"How can creationists expect people to accept a young earth when science has proved through radiometric dating that the earth is billions of years old?" This article addresses that question, which represents the thinking of a large number of people today. Certainly the majority of scientists accept radiometric dating. And yet, there is really no scientific reason proving that radiometric dating is correct, and a number of evidences showing that it doesn't work. We'll discuss several of these.
REFERENCES 1. John Woodmorappe, "Radiometric Geochronology Reappraised," in Creation Research Society Quarterly, Volume 16, September, 1979, pp. 102-129, 147. 2. Ibid., p. 114. 3. Joan C. Engels, "Effects of Sample Purity on Disco
Darwinism was originally found so acceptable by so many because it provided the mechanism for evolution, so men could understand all that exists as not needing a Creator. Today, however, Darwinism is all but dead, killed by the lack of positive evidence, and by the growth of human knowledge in dozens of areas. Still, evolutionism persists. Evolution is called a "fact" even if we can see no way it could have happened. This irrational position seems surprising until one realizes that evolutionism was prophesied.
In the 1920′s J. Harland Bretz, a secular geolgoist proposed to his
colleagues evidence for a massive Flood across eastern Washington. He
was rejected by the scientific community because what was proposing was