Is there any real, hard, cold evidence against creationism and a 6000+ year old Earth?

I know there are debates--arguments, really-- but is there really any evidence? Or at least some compelling ideas that don't have an equally compelling answer on the side of Creationism. If you answer yes, could you please tell me where I can research this for myself? Knowing that Carbon-14 dating is not reliable, what are these other dating methods and where can I learn about them? Thanks.

14 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    The Mesopotamians and Egyptians invented beer around 8000 years ago. The earth can't be younger than beer, can it?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • nick s
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    You can present all the data you like, but it will fall on deaf ears. Creationists put all the geology, strata, fossils, Grand Canyons, down to the flood. It turned over everything, destroyed most life (fossils) and pushed up the mountains.

    If you argue that this is physically impossible in the 6000 year timeframe, or impossible for a single flood event, they will simply come back with the “God can do anything” bit.

    Probably the best evidence geologist have is taking the geological extreme – Everest. The summit of Everest is made of limestone that was formed from the shells of trillions of ocean creatures. For a flood event to push up the ocean bed to nearly 9 km above sea level, it would have to have been a gargantuan cataclysmic event. Tsunamis many kilometers high would have raged all over the world, and from all the other mountain ranges being pushed up at the same time. This would hardly be good sailing conditions for Noahs wooden boat, would it?

    But even then, the creationists would argue that God protected Noah’s ark from the mayhem, which would make anyone wonder why he bothered to get Noah to build an ark in the first place. But they would say “to test his faith”.

    Can’t win, I’m afraid. We just need to ignore them.

    Source(s): Science writer
    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Just study sciences, and you will find overwhelming evidence against such a primitive and ignorant myth. Geology, paleontology, cosmology, biology, archaeology, astronomy, etc. all show that Genesis is a piece of bad fiction written by an ignorant shepherd. creationism has no compelling arguments. It is just bad science and pseudo-science that real scientists have refuted many times. I used to get 2 books on creationism and 2 on evolution and compare them. If you are objective, you should easily see in such comparisons that creationism is nonsense. At the library, I have seen a book about "Why Creationists Are Wrong". Look for it.Carbon-14 dating is only for items less than 50,000 yers old. There are several other radioactive elements used, and they all agree quite well about the age of the earth and its fossils.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    There are mountains of evidence against creationism. They come from astronomy, geology, chemistry, physics, paleontology, molecular biology and other sources.

    Carbon 14 dating is useful for samples less than 50,000 years. However, there are other isotopic dating methods that are useful for time periods that are in the hundreds of millions to billions of years.

    There is no physical evidence for a world that is 6000 years old. It is a myth. The important point is that creationism cannot claim evidence supporting a young earth by merely questioning the scientific evidence. This is a logical error called a false duality. Each theory must have supporting physical evidence, and the young earth has no supporting physical evidence, only arguments against what its supporters see as holes in the old earth argument. This, again, is very bad logic.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Christianity itself provides the best evidence; for the Earth to only be 6000 years old, the God of Christianity would have to be an evil Trickster God; He made the Grand Canyon LOOK as though water had been eroding it for tens of thousands of years; He hid fossils in rock strata, He magically endowed things with levels of carbon isotopes that made them appear to be hundreds of thousands of years old. If you "know" Carbon-dating to be unreliable, please pass on the details of this to the rest of us!

    Creationism is pseudoscience, pure & simple, invented by people apparently willing to believe in a God smart enough to have made the world, the Universe & Everything, but not smart enough to done it through any elegant mechanisms....they prefer He just "waved a magic wand", like the Wizard of Oz!

    You don't believe your God is an evil Trickster God, do you?

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Carbon dating is only really usueful over a few thousand years - that's not how rocks are dated.

    We use Uranium-Lead, Strontium-Neodymium and other radioactive decays. We can use several to verify the answers, and they are much more reliable than C14 dating.

    Every measure we have of the speed of light is consistent; and we can measure the distance to stars and galaxies in various different ways, and the light from even the closest galaxies takes more than 6000 years to reach us.

    In addition to reading Geology textbooks, try astronomy textbooks to understand this.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    The most compelling evidence would have to be the fossilized remains of plants and animals that do not exist today or are mentioned in the Bible.

    The only explaination would be the pre-biblical existance of the earth.

    The Creationist theory falls apart when you try to find a definiton of what is "one day" for God.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    4 years ago

    None, but neither do you have any scientific evidence that it is not. It certainly couldn't be billions of years old. Not scientifically but maybe philosophically. And yes, I am aware of all the 'evidence' (and their problems) that is used to support evolution and its necessity for billions of years.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Wow, people do get freekin' excited about this, don't they? One or two of 'em even wrote you a term paper! No references in the whole batch, tho, mine included.

    Simple answer, No. It's not easy to develop "real hard cold (meaning 'scientific') evidence" AGAINST something, only FOR something.

    And there are mountains of evidence FOR the preeminent scientific theories, that's why they are preeminent.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Yes. Oodles. Every science from chemistry, acrhaelogy, biology to physics shows the earth is MUCH older.

    Pick up a geology textbook.

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.