Skip to content
Giving an answer to Creationists – component 2 reactions to basic creationst arguments
- Typical Creationist Criticism’s of Mainstream Dating MethodsBy Chris StassenPart of Stassen’s FAQ file The Age of the planet earth, that also relates to a number of other assertions that are young-Earth radiometric relationship.
- Radiometric Dating in addition to Geological Time Scale – Circular Reasoning or dependable ToolsBy Andrew MacRaeMacRae received their PhD in Geology through the University of Calgary in 1996. This can be a well article that is illustrated includes stratigraphy, general time scales, while the absolute chronometry supplied by radiometric relationship. It really is a typical assertion from young-Earthers that dating methods are circular; that fossils are dated relating to their strata and that the strata are dated in accordance with their fossils. The assertion is flatly false.
Chronilogical age of the Earthby Robert Williams that is a basic a reaction to a few young-Earth arguments.
- Nearly all product is on radiometric dating, though some other faulty young-Earth age arguments are addressed too. Information, outcomes, and defective methodologies are addressed. Of specific interest is some tabulated information from Dalrymple’s chronilogical age of our planet (see below). These data well illustrate the internal consistencies of radiometric dating techniques. A well crafted article worth reading.
- Fresh Lava Dated As 22 Million Years OldBy Computer Scientist Don LindsayA common creationist argument is the fact that radiometric relationship should be unreliable, because fresh Hawaiian lava ended up being dated become scores of yrs old. But this is certainly a metropolitan legend, as Lindsay points out. Additionally see their The Creation/Evolution Controversy web web web page for way more product on creationism, including other topics that are radiometric. Continue reading “Giving an answer to Creationists – component 2 reactions to basic creationst arguments”