highwaystar101 said:
The whole young earth arguement is pretty much redundant nowdays. Scientists have performed countless tests for decades. Radiometric dating yields hundreds of seperate tests alone, and have always had the same result... 4.54 billion years old. Young earth creationists always argue in factors such as the slowing decay of isotopes, but no evidence points towards it. If it did our results would very varied from a few thousand years old to a few hundred trillion years old. So that counts out the radioactive decay arguements young earh creationists always argue about. Add to that data we have obtained from dating metiorites, heliosiesmic verification, etc all seem to support our best estimates.
...What is different is different between the two sides is that scientists hold no emotional/theological attachment to 4.54 billion years old, if the number were to increase or decrease then they would happily accept the new number based on the new evidence. They just want it to be what they believe the evidence suggests. Where as it is hard for a young earth creationists to accept a different number to what they believe, despite what evidence is available. |
Your side is biased by satan and his lies and tricks.
Here's all the proof for young earth creationism we need:
