I'm a YEC. Challenge me.

[pocaracas]

I'm sober and out of pain reliever so I know I'll regret this, but what the hell! OK, what scientific evidence do you have that contradicts the generally accepted age of the universe?

Here are a few links:
http://creation.com/young-saturn

Lots of "I don't know, hence god"... based on very sketchy data...

http://www.icr.org/article/7200/

Some remark about some magnetic field aligning well with some other creationist calculations of magnetic fields from water...
Wait until real scientists explain that... Not even googling it.

Items 1 – 3 here: http://www.icr.org/articles/view/1842/264/

1 is not true. There is no "winding up dilema" That thing was made up by creationists... Also, "evolutionists" do not make claims about the Universe, only maybe about evolution of species on Earth... perhaps stretching it to other potential planets.
2 is idiotic, failing to account for all the supernovae that occur at the galactic center, where the star density is greater and so more supernovae would exist there... Also, more stars around, means all the gas gets quickly sucked into some of them.
3 "According to evolutionary theory, comets are supposed to " Couldn't read anything else... sorry, that's just stupid.

Items 65 through 95 here: http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth

Too many to list individually.
Moon Origin_of_the_Moon

argghhh I stopped at 80, Only half-truths and flat out lies...
Come on.
Have you even tried to find out if these people are lying to you?
Are you that gullible?!

A friend of mine, once, came up to me with something he'd heard about from another guy who he wouldn't doubt. It was about an alleged beneficial effect on your overall health from eating peach cores. One a day. Google about it, there are tons of sites claiming that it's good for you.

Then you find that some doctors have actually tested that... not just once!... and guess what? There's nothing suggesting any improvement on anyone's health.
My friend was wowed by all the sites claiming the same thing, but never bothered to look for actual data.
I showed it to him and he stopped eating those things.
Don't be gullible. Research...

---

Ironic isn't it that in a thread about a young Earth John posts a chart that supports an old Earth as evidence of a young Earth then accuses us of conformation bias when we don't see support for a 10,000 year old Earth in billion plus year old moon rocks.

No, I accuse you of confirmation bias when you only see 4 - 4.5 billion year ages despite a significant number of other ages. Some older in fact. As you guys sometimes say - they can't all be right, but they could all be wrong.

They are all wrong!
That's why they should have an error bar attached to each value.
Usually, when you take into consideration the error bar, they can match.
When most of the methods match, but a few don't, a few reasons for that can be that the method was not properly carried out, or some assumption inherent of that method was not followed (ruling it a useless waste of time by the researchers), or the method is not valid for that kind of rock, or the researcher was cheating and lying, YES it does happen.

Now, this thread is about YEC, and I still fail to see how to reconcile radiometric dating with the YEC alleged age of the Universe.