Isotope preferred dating very old rocks 100 free webcams mobile no sign up
Creationists, however, typically state or imply that the principle of uniformity, as used by scientists, means that the rates of natural processes are always constant.
In the remainder of this chapter I examine 49 of the “ages” of the Earth advanced by creation “scientists”, using Morris and Parker’s (97) tabulation (Table 10) as a guide.
I will show that all 49 of these ages are invalid and that most are probably best described as silly.
Thus, it is concluded that the weight of all the scientific evidence favors the view that the earth is quite young, far too young for life and man to have arisen by an evolutionary process. 53-54) The problem with these 68 “ages” of the Earth is that they are all either based on false initial assumptions or have too many unknown variables for a reliable solution, or both.
The origin of all things by direct creation — already necessitated by many other scientific considerations — is therefore also indicated by chronometric data. Nearly all these methods have been aired in the scientific literature and found to be so worthless that scientists do not use them for determining the age of the Earth.
These calculations occur throughout the literature of creation “science” (e.g., 13, 77, 92, 116, 135), and they have been conveniently tabulated by Morris (93, 95) and Morris and Parker (97) (Table 10).