisms are constantly incorporating this C into their bodies along with other carbon isotopes.

When the organisms die, they stop incorporating new C, and the old C starts to decay back into N by emitting beta particles. The older an organism’s remains are, the less beta radiation it emits because its C is steadily dwindling at a predictable rate. So, if we measure the rate of beta decay in an organic sample, we can calculate how old the sample is.

C decays with a half-life of 5, years. Question: Kieth and Anderson radiocarbon-dated the shell of a living freshwater mussel and obtained an age of over two thousand years.

Debunking Creationists – Dr. Ben Carson

Greetings! Do you need to find a partner for sex? Nothing is more simple! Click here, registration is free!