I realize you know that you can’t win the debate, and therefore only want one side to be able to present their evidence, but I’d rather have both sides be able to present their evidence because it overwhelmingly supports a “young” earth. Censorship helps no one.
This is exactly what I am talking about; many people who believe the earth is old don’t understand why scientists believe it is old but they look down on those of us who think it is young as if we are the ones who are “ignorant about science”. Radio-carbon dating can only be used to date matter that was once living, it cannot be used to date the earth and it cannot be used to date anything that is even close to millions of years old (measurable levels of C14 are long gone after about 150,000-200,000 years). The C14/C12 ratio is empirically measurable; however how that is used to date the material is not empirical at all. It assumes that the C14 atmospheric levels have been in equilibrium prior to the industrial revolution (which actually they have not been, which is compelling evidence the atmosphere is less than 10,000 years old). This one faulty assumption is enough to make the entire system give grossly inflated or erroneous dates (we see this often when it is used to date something of empirically verifiable age). Radio-metric dating is the method they use to date rocks and it has its own set of issues.
Nothing annoys me more than people who think radio-carbon dating is used to prove the Earth is billions of years old. There are 2.3 billion Christians in the world; I don’t think we’re suffering in the “popularity contest”.
I am not sure if these pastors are cognizant of the lies and half truths they are spreading to their ministry, or if they truly believe what they are saying. Being that many of these pastors are rather intelligent in other facets of their life, I would have to believe they know the falsities of their claims, but keep spreading the misinformation to not diminish the validity of the Word.
Can you please be more specific? What are some of these “lies and half-truths” you speak of?
No, according to Statler…
1. Radio-carbon dating cannot be used to date the Earth because it measures the ratio of C14/C12 in matter that was once living.
2. Age is not an empirically testable property of matter, it must be inferred from the observation of current rates and processes, of course this includes numerous and often untestable assumptions.