Debunking YEC claims: Empirical evidence for the age of the Earth

[Jackalope]

Young earth creationists assert that the earth is 6,000 - 10,000 years old.

The scientific community generally accepts that the age of the earth is 4.54 billion years (+/- 1%). This value is supported by several lines of empirical evidence that establish a minimum age of the earth:

- Radiometric dating of formations on earth, lunar samples, and meteorite samples (using a variety of radiometric methods).

- The presence of radioactive isotopes with long half-lives and absence of those with short half-lives (excepting those that have natural sources of replenishment).

- Varves (annual sediment layers) in freshwater lakes.

- Analysis of helium concentrations in the sun via solar seismology.

Rather than repeating said empirical evidence here, I'll reference the following pages (which contain their own references):

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH210.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/age.htm

These sources also address common young-earth creationist claims regarding the age of the earth.

YEC proponents are welcomed to attempt to refute this evidence, and non-YEC proponents are encouraged to add other sources of evidence for an old earth.

This thread is intended for empirical evidentiary claims. This is not the place for biblical claims.

[popeyespappy]

Below is a link to a nice little paper written by a Christian for Christians on radiometric dating. It was last updated in 2002 so parts of it are a little out of date. For example the author references an older carbon-14 calibration chart that goes back 50,000 years. Within the last couple of years the C-14 calibration data has been updated and is now good for 70,000 years.

From the article

This paper describes in relatively simple terms how a number of the dating techniques work, how accurately the half-lives of the radioactive elements and the rock dates themselves are known, and how dates are checked with one another. In the process the paper refutes a number of misconceptions prevalent among Christians today.

Radiometric Dating A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens

[Justtristo]

I have given up trying to reason with Creationists. Debating with creationist is like playing chess with a pigeon, it just craps all over the board and flies home to claim victory.

So I have decided to focus my efforts on keeping all forms of creationism out of the education system.

[organiccornflake]

I agree, YEC is bunk.

[Minimalist]

This paper describes in relatively simple terms

It would have to be in exceedingly simple terms for the majority of those morons.

[twocompulsive]

The figure of 6000 comes from
the Jewish New Year which takes
Genesis as its chronological starting
point following it along an exact timeline
to the present day. Actual figure is 5772 to
be precise. So as a consequence of this one
does not need to invoke any radiometric dating
procedure for 4. 54 billion years since the above
figure is all that has to be referenced instead which
makes the process so much easier. The evidence exists
in hominid fossils dating as far back as 4. 5 million years
and there are dinosaur bones pre dating their extinction over
65 million years ago. So any claim which pertains to the Biblical
chronology is immediatedly invalidated beyond all reasonable doubt