Creationist claims radiometric dating michelle trachtenberg dating trapt chris brown
It is not unreasonable to assume that God used the energy of accelerated radioactive decay to initiate and drive the major geologic changes in the earth that accompanied the Flood" (answersingenesis.org).In other words, RATE has found evidence, through how different dating methods come up with different ages of the same rock samples, that the decay rates of certain elements' have been faster in the past than they are now.Lots of daughter atoms in the sample have come from outside sources, and3. While currently, the decay rates are stable and are not affected by outside conditions, a Creation scientist group has found evidence that the decay rate has been faster in the past for some elements."Recent research by a creation science group known as RATE (Radioisotopes and the Age of The Earth) has produced evidence of accelerated rates of decay at some point (or points) in the past....As for the second assumption, it is highly unlikely.
Have you ever wondered, which is correct, Evolution or Creation?
There is hard evidence for this occurring as shown by scientific studies. As for the first assumption, there is no way we could know one way or another if there were daughter elements in the rock when it was originally formed.
Creation While Evolution uses assumptions to get to the right set of dates (most of the time), Creation uses its own set of assumptions as well. Some of the daughter elements could have been there when the fossil was created, 2. As for the second, Creationists believe in a global flood, and if there was a such an occurrence in the past, it would add daughter elements to the rocks through the water and sediments around the rocks. Do we have any evidence of them being faster in the past?
Creationists use some of these more accurate methods to date rocks instead.
Another significant method to note is Carbon-14 dating.