For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, because they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn their ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables. (2 Timothy 4:3-4) NKJV

The Bible says that the Earth is about 6,000 years old, yet popular science (SciPop) is convinced that it’s dated rock samples and fossils up to 3.8 or so billion years old. How could this be?

Clearly there’s something wrong with the experimental method they’re using, or the theoretical paradigm which it’s part of (or both). In this case the culprit is easy to spot. The only way to derive radioisotope dates older than the Earth is by assuming something called the decay constant. However, there’s a serious problem with it.

If the Earth is 4.6 billion years old, but we only have radiometric data from about the last 120 years, this isn’t a statistically significant sample size from the scope of history from which to conclude that the decay constant is actually constant, or that Earth is 4.6 billion years old. It’s circular reasoning. The process of doing this is called inductive reasoning.

Inductive reasoning (as opposed to deductive reasoning or abductive reasoning) is reasoning in which the premises are viewed as supplying strong evidence for the truth of the conclusion. While the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive argument is probable, based upon the evidence given. – Inductive Reasoning, definition (Wikipedia)

For that matter, if the Earth is 6,000 years old, then 120 years of sampling isn’t a statistically significant sample size from the scope of history to be able to verify that decay has been constant either. Radiometric dating is infinitely improbable pseudoscience. Here’s our working definition of the decay constant which, obviously, isn’t constant.

The decay constant is a fictional contrivance necessary for the popular science (SciPop) rationalization of the geological timescale and the age of the Earth. It’s critical to the SciPop claim that there’s no hell. – Decay Constant, definition

How do we prove that nuclear decay has always been constant? We can’t. – Navigate below

The Decay Constant – Navigation

July 30th – The Decay Constant Is the Earth 4.6 billion years old or 6,000? The difference is the Decay Constant. It it real? Or is it an inductive rationalization of the premise of ancient Earth?

Thought for the Day

Linus Pauling ..only a genius of his stature could play like a 10 year old boy a still get the right answer. – James D. Watson, regarding Linus Pauling in The Double Helix Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. (Mark 10:15) KJV

Save

Save

Save

Save

36.09986 -80.244216

Winston-Salem, NC, USA

Like this: Like Loading...