RE: [split] Radiometric Dating
November 24, 2014 at 12:03 pm
(This post was last modified: November 24, 2014 at 12:09 pm by Creatard.)
(November 24, 2014 at 3:48 am)whateverist Wrote:I don't know enough to say how radioactive decay would be different with/without a creator, but I don't see your argument there. I know it does explain phenomena puzzling secular scientists. For instance the presence of Carbon-14 in diamonds and coal that are supposed to be billions of years old, the presence of soft tissue in fossils supposed to be millions of years old, and other examples. There is also so much evidence for catastrophe throughout geology that it has sparked a new movement called neocatastrophism, in which geologists acknowledge the need for several catastrophes to create the geologic column without conceding to a Genesis flood.(November 24, 2014 at 1:30 am)Creatard Wrote: By my name you probably know my position, but I have a little bit of a beef with radio metric dating because of its presuppositions. Basically there are three:
1) you have to assume the absence of the daughter isotope at the start of process.
2) you have to assume constant decay rates. We have only been able to observe their rates for the past 100-150 years. Before that we can reasonably guess the affects of the earth's magnetic field and other factors would have on decay, but that is all they will ever be: an educated guess.
3) no parent or daughter isotopes were lost or added during the process.
I'm going to leave it at that and see where the replies take it. Hope to here from you guys soon.
I can only come at this in a round about manner since I am ignorant regarding decay rates. Even so, perhaps you'd care to explain how positing a creator makes any account of this or any other natural phenomenon any more plausible. Beyond that, even if you could show there are some useful theoretical results of such an assumption, you'd still have to admit that what must be sacrificed to take a god hypothesis tempting is actually much more clarity and confidence that belief in god could ever give you back.
By sacrifice do you mean that you would have to give up a materialistic bias or are you intending something different altogether?
(November 24, 2014 at 11:59 am)Minimalist Wrote:Yes, because mission projects in Africa and South America have done nothing to improve water systems and housingQuote:I'm getting ready to leave high school to pursue pastoral ministries
Why don't you do something useful with your life, instead. Churches are dying out in the west.