In fact, the list might be better titled a list of arguments that Ai G would rather not hear.
It is true that creationists and evolution supporters are both guilty of this.
Most young earth creationists reject all of these points.
As a scientific skeptics, we ask ourselves: is this really the case?
Stating "evolution is a fact" is actually justifiable, because it meets the scientific usage of the word "fact", that is, of something observed.
If you came directly to this page from a search engine, please visit our home page before you leave, and thanks for stopping by.
A very common claim of young earth creationists in trying to reject the evidence for an old earth is to loudly proclaim that radiometric dating methods “makes assumptions” and that these “assumptions” are somehow fatally flawed or not supported by evidence.
These claims generally land in three different categories: (1) radiometric dating assumes that initial conditions (concentrations of mother and daughter nuclei) are known, (2) radiometric dating assumes that rocks are closed systems and (3) radiometric dating assumes that decay rates are constant.
The purpose of this index is to list all the claims of young earth creationists, and provide rebuttals to those claims.
Although the idea for this index came from the Talk listing of creationist claims, this index differs in that it answers the arguments from an old earth creationist perspective.