Explore
dating-problems
Back to Topics
Page 2 of 3 (27 Articles)
Difficult to believe that they are all wrong on the age of the earth
The Bible provides the foundations for the answers
by The Team at CMI
Flaws in dating the earth as ancient
When the numbers don’t add up, it’s time to examine the methods and the philosophy behind them.
by Alexander R. Williams
Carbon-14 in diamonds: Refuting Talk.Origins
Carbon-14 in Diamonds is still a problem for evolutionists.
by Joel Tay
Radiometric backflip
The discovery of bird tracks in ‘Late Triassic’ rocks once again puts a big question mark over the veracity of long-age radiometric techniques
by Jonathan O'Brien
More on radioactive dating problems
A further response to Reasonable Faith Adelaide.
by Jim Mason
Sperm wail
The evolutionists’ cry that ostracod gametes are 17 million years old defies common sense.
by David Catchpoole
Oxidizable carbon ratio dating
What is it? And is it evidence against the Bible’s age of the earth?
by Tas Walker
The way it really is: little-known facts about radiometric dating
Long-age geologists will not accept a radiometric date unless it matches their pre-existing expectations.
by Tas Walker
Radiometric dating and the age of the Earth
The 4.5 billion-year radiometric ‘age’ of the earth is based on faulty assumptions even secular researchers have acknowledged.
by Ralph W. Matthews, Ph.D.
Evidences for a young earth and universe
‘Billions of years’ is accepted without question but there is lots of evidence that the earth and universe are much, much younger.
by Don Batten
The fatal flaw with radioactive dating methods
When you peel away the mystery it’s obvious that the dates are not objectively measured.
by Tas Walker
Radiometric dating breakthroughs
Radiometric dating breakthroughs
by Carl Wieland, Australia