Methods for dating the earth speed dating riverside ca
The assumptions conventionally used in obtaining scientific estimates of the age of the Earth and the universe look supremely cautious compared to such a leap of faith.The reference to the "way[s] in which the speed of the clock has varied over time" are a very thinly veiled attack on a bedrock assumption of scientific practice, uniformitarianism, in (for the sake of argument) contradistinction to catastrophism.The vast majority of creationist assumptions of uniformitarianism, however, end up absurd because they ignore important known mechanisms of rate change. one will show that the decay of carbon-14 in the latter sample is far more advanced than in the former.Radiometric dating does not merely give age for an assumed constant rate of decay, but also relative age. To believe that they are about the same age requires that two different places be subject to vastly different rates of decay.
A list of arguments broken down by fallacy is presented at the end of this page.If we don't assume good faith, it appears that CMI is combining a false dilemma with the Nirvana fallacy - one theory can't yet answer all possible questions, so the other should be accepted unquestioningly.This logic is both fallacious (wrong in its pattern of reasoning) and incorrect (wrong in the facts it reasons with).A failure to understand consilience is why many creationists postulate a conspiracy amongst scientific investigators, as the author does here.It is important to note that creationists often use the term "uniformitarianism" in a different way than modern science does, and insist that it also refers to a uniformity of geological rate with no regard for well-known prevailing conditions. It is not used to obtain absolute dates, but to compare the age of one region to another, whose age is known through radiometric dating.