why do creationists try to push this idea...?

Question

why do creationists think it is possible for an alleged flood, which lasted no more than 40 days, is capable of affecting radiometric datings enough that we would end up with measurements which prove the earth is over 4 billion years older than what most creationists estimate? as i recall, the flood mentioned in the bible dried up after less than 100 days. this would not affect radiometric datings.

richard, interesting, but you still have the task of proving the flood. not only that, but that the entire world could become repopulated through means of incest. it's all a bit far fetched if you ask me. all things considered, the simplest explanation is usually the right one. that means, probably wasn't a flood.

jesus m, someone didn't do they're yoga this morning. does it bother you that someone is here spreading an alternate opinion to how the universe came to be? too bad...

ah yes, where is my mind... i didn't even bother to look at the fact that they were some were talking about carbon as if it's the gold standard of radiometric dating. sorry to say though, radiometric dating does prove when crossed with all the other dating methods we have that the earth is over 4 billion years old. this has to do with our knowledge of an expanding universe and the rate at which it's expanding, the speed of sound waves from explosions in outer space, and yes, radiometric dating. all these values are congruent in determing the age of the earth to be over 4 billion years old. the reason we are certain that elements continue to decay at the same rate today as they did billions of years ago is because when you take a 4 billion year old sample of a fossil or elements surrounding that fossil, they continue to decay at the rate predicted if they were indeed that old.

Answer 1

Because they want to make their ideas sound good enough to fool those who are not science majors. They have made a calculation that the well educated will not buy their bull but more of the general public will if they just make it sound scientific enough that the average person would have a hard time proving them wrong. Pretty much all of their arguments focus on obscure or rediculous points of contention with outdated theories. Another thing is the creationist have a literal Biblical worldview. They think that if any part of the Bible is wrong then Christianity would be wrong. They apply this same standard to science, not realizing science constantly changes and non working ideas get cast out on the asheap of history fairly often.

Answer 2

Although many answered correctly, I thought that a more scientific viewpoint was warranted.

It has not been proven, by radiometry or any other method, that the earth is 4 billion years old. This is a scientific fact (the lack of proof). It *does* seem *likely*, but these estimates (and they are only estimates) are based on both scientific principles *and* assumptions. Sorry, but science, at this point, can only *theorize* or *hypothesize* the age of the earth, not prove.

For the carbon-14 answer: as far as I know, carbon-14 dating is only useful for determining the age of organic matter. Therefore, it is not useful for gaging the age of the earth. There is other radiometric testing that is used for that purpose.

BTW, I am a creationist who believes that the earth is older than 6000 years - though, since I am also a scientist, I do not pretend to know how much older.

Jim, http://www.life-after-harry-potter.com

Answer 3

Just Curious, I'm just curious, did you really take time to read the great answers given by JimPettis, C, Richard, Sweet Suzy 777, and Rev. Albert Einstein. Oh, and Earthman, where is your "solid proof" that the flood didn't happen? And Jim, a lot of words but no good rebuttal of the first 5 people I listed above. Why do we push the idea, because it is the truth.

Answer 4

I don't push the idea, I believe my way and frankly I think we are not exactly sure if it was evolution or creation, God could have used whichever he wanted to or a combo of both. The dating we have today is not trsutworthy and reputable and has even been proven so, I am not sure why anyone even brings it up anymore. We have no idea of God's time table, and most likely could not even graps the concept of it if we knew.

C'mon, this is just something else to seperate and divide ourselves. Why can't we all just love one another like we are commanded to do?

Answer 5

That is within the power of God who is powerful. Nobody could question the power of God. We are not forcing anybody to believe it but we only wanted to let you know the truth but if you do not believe on the words of God in the bible, go ahead to your own. Move out of this category and do not ask questions about our God if you do not want us to convince you. OK?
jtm
jtm

Answer 6

Because they are ignorant. Richard's speil above is an example of much ado abut nothing, about what and how it would happen "if" it happened, but where is the solid proof that it did happen?

Answer 7

Radiometric dating methods are flawed and a mere theory. No one knows how old the Earth is.

Answer 8

No one has said that the flood caused radiometric dating problems.....it was the fall of man that started the radioactive decay.

RadioMETRIC DATING HAS BEEN SHOWN TO BE HIGHLY UNRELIABLE..btw,

.Read here for a great article on the unreliability of decay rates and radiometric dating methods.

http://www.trueorigin.org/dating.asp
http://www.answers2prayer.org/bible_questions/Answers/carbon_dating/carbon_dating.html
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dating.asp

Answer 9

Don't they use decaying isotopes of Cadmium or something?

Answer 10

Here is a long explanation and well researched. Im not a creationist but I believe the flood affects the accuracy of Radio Carbon dating.

Effects of the Deluge

Mention of the volume of the oceans immediately raises in the mind of the Bible student the possibility of major dislocations in the radiocarbon clock at the time of the global deluge of Noah’s day, 4,340 years ago. The oceans must certainly have been much greater in extent and depth after the Flood. This in itself would not increase the amount of carbonate in the ocean; it would merely dilute it. The amounts of carbon 14 and carbon 12, as well as their ratio, which determines the specific activity, would not have been changed merely by the fall of the water. However, the increased volume would give the ocean the capacity ultimately to carry a much larger load of dissolved carbonate.

And adjustments in the crust of the earth would be expected because of the greatly increased weight of water on the ocean basins. This pressure would be greater than that over the continents. It would push the underlying plastic mantle away from the ocean beds toward the continents, thus lifting them to new heights. This would expose rock surfaces to increased erosion, including the limestones in the beds of shallow seas that geologists show in low-lying continental areas in their maps of Pliocene times.

So, beginning shortly after the Flood, the oceanic reservoir of carbonate would steadily increase until it reached the concentration we have today. Then, rather than assume that the carbonate reservoir has been constant, we should consider the possibility that it has been gradually increasing over the past 4,300 years.

How would the Flood affect the carbon 14? Since the Bible indicates that the water that fell in the Deluge was previously suspended in some way above the earth’s atmosphere, it must have impeded the entrance of cosmic rays and hence the production of radiocarbon. If uniformly distributed in a spherical shell, it could have prevented completely the formation of radiocarbon. However, it is not necessary to assume this; the water canopy might have been thicker over the equatorial parts than over the poles, thus admitting cosmic rays at low intensities. In any case, the removal of this shield by its falling to the surface would increase the rate of producing carbon 14.

Thus, we should expect that, after the Flood, both the radioactive carbon 14 and the stable carbon 12 in the oceanic reservoir would begin to increase rapidly. Remember that it is the ratio of carbon 14 to carbon 12 that fixes the specific activity. So, depending on just how quickly the erosion of the land added carbonate to the seas, the activity might either increase or decrease. Indeed, it would be possible, though not probable, that the growth of one would just balance the growth of the other; in that case, the radiocarbon clock would have continued to run uniformly right through the Flood. Libby pointed out the possibility that such a fortuitous balancing could bring about the “agreement between the predicted and observed radiocarbon contents of organic materials of historically known age.”7 But he did not prefer this explanation.

Since the inventories of carbon 14 and carbon 12 are independent of each other, it is possible to postulate values that would account for the excessive ages reported on old samples. For example, if we assume that the specific activity before the Flood was about half its present value, all pre-Flood specimens would appear to be about 6,000 years older than they really are. This would also be true for a while afterward, but with a rapid erosion of carbonate in the centuries after the Flood, the error would be reduced. It appears that by about 1500 B.C.E. the activity had approached its present value, since radiocarbon ages seem to be nearly right since then.


**********************************

What evidence proves that there truly was a global deluge?

Other possible evidence of a drastic change: Remains of mammoths and rhinoceroses have been found in different parts of the earth. Some of these were found in Siberian cliffs; others were preserved in Siberian and Alaskan ice. In fact, some were found with food undigested in their stomachs or still unchewed in their teeth, indicating that they died suddenly. It is estimated, from the trade in ivory tusks, that bones of tens of thousands of such mammoths have been found. The fossil remains of many other animals, such as lions, tigers, bears, and elk, have been found in common strata, which may indicate that all of these were destroyed simultaneously. Some have pointed to such finds as definite physical proof of a rapid change in climate and sudden destruction caused by a universal flood.

Also that the Flood did happen is seen in the fact that mankind never forgot it. All around the world, in locations as far apart as Alaska and the South Sea Islands, there are ancient stories about it. Native, pre-Columbian civilizations of America, as well as Aborigines of Australia, all have stories about the Flood. While some of the accounts differ in detail, the basic fact that the earth was flooded and only a few humans were saved in a man-made vessel comes through in nearly all versions. The only explanation for such a widespread acceptance is that the Flood was a historical event.

Flood Legends

Samples from six continents and the islands of the sea; hundreds of such legends are known.

Australia - Kurnai
Destruction by Water
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Babylon - Berossus’ account
Destruction by Water
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Babylon - Gilgamesh epic

Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Bolivia - Chiriguano
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Borneo - Sea Dayak
Destruction by Water
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Burma - Singpho
Destruction by Water
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Canada - Cree
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Canada - Montagnais
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

China - Lolo
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Cuba - original natives
Destruction by Water
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

East Africa - Masai
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Egypt - Book of the Dead
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Fiji - Walavu-levu tradition
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

French Polynesia - Raïatéa
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared

Greece - Lucian’s account
Destruction by Water
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Guyana - Macushi
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Iceland - Eddas
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

India - Andaman Islands
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

India - Bhil
Destruction by Water
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

India - Kamar
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Iran - Zend-Avesta
Destruction by Water
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared

Italy - Ovid’s poetry
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Malay Peninsula - Jakun
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Mexico - Codex Chimalpopoca
Destruction by Water
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Mexico - Huichol
Destruction by Water
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

New Zealand - Maori
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Peru - Indians of Huarochirí
Destruction by Water
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared

Russia - Vogul
Destruction by Water
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

U.S.A. (Alaska) - Kolusches
Destruction by Water
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

U.S.A. (Alaska) - Tlingit
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

U.S.A. (Arizona) - Papago
Destruction by Water
Warning Given
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

U.S.A. (Hawaii) - legend of Nu-u
Destruction by Water
Divine Cause
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Vanuatu - Melanesians
Destruction by Water
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Vietnam - Bahnar
Destruction by Water
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel

Wales - Dwyfan/Dwyfach legend
Destruction by Water
Humans Spared
Animals Spared
Preserved in a Vessel


Where Did the Floodwaters Go?

Evidently they are right here on earth. Today there is about 1.4 billion cu km (326 million cu mi) of water on the earth. It covers more than 70 percent of the globe’s surface. The average depth of the oceans is 4 km (2.5 mi); average elevation of the land is only 0.8 km (0.5 mi) above sea level. If the earth’s surface was smoothed out, it would all be covered with water to a depth of 2,400 m (8,000 ft)

Water c. 70 percent of earth’s surface
Land c. 30 percent