Replies

Decay dating is a flawed system.

Just to take the simplest, radiocarbon dating, is enough to show that you are incorrect.

I don't have the time tonight to explain this in my own words, so must resort to links (which I prefer not to do in this field, as I know it fairly well).

So, if you are interested take a look at some of the links and I will try to do more if you want tomorrow night. Let me know.

Night all!

ReligiousTolerance.org Carbon-14 Dating (C-14): Beliefs of New-Earth Creationists
The American Scientific Affiliation: Science in Christian Perspective Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.
This site, BiblicalChronologist.org has a series of good articles on radiocarbon dating.

Are tree-ring chronologies reliable? (The Biblical Chronologist, Vol. 5, No. 1)
How does the radiocarbon dating method work? (The Biblical Chronologist, Vol. 5, No. 1)
How precise is radiocarbon dating?
Is radiocarbon dating based on assumptions?
Has radiocarbon dating been invalidated by unreasonable results?

Tree Ring and C14 Dating
Radiocarbon WEB-info Radiocarbon Laboratory, University of Waikato, New Zealand.

You may know the process of how it is preformed, but I doubt very seriously that you know how the rocks that are dated were formed and if they were pure to give such a date. Was there any daughter element, was there any leaching(which is very likely unless it were a planet without water.)

I find it interesting how many sites that claim to believe in God but do not believe the Bible 100%.

Carbon dating is a flawed system, they throw away dates that do not fit to their age requirement, and live animals have been dated 1000's of years old.

Radiometric dating--the process of determining the age of rocks from the decay of their radioactive elements--has been in widespread use for over half a century.

The American Scientific Affiliation: Science in Christian Perspective Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens. You see from a site you posted to me, the technology is only about 50 years old which is about .02% of the half life of most of the things dated. You would not buy stock with that kind of precentage.

We have studied the magnetic field for over 150 years which is equal to about 25%, yet frevolutionist discount the dying magnetic field and the reverse look of how it would be a magnetic star around 20000 years ago.

Oh thats right there is a mysterious source that re-energizes the magnetic field yet has no effect upon the carbon dating or radio metric dating methods out comes.