There are plenty of examples which radiometric dating comes up with completely different ages for the same rocks. Not to mention layers of sediment often date younger at lower levels than the rock and sediment above them which isn't logical. Also radiometric dating only would work in a closed system and the world isn't a closed system, the daughter elements quants at the start are unknown and the amount of leaching of daughter elements compared with the original element are also often unknown and undetermined. On top of that nearly all fossile fuels and diamonds contain carbon 14 which none should have.
Those studies where done with creationist. If North Korea built and tested an American helicopter and crashed it only to say “American helicopters are death traps, North Korean helicopters are better” would you think that 1. North Korea didn’t build and fly it correctly 2. North Korea crashed it on propose to make it look dangerous 3. North Korea is honest and truthful
@@joshuadunford3171 they were samples sent and processed by commonly used labs. Where did you come up with the idea creationist processed them by themselves out of intrest because that's completely incorrect? Also, multiple studies show dimonds which are supposed to be a min of 990m years old have C-14 in them. In fact all coal samples also contain C-14 something which isn't possible if its even just a million or so years old. These are very much facts. You can of course disagree how that comes about but it is a fact nevertheless
@@mdl2427 those studies are all from the creationist museum and done by creationist, even with those who aren’t done and get some information wrong, we still know the ball park. Plus even if we dismiss them all, creationism is still defeated by the heat problem as well as manny others
@@joshuadunford3171 thanks for your reply. How do you dismiss the carbon 14 in coal and dimonds, this isnt just found by creationist its definitly a confusing result in the sicentific communitiy and its found in all dimonds and not just some. The heat problem been solved and was hard to explain. You can look up videos or writen explanations a other wise the post will become an information dumb before long. But happy to elaborate if it helps either way. On another point Mantle tomography have shown visible slabs of oceanic lithosphere (which includes oceanic crust) descending hundreds of miles beneath ocean trenches into subduction zones which shown to be significantly colder than the rest of the mantel which, modeling shows that they must have enter to earth's mantel recently as they'd of easily reach equilibrium with the surrounding temapture if they were subducted over 10s of millions of years as previously believed. This was predicted by creationist given they believe continental sprint occurred during the flood. This is definitely very hard to explain in the current materialistic world view. What are your thoughts on that?
Where's the study that measured and then subjected them to high voltage in a very high KV range (AC and DC) and re-measured? There are 100 lightning strikes on earth per second. This is not to validate creationists, it's to ensure no mistake.
It gets worse, the inaccurate carbon datings creationists present in their museum was done by them! It’s like someone who works for Coke and owns millions in its stocks drinking Pepsi and saying “Pepsis tastes bad nobody likes it” and expect him to be honest
There are plenty of examples which radiometric dating comes up with completely different ages for the same rocks. Not to mention layers of sediment often date younger at lower levels than the rock and sediment above them which isn't logical. Also radiometric dating only would work in a closed system and the world isn't a closed system, the daughter elements quants at the start are unknown and the amount of leaching of daughter elements compared with the original element are also often unknown and undetermined. On top of that nearly all fossile fuels and diamonds contain carbon 14 which none should have.
Site those studies and show what methods were used.
Those studies where done with creationist. If North Korea built and tested an American helicopter and crashed it only to say “American helicopters are death traps, North Korean helicopters are better” would you think that
1. North Korea didn’t build and fly it correctly
2. North Korea crashed it on propose to make it look dangerous
3. North Korea is honest and truthful
@@joshuadunford3171 they were samples sent and processed by commonly used labs. Where did you come up with the idea creationist processed them by themselves out of intrest because that's completely incorrect? Also, multiple studies show dimonds which are supposed to be a min of 990m years old have C-14 in them. In fact all coal samples also contain C-14 something which isn't possible if its even just a million or so years old. These are very much facts. You can of course disagree how that comes about but it is a fact nevertheless
@@mdl2427 those studies are all from the creationist museum and done by creationist, even with those who aren’t done and get some information wrong, we still know the ball park. Plus even if we dismiss them all, creationism is still defeated by the heat problem as well as manny others
@@joshuadunford3171 thanks for your reply. How do you dismiss the carbon 14 in coal and dimonds, this isnt just found by creationist its definitly a confusing result in the sicentific communitiy and its found in all dimonds and not just some.
The heat problem been solved and was hard to explain. You can look up videos or writen explanations a other wise the post will become an information dumb before long. But happy to elaborate if it helps either way.
On another point Mantle tomography have shown visible slabs of oceanic lithosphere (which includes oceanic crust) descending hundreds of miles beneath ocean trenches into subduction zones which shown to be significantly colder than the rest of the mantel which, modeling shows that they must have enter to earth's mantel recently as they'd of easily reach equilibrium with the surrounding temapture if they were subducted over 10s of millions of years as previously believed. This was predicted by creationist given they believe continental sprint occurred during the flood. This is definitely very hard to explain in the current materialistic world view. What are your thoughts on that?
Where's the study that measured and then subjected them to high voltage in a very high KV range (AC and DC) and re-measured?
There are 100 lightning strikes on earth per second. This is not to validate creationists, it's to ensure no mistake.
You're wrong..
It gets worse, the inaccurate carbon datings creationists present in their museum was done by them! It’s like someone who works for Coke and owns millions in its stocks drinking Pepsi and saying “Pepsis tastes bad nobody likes it” and expect him to be honest