What would you say is the best scientific evidence of a young earth? When discussiing Creation I often use limiting factors like the oldest tree, desert, and reef being only 4400 years old to prove the flood, and the 10,000-year age limit of comets. Besides limiting factors and geneologies, is there any definitive evidence that points to about 6,000 years?
Oh, I've also had a hard time finding good references for population charts that show the bottleneack that occurred because of the flood.
well, one of my favourite evidences to use is the fact that all dinosur bones have carbon 14 in them. even though after 60,000 years all carbon 14 should have left the dinosaur bones and these dinosaur bones that are supposed to be more than 65 million years old still have carbon 14 in them. they usually give dates of around 12,000 years when carbon dated and then when they say "well thats still older then 6,000 years" you can explain that the difference of age can be explained by the fact that there is more c-14 in our atmosphere today then there would have been when the animal was alive giving it an older date then 4,400 years. This evidence doesn't point directly to 6,000 years but it does go against the millions of years thing.
First, most dinosaur bones are mineralized to the point that they have no organic material in them. A recent notable exception is the T. Rex bones Dr. Mary Schweitzer reported on, that contained what visually and chemically appeared to be soft, elastic, organic connective tissues.
Second, scientists do not perform expensive AMS carbon-14 dating on samples that are assumed to be greater than about 50,000 years. 65 million years falls into this category.
Third, at least one scientist who called for C-14 dating on Schweitzer's bones did so with the intent of showing that her samples had been contaminated by modern bacterial biofilms, thus proving that the elastic tissues were artifacts, and not fossils. So even if C-14 is found in these dino bones, it only proves that they were contaminated. The paradigm overrides the empirical evidence.
You might try the web site: www.creation.com/age-of-the-earth. It gives 101 scientific evidences for a young earth and solar system. Check it out.
Best Regards Robert Buckman
You might already be aware of this: http://creation.com/age-of-the-earth
Personally, the C14 found in deep earth diamonds and the helium diffision from zircons at various depths are powerful, but I think the decay of Earth's magnetic field and other solar system magnetic fields provide the most powerful argument of all for me personally.