One Method for Dating Earth Might Not Work … Therefore GodDidIt 6000 Years Ago

Posted: December 19, 2013 in religion, science
Tags: , , , , , ,

I was surprised when I saw this World Net Daily story, “Phenomenon Throws Twist Into Age of Earth.” Why? Because it seemed familiar and yet old at the same time. Searching back through my archives, I found this post from Eye on ICR, “Not Enough Lightning Strikes.” Except, that blog post was from November 15, 2013, while WND’s Bob Unruh’s story was from December 8, 2013.

What Mr. Unruh wants to say is this:

Two South African research scientists have documented a phenomenon that indicates a particular type of soil erosion might have taken place in a split second rather than eons, as mainstream scientists have believed.

The conclusion could upset widely accepted estimates for the age of the Earth. […]

Brian Thomas, the science writer for the Institute for Creation Research, said the new research findings make “earth’s old age assignment even less credible.”

Most scientists long have estimated the earth is more than 4 billion years old, while many who believe the Genesis account of creation took place in a literal six days believe it’s only thousands of years old.

The finding that lightning can accomplish in a millisecond what previously was thought to take generations calls into question “old age assignments for earth’s land features,” Thomas wrote.

After the ellipse, the second part of what I quoted, is where Bob is directly citing the Institute for Creation Research for his conclusion. Which is why it reminded me of the Eye on ICR post from a month ago. Which completely eviscerates Thomas’s and hence Unruh’s claims. The crux of it has to do with erosion rates, which themselves are an incredibly stupid way to estimate the age of Earth (as opposed to estimate the age of a young landform). In fact, I addressed this myself back in 2011. But, while I’ve “debunked” WND stories before on this blog, I’m a bit tired and think I’ll just leave it to you to check out Eye on ICR‘s post, or just read on for WND’s reaction.

And, there were a lot. Of the stories that I accumulated over the last month and have been putting out at a pace of four per day, this one has the most number of ratings (649, for an average of 4.52/5 stars), and there are 606 comments. And, they are what you’d expect, highly religious, highly creationist-ic. And the very top-rated comment, by “normanramsey” with 20 up and 0 down votes, is directly relevant to what I put up a few posts ago: “As my first science teacher taught me years ago, all science is assumption based. If you change your assumptions your reading of the facts change as well.”

“Nunya” has 34 up and 2 down votes (which somehow ranks it lower than 20 up and 0 down?): “More scientific evidence of God that the atheists can ignore. Nothing to see here.”

I don’t really think it’s worth quoting much more.

  1. eyeonicr says:

    You forgot my favourite one:

    Bob, thanks for citing my ICR material. It looks like you recognize the challenge that continents and the lack of fulgarites present to billions-of-years. However, the article above MISQUOTES me twice, and embeds a wrong link. Ultimately, this damages both of our reputations, as well as the impact of the message. Any chance we can correct these issues?

    Apparently the answer is “no,” as there are no replies and the wrong link hasn’t been corrected etc.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s