Is the RATE project a serious challenge to evolutionists?

Question

A group of scientists recently completed an eight-year research project on Radioactivity and the Age of The Earth(RATE). The evidence points to a relatively young earth. Has there been an academic response by evolutionists?

These are highly qualified scientists from what I have read. Their discoveries would seem to deserve peer review from an objective viewpoint.

Answer 1

One of the professors at my college is involved in the RATE project but no it is not a challenge to evolutionist because they will say that we skewed the facts, that we do not conduct good science and such. Evolutionist are ignorant. Ignorant of the holes in their theory and ignorant of the truth right in front of their eyes.

Oh yeah and Kookoo Bananas, you have no idea what you are talking about. First of all it is Carbon 14 dating and the half-life of carbon is around 5,720 years, that would mean there are 6.99 times ten to the sixth half-lives in 4 billions years. So say that you have 1 millions moles of carbon 14 in the same place after than many half lives how much would be left. So small that my ti-89 says 0. There is none left and therefore it cannot be measured. There are so many assumptions that Carbon 14 dating makes that make in unreliable. Read the RATE project, it might change your mind.

Edit- about the like on Wyelie Genius comment, it is just like i said above, the evolutionist are attacking the scientists and their data collection techniques becuase they realize we are right and they choose not to believe it. (Their mentality is don't tell me the facts becuase my mind is already made up).

Answer 2

there is always evidence going against the flow. Some people say the earth is like a coin and flat on 2 sides. But the majority of evidence goes the other way

Answer 3

I have not heard of this. They don't use radio-metric dating anymore- it was not reliable. They have used the geologic column and the index fossil (or some adaptation of it) for nearly 100 years. It is very unreliable also- but it is so flexible one can get just about any date they desire. Not really much science to it. If I didn't know it --I wouldn't believe it.
I gotta check on the RATE project.

Answer 4

Compared to the rest of the universe, the Earth is quite young. It has been placed at being only around 4.404 billion years old.

Answer 5

advent is the speaking of something into existance that did not exist before. jointly with the heavens and this planet, you and that i, the beef of the container, and all remember of issues considered and not in any respect considered. the objective of advent is to examine there's a God. A God of significant capacity and a capacity He does no longer choose from absolutely everyone or any element; Soverignty. advent is born by skill of information and comprehend-how and with comprehend-how knowledge is done. subsequently organising His righteousness and massive vast difference before all advent; i'm. contained in the days of Pharaoh even as Moses referred to issues that would come to previous. Pharaoh had magicans and scientist that attempted to mission God's capacity yet contained eventually they fail in any respect that they did before the eyes of God and guy. Evolution is crew that chase after its own tail and the rationalization behind it really is they could't decide how advent got here to be. to illustrate: What got here first? The chicken or the egg...Hummm. :)

Answer 6

I doubt this. GIven the multitude of methods of Radio dating and the collective agreement of these methods, not to mention the verification of these methods.

I smell either a twisting of words, or a Creationist society masking itself as a Legitimate Science council.

EDIT: Thank you Wylie Genius for doing the research for me and pointing out another hilarious attempt and masquerade Science. It appears my second guess was correct...

EDIT: Dryies, if the counter-arguments for your claims are wrong, how about explaining their error?

Typical... assert and fail to back up.

Answer 7

What evidence? It's another sham from the "answerfromgenesis" and the ever-loving "Institute for Creationist Research." Puleeze! Give it a rest.

Answer 8

LOL!!!
Good one! The "rate" project is a laughingstock at the moment. NONE of the findings have been allowed to be peer reviewed. Gee, I wonder why?
Thanks for the guffaw...

Answer 9

Please look at this website to see how the RATE project fiddled with numbers and took bad samples to try to prove their point.
http://answersincreation.org/ratedeception.htm
Real scientists don't try to skew their results; real scientists are willing to adapt their theories or admit they are wrong when confronted with valid evidence.
This is no challenge to evolution because it's utterly bogus.

Answer 10

link? And for every young earth scientist there are hundreds of old earth scientist.