Laurens
New Member
Creationists seem to use their unfounded doubts about radiometric dating to completely dismiss the very notion of an old Earth, while being completely oblivious to the very fact that even without radiometric dating we'd still have evidence for an old Earth.
I was thinking that it would be a good method of dealing with their non-sense if you could demonstrate unequivocally that the Earth is older than 6,000 years without even resorting to radiometric dating.
Things like the size of ice sheets, and coral reefs, and the depth of dust on the moon...
Anyone know of any good evidence that the Earth is old that doesn't require radiometric dating? It would be good to have a list so that we could demonstrate that they are wrong even if we grant them that radiometric dating is false...
I was thinking that it would be a good method of dealing with their non-sense if you could demonstrate unequivocally that the Earth is older than 6,000 years without even resorting to radiometric dating.
Things like the size of ice sheets, and coral reefs, and the depth of dust on the moon...
Anyone know of any good evidence that the Earth is old that doesn't require radiometric dating? It would be good to have a list so that we could demonstrate that they are wrong even if we grant them that radiometric dating is false...