Creation VS Evolution

and it happens more often than one might think. Looking at carbon dating, it makes two assumptions: that the amount of carbon 14 in the atmosphere has always been constant, that its rate of decay has always been constant and once an organism dies, nothing alters the proportion of carbon-14 to carbon-12 other than radioactive decay.

Independent measurements, using different and independent radiometric techniques, give consistent results (Dalrymple 2000; Lindsay 1999; Meert 2000). Such results cannot be explained either by chance or by a systematic error in decay rate assumptions.

Radiometric dates are consistent with several nonradiometric dating methods. For example:


The Hawaiian archipelago was formed by the Pacific ocean plate moving over a hot spot at a slow but observable rate. Radiometric dates of the islands are consistent with the order and rate of their being positioned over the hot spot (Rubin 2001).


Radiometric dating is consistent with Milankovitch cycles, which depend only on astronomical factors such as precession of the earth's tilt and orbital eccentricity (Hilgen et al. 1997).


Radiometric dating is consistent with the luminescence dating method (Thompson n.d.; Thorne et al. 1999).


Radiometric dating gives results consistent with relative dating methods such as "deeper is older" (Lindsay 2000).


The creationist claim that radiometric dates are inconsistent rest on a relatively few examples. Creationists ignore the vast majority of radiometric dates showing consistent results (e.g., Harland et al. 1990).

The fine structure constant affects neutron capture rates, which can be measured from products of the Oklo reactor, where a natural nuclear reaction occurred 1,800 million years ago. These measurements show that the fine structure constant has remained constant (within one part in 1017 per year) for almost two billion years (Fujii et al. 2000; Shlyakhter 1976).

Despite some weak evidence that the fine structure constant may have varied slightly more than six billion years ago (Musser 1998; Webb et al. 1999), analysis of the spectra of quasars shows that it has changed less than 0.6 parts per million over the last ten billion years (Chand et al. 2004)


Experiments with atomic clocks show that any change is less than a rate of about 10-15 per year (Fischer et al. 2004).


Absorption lines in light from quasars suggest that the ratio of masses of the proton and electron may have changed by 20 parts per million over the last 12 billion years (Cho 2006).

If you look at the size and mass of the fossils you would know that the quality of oxygen in our atmosphere today would not sustain the size and life of the animals found long ago.

...Yes, everyone is aware the atmosphere was completely different millions of years ago vs the thousands of years that carbon dating can actually measure.

This is your day job, how can you be so misinformed?

Edit: You know kanye west you could just block me like I did with you so you wouldn't have to see what I post, but i guess you like just the drama .

...Well no one else is clearly going to correct your inaccuracies, and this is drama? Me correcting you? OH GEEZE. Stop being so melodramatic.