Primary source references As a preface to this document, I want to point out that it is a shame that we have to continue to refute the same arguments that evolutionists keep bringing up over and over again in their attempts to argue against the fact of creation, which fact has been well established since the day the earth was created ex nihilo several thousand years ago. Nevertheless, the neo-Darwinian dogma of the spontaneous auto-organization of random chemicals into complex biopolymers, by chance forming complex self-replicating automatic machines that then evolve into more and more complex self-replicating automatic machines through genetic transcriptional errors and the injection of random noise, filtered into highly coded information and structures by predators, the climate, and other mindless agents working together to produce an ecosystem capable of sustaining and improving all these countless life forms for billions of years has managed to permeate, over the last years, the thinking in major scientific circles, the media, and secular education, even penetrating some professing Christian institutions. It is also a shame that the masses have bought all this based on some circular reasoning about fossils, where fossils tend to be found buried, similarities between various life forms, the presence of certain decay products in rocks, and other inherently speculative arguments about the past, based on phenomena that exist in the present.
The Radiometric Dating Game Radiometric dating methods estimate the age of rocks using calculations based on the decay rates of radioactive elements such as uranium, strontium, and potassium.
On the surface, radiometric dating methods appear to give powerful support to the statement that life has existed on the earth for hundreds of millions, even billions, of years.
We are told that these methods are accurate to a few percent, and that there are many Evolutionists and creationist theories essay methods. We are told that of all the radiometric dates that are measured, only a few percent are anomalous.
This gives us the impression that all but a small percentage of the dates computed by radiometric methods agree with the assumed ages of the rocks in which they are found, and that all of these various methods almost always give ages that agree with each other to within a few percentage points.
Since there doesn't seem to be any systematic error that could cause so many methods to agree with each other so often, it seems that there is no other rational conclusion than to accept these dates as accurate. However, this causes a problem for those who believe based on the Bible that life has only existed on the earth for a few thousand years, since fossils are found in rocks that are dated to be over million years old by radiometric methods, and some fossils are found in rocks that are dated to be billions of years old.
If these dates are correct, this calls the Biblical account of a recent creation of life into question. After study and discussion of this question, I now believe that the claimed accuracy of radiometric dating methods is a result of a great misunderstanding of the data, and that the various methods hardly ever agree with each other, and often do not agree with the assumed ages of the rocks in which they are found.
I believe that there is a great need for this information to be made known, so I am making this article available in the hopes that it will enlighten others who are considering these questions.
Even the creationist accounts that I have read do not adequately treat these issues. At the start, let me clarify that my main concern is not the age of the earth, the moon, or the solar system, but rather the age of life, that is, how long has life existed on earth.
Many dating methods seem to give about the same ages on meteorites. Thus radiometric dating methods appear to give evidence that the earth and meteorites are old, if one accepts the fact that decay rates have been constant. However, there may be other explanations for this apparent age.
Perhaps the earth was made from older pre-existing matter, or perhaps decay rates were briefly faster for some reason. When one considers the power of God, one sees that any such conclusions are to some extent tentative.
I believe that life was recently created. I also believe that the evidence indicates that the earth has recently undergone a violent catastrophe. Geologic time is divided up into periods, beginning with the Precambrian, followed by the Cambrian and a number of others, leading up to the present.
Some fossils are found in Precambrian rocks, but most of them are found in Cambrian and later periods. We can assume that the Precambrian rocks already existed when life began, and so the ages of the Precambrian rocks are not necessarily related to the question of how long life has existed on earth.
The Cambrian period is conventionally assumed to have begun about million years ago. Since Cambrian and later rocks are largely sedimentary and igneous volcanic rocks are found in Cambrian and later strata, if these rocks are really million years old, then life must also be at least million years old.
Therefore, my main concern is with rocks of the Cambrian periods and later. How radiometric dating works in general Radioactive elements decay gradually into other elements. The original element is called the parent, and the result of the decay process is called the daughter element.
Assuming we start out with pure parent, as time passes, more and more daughter will be produced. By measuring the ratio of daughter to parent, we can measure how old the sample is.
A ratio of zero means an age of zero. A higher ratio means an older age. A ratio of infinity that is, all daughter and no parent means an age of essentially infinity.
Each radioactive element has a half-life, which tells how long it takes for half of the element to decay. For potassium 40, the half-life is about 1.
In general, in one half-life, half of the parent will have decayed. Potassium 40 K40 decays to argon 40, which is an inert gas, and to calcium.Jul 06, · There are comments on the Best of New Orleans story from Jan 6, , titled Evolution vs.
lausannecongress2018.com it, Best of New Orleans reports that: High school senior Zack Kopplin is . The Selfish Gene: 30th Anniversary Edition—with a new Introduction by the Author Inheriting the mantle of revolutionary biologist from Darwin, Watson, and Crick, Richard Dawkins forced an enormous change in the way we see ourselves and the world with the publication of The Selfish Gene.
Suppose. espite many people's tendency to think of all creationists in one group and all evolutionists in another, "creationism" refers to a wide range of beliefs.
This article gives a brief introduction to creationist positions. It tries to cover the breadth of creationist beliefs (and a little of the.
Evolution Vs. Creationism. February 24, One main argument that creationists make against evolutionists is that there are gaps in our theory, most specifically in the fossil record. Like the Pharisees of Jesus day, evolutionists make claims that deny obvious truths, unaware that their claims refute their own position and arguments.
Let me pause here to make sure Continue Reading.
Articles home page Creation vs. Evolution 0. Introduction and table of contents The following is an organized presentation on the creation vs.