Mt. St. Helens, Dr. Austin, and why we can't really know anything

[Halitoid]

I need a little help.

From a discussion regarding the geological age of Mt. St. Helens. Dr. Austin's research has not been mentioned directly by name, but is referred to.

The Creationist has problems with it because the Creationist knows what assumptions are being made, and what is not being said.

The 'biochemists, medical doctors, geologists' etc. don't have a problem with it as they were indoctrinated into a belief system in their education.

As mentioned earlier, there's no way to determine an age outside of man's history without making various assumptions, and there are variables that are ignored in order to make everything fit the belief, even if a crowbar is needed.

So how does one counter this without resorting to name calling? His main argument seems to be made in the last sentence. I'd rather not touch the indoctrination thing, it smacks of paranoia.

[LastPoet]

Hey, hello to you too!

[Anomalocaris]

I need a little help.

..........
As mentioned earlier, there's no way to determine an age outside of man's history without making various assumptions, and there are variables that are ignored in order to make everything fit the belief, even if a crowbar is needed.

[/quote]

There is no way to determine an age that is assumed to be inside men's assumed history without making various assumptions either. So why is the shit head harping just on those well validated assumptions that contradicts his holy toilet roll?

[LastPoet]

The assumptions they claim dating methods are based on, are objective, testable means. Virtually anyone capable of interpreting the data generated from dating methods, capable of understanding would know that.

Anyone that poses that question to you is being outright dishonest, so I'm not sure why would you have such a conversation with such a fucktard.

[Cyberman]

Regarding the 'research' of Steve Austin (a man fairly maligned) involving Mount St Helens, the site NoAnswersInGenesis has this article by geologist Dr Kevin R. Henke, Ph.D. which might prove useful:

Young-Earth Creationist 'Dating' of a Mt. St. Helens Dacite: The Failure of Austin and Swenson to Recognize Obviously Ancient Minerals

Basically Austin knowingly used inappropriate dating methods to arrive at his results. The laboratory that he sent his samples to explained that their equipment was unable measure samples less than two million years old accurately. So when the results came back, he was able to 'prove' how inaccurate radiometric dating methods are. It's sort of like using a deepfreeze to roast a turkey, then using the result to 'prove' that freezing methods are unreliable.

Oh, and hello from me too.

[Halitoid]

Yeah, the conversation (parenthetical, at best) deteriorated quite quickly after I pointed out the problems in his math, and then asked to see the references he claimed he had. Nothing worth quoting.

Thank you all for the advice and the welcomes!

[Tea Earl Grey Hot]

I think I remember hearing Austin speak at some fundy pastor's conference a few years ago. I particularly remember him complaining that the government of Texas was making it difficult for him to teach geology because of his crazy views. Yay Texas for once!