Dating

There are numerous unknowns and inaccuracies in uniformitarian attempts to use microfossils to gauge past climates.

All radioactive dates are based on assumptions so you can get any age you like by changing your assumptions.

Does amino acid racemization make for a reliable dating technique?

DNA has been detected in a duckbilled dinosaur fossil, undermining the traditional millions of years age for it.

Equivocal carbon dating of ancient footprints in New Mexico, conflict with long-age understanding of human occupation of North America.

Do amino acids racemize in water faster than peptides can grow?

Multiple lines of evidence support the Bible

Creationists have more in their armoury now to deal with that question than ever before—while the problems for long-age evolutionists just get worse.

Secular models for Ganymedes magnetic field struggle, but creationist models offer a better framework.

Biblical creation makes better sense than evolution of bird tracks found below bird fossils in the rock record.

An answer to Reasonable Faith Adelaide about lead in zircon crystals, the Concordia technique, and worldview bias of secular scientists.

The continents cannot be billions of years old because they would have eroded away long ago; there should be nothing left.

Conflict over the date of the Mungo Man fossil shows that evolutionists do not automatically accept laboratory dates, but interpret them within an evolutionary framework.

What assumptions and challenges call into question long-age attempts to assess the height of the land in the past?

Researchers recently presented at a geophysics conference in Singapore radiocarbon dating results of dinosaur bones ranging from 22,000 to 39,000 years old, which have since been censored.

Stone circles are difficult to date.