[Junior]

Now, if you really want to talk about truly circular logic, then you should consider the geologists and the paleontologists. The geologist says the rock is 70 million years old because there is a dinosaur fossil in it which is known to be 70 million years old. The paleontologist says the same dinosaur fossil is 70 million years old because it was found in a rock known to be be 70 million years old. This goes on all the time.

I'm terribly sorry, but this is an old creationist canard that has no basis in reality. Rocks are dated by several methods involving isotopes (and not by the fossils found therein). More than one method of dating is typically used and multiple dating tests are conducted to narrow the margin of error. The whole thing is not arbitrary at all, regardless of what the rumors may be.

I hope this has been a little help in clearing up any possible misunderstandings.

[music_code]

I'm terribly sorry, but this is an old creationist canard that has no basis in reality. Rocks are dated by several methods involving isotopes (and not by the fossils found therein). More than one method of dating is typically used and multiple dating tests are conducted to narrow the margin of error. The whole thing is not arbitrary at all, regardless of what the rumors may be.

You're not really going to tell me that the dating methods are reliable. All of them are based on arbitrary assumptions which presume long periods of time and uniformitarianism.

[exmarine]

I see you did not respond to my last post in our discussion.