Last week, I had the privilege of attending the eighth International Conference on Creationism (ICC). This conference is a “meeting of the minds” in which several hundred creation scientists, Bible scholars, and other creation advocates can present and critique their research in various fields, including biology, geology, astronomy, physics, archeology, and biblical studies.
The critics for this week have posted on the Biblical Science Institute Facebook page in response to the geology articles here and here. I will use only their first name in the response. The critic’s comments are in violet text, with my response in black.
In part one, we examined the basics of geology, and found that scientists generally agree on the observational aspects of geology regardless of their respective positions on origins. But when it comes to interpreting geological events of the past, we form different conclusions on the basis of different starting presuppositions and views of Earth history.
Our critic this week responded to my recent article on radiometric dating. He made a number of assertions. Does this critic make any good, rational points? Or does he exhibit the typical ignorance of science and creation technical literature along with fallacious reasoning?
“Science has proved that the earth is 4.5 billion years old.” We have all heard this claim. We are told that scientists use a technique called radiometric dating to measure the age of rocks. We are also told that this method very reliably and consistently yields ages of millions to billions of years, thereby establishing beyond question that the earth is immensely old – a concept known as deep time. Has science therefore disproved the Bible?