5 assumptions of radiometric dating cyclist dating
Now I regard my pro-creation activities as part of the work of the kingdom of God. evolution, H C Dudley, Ian O'Neill, Jay Hall, neutrinos, Paul Renne, quantum wave function, radioactive decay, radioactive decay constant, radiometric dating, William Stansfield, young earth, Young Earth Science As a scientist, it is hard for me to fathom anyone who has scientific training and does not believe in God. from the University of Rochester in nuclear chemistry and a B. I believe that a very tough, strident and unapologetic stance against evolution is called for though I may soften my tone if and when Mark Armitage and David Coppedge, fired for their creationist beliefs, are given their jobs back. Indeed, it was science that brought me not only to a belief in God, but also to faith in Christianity. Evolutionists cite radiometric dating results as the most important, and supposedly most reliable, dating technique of rocks and fossils.
” Is there perhaps an external energy source that can interact with matter in such a way as to cause radioactive decay? This is especially mysterious as we are talking about elements with ‘constant’ decay rates – these values aren’t supposed to change…This is the conclusion that researchers from Stanford and Purdue University have arrived at…The sun might be emitting a previously unknown particle [or neutrinos maybe] that is meddling with the decay rates of matter…researchers noticed the decay rates vary repeatedly every 33 days – a period of time that matches the rotational period of the core of the sun.This planet may actually be youthful and not billions of years old.”—pg. Evolutionists claim that Hall and other creationists are biased against evolution and are making bogus claims. Each assumption is a potential variable, the magnitude of which can seldom be ascertained…