Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
56 bytes removed ,  15:02, April 11, 2007
m
→‎Dating: This is a more elegant wording, and gives the argument more directly.
Line 36: Line 36:     
Flood geologists date the flood to around 2350 B.C., based on [[biblical chronology]].
 
Flood geologists date the flood to around 2350 B.C., based on [[biblical chronology]].
−
They argue that uniformitarian dating methods are unreliable, in part because such methods presume that there was no Flood, and that the Flood would invalidate some of the presumptions behind uniformitarian dating methods.
+
They argue that uniformitarian dating methods are unreliable, reasoning that the Flood would invalidate some of the presumptions behind uniformitarian dating methods.
 
On this basis, archaeological dates which purport to show civilisations and artifacts being older than the Flood cannot be used to invalidate the date of the flood because they are based on the presumption that there was no Flood.<ref>For example, Carbon Dating is calibrated according to known background levels of C14 in the atmosphere, but this calibration does not account for likely altered levels due to extensive volcanism during the Flood.  See [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5026/ Carbon dating into the future] (Creation Ministries International).</ref>
 
On this basis, archaeological dates which purport to show civilisations and artifacts being older than the Flood cannot be used to invalidate the date of the flood because they are based on the presumption that there was no Flood.<ref>For example, Carbon Dating is calibrated according to known background levels of C14 in the atmosphere, but this calibration does not account for likely altered levels due to extensive volcanism during the Flood.  See [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5026/ Carbon dating into the future] (Creation Ministries International).</ref>
 
Concluding that there was no Flood on the basis of dating methods that presume that there was no Flood is circular reasoning.
 
Concluding that there was no Flood on the basis of dating methods that presume that there was no Flood is circular reasoning.
303

edits

Navigation menu