• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Dinosaurs would still be here.

Frank Robert

Well-Known Member
Feb 18, 2021
2,389
1,169
KW
✟145,443.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I have given a few

but considering the attitudes I have seen in here. I doubt anyone would change their minds, it appears as if you have all made up your mind.
You are evading. If you provide credible sources and they are disregarded then it would be obvious where the problem lies but we have not seen any links or references to credible sources from your side. Obviously, I could have missed them, if so let me know.
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,175
3,180
Oregon
✟943,170.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
actually it is not proven, and it is questioned by many people.

Again, No one was there 50 million years ago (if the earth was even here)

radiometric data demands everything is the same 50 million years ago as it is today. if it is not. then the data can not be trusted.

I can go on and on and on.



Ice age occurred after the flood.

The Flood was suppose to have occurred 4,000 years ago. How do we get an Ice Age with glaciers 2 miles deep of such short duration?
300 different lava flows? and

Here's a chart of the different groups. Many of the groups had numerous flows. Some ran for 300 miles to the Pacific Ocean. My question is how do you fit all of this basalt into such a short time frame?
Columbia River Basalt.png
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,175
3,180
Oregon
✟943,170.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
actually it is not proven, and it is questioned by many people.

Again, No one was there 50 million years ago (if the earth was even here)

radiometric data demands everything is the same 50 million years ago as it is today. if it is not. then the data can not be trusted.

I can go on and on and on.
Here's the track of the Yellowstone Hot Spot. How do you account for all of his volcanic activity and movement in less than a couple of thousand years?

siletziayhs1.jpg
 

Attachments

  • siletziayhs1.jpg
    siletziayhs1.jpg
    223.7 KB · Views: 8
  • siletziayhs1.jpg
    siletziayhs1.jpg
    223.7 KB · Views: 9
  • Like
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,688
29,297
Pacific Northwest
✟818,913.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Your making a claim yourself

I've said there's no evidence.
You said there is lots of evidence.

The burden of proof rests on you.

what I am familiar with is learning in history class that people of the ancient world were afraid to sail to far from their home. because the general thinking was that the earth was flat. and they were afraid they would fall off the end of the earth.

I did not say everyone believed it, i am sure there were some who did not. The word of God speaks of the globe of the earth..

My point was science changes.. what is science today may not be science tomorrow.. so it would be foolish to put all of our eggs in one basket so to speak.

Again, I used to believe in an old earth. I no longer do. based on what i saw..

So no, you are not familiar with Eratosothenes.

The ancient Greeks, based on their observations, speculated that the earth was probably a sphere. Though no one had done anything to try and prove it, but anyone could look and notice that objects eventually as they get further away from an observer (this is best observed when looking at the horizon at sea or an otherwise sufficient body of water) that the object dips below the horizon; thus indicating curvature. However it was Eratosthenes of Cyrene who decided to set up an experiment, he wanted to measure the circumference of the earth. The experiment was pretty simple, here is an incredibly crude summary: in two far away places he set up two poles of equal length, and at the same time of the day, on the same day, he measured the length of the shadow cast by the sun. Using these measurements, along with the distance between the locations, Eratosthenes was able to mathematically determine the circumference of the earth. His measurement was not perfect, but he was extremely close, he was off (if I recall correctly) by only a couple hundred miles.

This was centuries before Jesus. By the time of Jesus and the New Testament, the spherical shape of the earth was common place. There were, no doubt, lots of people who thought the earth was flat. Heck, there are people living today who think the earth is flat. But anyone, if they knew anything, knew the earth was flat. Not only had it been demonstrated mathematically, it was--again--something people could observe with their own eyes.

Knowledge of the round earth didn't disappear. Some like to perpetuate the myth that, after the fall of Rome, Western Europe entered into a period of total ignorance and all knowledge was lost. That is, of course, pure poppycock. As Late Antiquity gave way to the Middle Ages, the knowledge of astronomy, mathematics, medicine, engineering, and etc continued to exist, and Medieval academics continued to build upon the knowledge of Classical Antiquity. It wasn't perfect, the loss of a centralized government in Western Europe did have an effect, and some things did take some time to return to the general knowledge base of Western Europe, as a revival in classical Greek and Latin literature in the Late Middle Ages, and knowledge from the Islamic world entered into Western Europe; as well as after the fall of Constantinople in 1453 many Greek refugees brought a great deal of classic works (including hundreds of biblical manuscripts, which would later be used by people like Erasmus of Rotterdam).

At no point, however, was knowledge of the roundness of the earth gone. Nobody with an education believed the earth was flat. The prevailing cosmological model of Antiquity and the Middle Ages was the Ptolemaic Model, which requires a round earth. When Copernicus, and later Galileo, challenged the Ptolemaic Model it had nothing to do with the size and shape of the earth, but rather the relative relationships between the earth and the other celestial bodies. The Ptolemaic Model held that the earth was the center of the universe, and the sun, moon, the five planets, and the stars formed a series of concentric spheres around the earth. Copernicus challenged this, by positing that the sun was the center, and the earth, along with the planets, circled in orbit around the sun; Galileo further championed Copernicanism. Galileo got in trouble with the Pope because he refused to publish the Pope's Ptolemaic ideas in his work, and publicly badmouthed and insulted the Pope, which is why he was arrested and then put under house arrest.

Perhaps you are under the idea that Columbus sailed west to prove the earth was round. This is a lie, a fiction, that was invented in the 19th century. In the 1800's it was common among Western intellectuals to view the history of civilization as a straight line of progress, from primitive society to advanced society. As such one myth that entered the Western cultural lexicon was that people in Europe were ignorant and thought the earth was flat. Columbus was re-written by 19th century writers as a brave hero and rebel who challenged the ignorance of his time, and so he sailed west to prove the earth was round, and on the way he discovered America. Fiction. That's fiction.

What Columbus was after was an alternative route to the East to secure spices and trade for the West, the Portuguese had already established trade routes by going around Africa. Columbus held to a personal opinion that the earth was actually a lot smaller than was commonly believed (he was wrong) and that the trip west to the East was quicker, cheaper, and safer than sailing around Africa. He attempted to convince a lot of people, they all rejected him. After pestering the Spanish Crown several times, they finally gave in, giving him three tiny vessels and a meager crew. Had there not been the Americas between Europe and Asia, Columbus would have died at sea, probably because his crew would mutiny and turn back. Because the world was bigger than Columbus thought, it was just as big as people in Europe already thought it was.

To be crystal clear. The idea that one could sail west to reach the East was not a crazy idea to people in Europe. They knew that if you went far enough west, you'd circle the globe and reach China, Japan, India, etc. The reason they didn't do that was because it would be suicidal. They didn't know the Americas were there, so as far as they knew they'd have to sail the entire distance across the Atlantic AND the Pacific, and then some. Rejecting Columbus' proposal wasn't out of ignorance, it was because Columbus was a weirdo with a crazy idea.

We only remember Columbus because he got lucky, there happened to be land in the west. Land unknown to Europe. And then Columbus proceeded to become one of the most evil people in all of history. So the only reason we remember him in America is because 18th and 19th century mythographers wanted to create a national hero in the person of Christopher Columbus (they weren't keen on heroizing English explorers like Cabot, given two wars with the British Crown). And then the legend of Columbus grew, myth and legend, and just a tiny bit of history.


-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

Eternally Grateful

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2018
1,061
322
60
Columbus, Ohio
✟52,129.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Sorry if I have not responded since yesterday.

the way I see it we have two groups of people. All begging for proof or whatever they think they need. Or claiming there is no proof. So we are at a loss or a standstill.

There is no need to continue, The fact is no one will actually know until we are face to face with God and we can ask him. We can guess, We can make determinations based on the evidence we see. But non of us where there so non of us can know.

As for me, I believe the biblical account.

I believe God created the heaven and earth

I think we all (well again, those who are believers) agree here (if you do not agree. then there really can be no conversation between us because our base premis is apposed. and can not align)

Now. as a Gap OEC Person most of my life. by using the science everyone here speaks about. I believed there was a GAP between Gen 1: 1 and Gen 1: 3 where there was an unknown amount of time between the first created act of God. and the time God was going to restore his normal creation.

I no longer believe this

Another OEC theory is the day age theory. where each day consisted of an unknown amount of years. possibly millions) before the next day started. I do not believe in this either (One of my biggest reasons for disagreement is that God created all plant life on day three. and the sun was not created until day 4. So how could plants live with no son for up to millions of years? They could not) But they could survive a 24 hour day easily, and we have no issue.

so I believe in a 6 day creation.

I believe in Noah's time, the earth that existed then perished with a major catastrophic flood which changed the face of the earth. and what we witness today can be answered by that flood (I have seen the evidence presented. and see no reason to disagree with it)

anyway, again, we can feel free to believe what we want. But I am not going to fight over this, this is not even a salvic issue.. so I will be moving on.. Good day
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,266
7,504
31
Wales
✟431,170.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
Sorry if I have not responded since yesterday.

the way I see it we have two groups of people. All begging for proof or whatever they think they need. Or claiming there is no proof. So we are at a loss or a standstill.

There is no need to continue, The fact is no one will actually know until we are face to face with God and we can ask him. We can guess, We can make determinations based on the evidence we see. But non of us where there so non of us can know.

As for me, I believe the biblical account.

I believe God created the heaven and earth

I think we all (well again, those who are believers) agree here (if you do not agree. then there really can be no conversation between us because our base premis is apposed. and can not align)

Now. as a Gap OEC Person most of my life. by using the science everyone here speaks about. I believed there was a GAP between Gen 1: 1 and Gen 1: 3 where there was an unknown amount of time between the first created act of God. and the time God was going to restore his normal creation.

I no longer believe this

Another OEC theory is the day age theory. where each day consisted of an unknown amount of years. possibly millions) before the next day started. I do not believe in this either (One of my biggest reasons for disagreement is that God created all plant life on day three. and the sun was not created until day 4. So how could plants live with no son for up to millions of years? They could not) But they could survive a 24 hour day easily, and we have no issue.

so I believe in a 6 day creation.

I believe in Noah's time, the earth that existed then perished with a major catastrophic flood which changed the face of the earth. and what we witness today can be answered by that flood (I have seen the evidence presented. and see no reason to disagree with it)

anyway, again, we can feel free to believe what we want. But I am not going to fight over this, this is not even a salvic issue.. so I will be moving on.. Good day

Understandable, but cowardly for sure.
 
Upvote 0

River Jordan

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2024
763
335
37
Pacific NW
✟29,223.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Sorry if I have not responded since yesterday.

the way I see it we have two groups of people. All begging for proof or whatever they think they need. Or claiming there is no proof. So we are at a loss or a standstill.

There is no need to continue, The fact is no one will actually know until we are face to face with God and we can ask him. We can guess, We can make determinations based on the evidence we see. But non of us where there so non of us can know.

As for me, I believe the biblical account.

I believe God created the heaven and earth

I think we all (well again, those who are believers) agree here (if you do not agree. then there really can be no conversation between us because our base premis is apposed. and can not align)

Now. as a Gap OEC Person most of my life. by using the science everyone here speaks about. I believed there was a GAP between Gen 1: 1 and Gen 1: 3 where there was an unknown amount of time between the first created act of God. and the time God was going to restore his normal creation.

I no longer believe this

Another OEC theory is the day age theory. where each day consisted of an unknown amount of years. possibly millions) before the next day started. I do not believe in this either (One of my biggest reasons for disagreement is that God created all plant life on day three. and the sun was not created until day 4. So how could plants live with no son for up to millions of years? They could not) But they could survive a 24 hour day easily, and we have no issue.

so I believe in a 6 day creation.

I believe in Noah's time, the earth that existed then perished with a major catastrophic flood which changed the face of the earth. and what we witness today can be answered by that flood (I have seen the evidence presented. and see no reason to disagree with it)

anyway, again, we can feel free to believe what we want. But I am not going to fight over this, this is not even a salvic issue.. so I will be moving on.. Good day
You claimed you knew all about each of the geologic strata in the Grand Canyon and that they were all laid down during the flood. I posted an image of those strata and a very brief description of each of them, then asked you to explain how they were produced in the flood.

Are you going to do that?
 
Upvote 0

River Jordan

Well-Known Member
Dec 26, 2024
763
335
37
Pacific NW
✟29,223.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Understandable, but cowardly for sure.
Like so many other young earth creationists I've come across. Lots of talk and empty claims, but as soon as anyone tries to get them to address the specifics and back up their claims, they make up an excuse and flee.

Not a good look.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,192
52,657
Guam
✟5,150,299.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Like so many other young earth creationists I've come across. Lots of talk and empty claims, but as soon as anyone tries to get them to address the specifics and back up their claims, they make up an excuse and flee.

I'm not a YEC, but I'm the next best thing to one.

Here's a thread I started years ago:

MOONDUST

How would you handle this, if a YEC presented it to you?
 
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,266
7,504
31
Wales
✟431,170.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
I'm not a YEC, but I'm the next best thing to one.

Here's a thread I started years ago:

MOONDUST

How would you handle this, if a YEC presented it to you?

You are a YEC though.
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,688
29,297
Pacific Northwest
✟818,913.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Sorry if I have not responded since yesterday.

the way I see it we have two groups of people. All begging for proof or whatever they think they need. Or claiming there is no proof. So we are at a loss or a standstill.

There is no need to continue, The fact is no one will actually know until we are face to face with God and we can ask him. We can guess, We can make determinations based on the evidence we see. But non of us where there so non of us can know.

As for me, I believe the biblical account.

I believe God created the heaven and earth

I think we all (well again, those who are believers) agree here (if you do not agree. then there really can be no conversation between us because our base premis is apposed. and can not align)

Now. as a Gap OEC Person most of my life. by using the science everyone here speaks about. I believed there was a GAP between Gen 1: 1 and Gen 1: 3 where there was an unknown amount of time between the first created act of God. and the time God was going to restore his normal creation.

I no longer believe this

Another OEC theory is the day age theory. where each day consisted of an unknown amount of years. possibly millions) before the next day started. I do not believe in this either (One of my biggest reasons for disagreement is that God created all plant life on day three. and the sun was not created until day 4. So how could plants live with no son for up to millions of years? They could not) But they could survive a 24 hour day easily, and we have no issue.

so I believe in a 6 day creation.

I believe in Noah's time, the earth that existed then perished with a major catastrophic flood which changed the face of the earth. and what we witness today can be answered by that flood (I have seen the evidence presented. and see no reason to disagree with it)

anyway, again, we can feel free to believe what we want. But I am not going to fight over this, this is not even a salvic issue.. so I will be moving on.. Good day

I used to be a Young Earth Creationist. It's how I was raised. The Fundamentalist non-denominational church I grew up in, and later my Pentecostal church of later childhood and adolescence all taught Young Earth Creationism. I also attended a private school run by an IFB church (KJV-only and everything). So I grew up learning "Creationist science".

I also was a deeply curious person, and my parents encouraged me to ask questions and indulge my curiosity. Which is why they were fine with me watching science based shows on the Discovery Channel (back when it used to have science based shows), and check out books about dinosaurs at the public library. My favorite book, which I got as a gift as a child, was an illustrated book of prehistoric animals by Dougal Dixon. My parents cautioned me against evolution, and being the kind of kid that I was I listened to the people in charge of me, believed what they told me, and so even though I was learning a lot about science, about evolution, I treated the evolution as I did say, fantasy or science fiction.

The trouble was this: The explicitly Creationist sources that I was fed would often go out of its way to disprove evolution, and the reason why that ended up being a problem was because I had been exposed to--through my own personal interests--evolutionary theory. And I noticed that the way Creationist sources talked about evolution wasn't the way science-based sources talked about evolution. That is to say, it appeared as though the Creationist sources didn't understand evolution, and so what they argued against was a caricature, a straw man. Now, I didn't really let that bother me; but it's something I recognized at a very young age.

The reason why I accepted Young Earth Creationism and rejected evolution wasn't because my Creationist education presented better scientific arguments, the arguments weren't good. Instead I accepted it because I had been raised to believe that Young Earth Creationism is what the Bible teaches, and it's what Christians believe, and evolution was an anti-Christian belief system. So I was raised believing that I can either be a Christian, believe in Jesus and all that He did and said, believing in the authority of the Bible as God's word; or I could believe in evolution, but if I did that then I would have to reject my faith in Jesus. Jesus was more important, so I naturally rejected evolution. It was entirely black and white, entirely binary, there was room for no other way of thinking.

Then in my later teenage years as I found myself wanting to take my religion more seriously, to take Jesus more seriously, take the Bible more seriously, I started to study the Bible more. I started to study theology, and Church history, and as my family finally got the internet (this was the late 90s) that meant I could interact with people from around the world, with a lot of diverse backgrounds. That led me to discover religious discussion forums, where I discovered Christians of diverse denominational backgrounds.

I learned very quickly that I had a lot of wrong assumptions about different Christian denominations. I also, as I began to read the BIble more and had people challenge me to read the Bible more deeply and thoroughly, that there were a lot of things I had been raised to believe that I could not justify nor defend with Scripture. And certain preconceptions and doctrinal positions which I had never even contemplated questioning I was now questioning. This created a domino effect that resulted in me going through an intense and lengthy period of religious rediscovery and theological reformation that lasted into my early-to-mid 20s.

The TL;DR of that is I ended up becoming Lutheran--that is a story for another day however. Relevant here was my discovery that, in spite of all I had been told growing up, there were literally millions of Bible-believing Christians across all denominations and theological traditions that had no issue embracing mainstream scientific views about the age of the earth, about evolution, etc. They did so not by compromising their faith in Jesus or their belief in Holy Scripture; the two simply existed hand-in-hand. That's how my Young Earth Creationism crumbled. Realizing that I didn't have to make a choice between following Jesus or accepting the science--because that was a false dichotomy.

I learned about genuine scientists who were faithful Christians, people like Francis Collins and Robert Baker.

The only reason I held to Young Earth Creationism for as long as I did had nothing to do with the evidentiary support for it--because frankly, "Creationist science" is bunk--but because I falsely believed I had to in order to be faithful to Jesus.

And tragically, that lie, that one can't accept evolution and be a "real" Christian has resulted in thousands, if not millions, of Christians losing faith because when they discovered the overwhelming support of evidence for evolution, and the geological evidence for the old earth; it created despair. A despair and crisis of faith that they were not equipped to deal with, because their religious support structure failed them, it failed them by selling them a false bill of goods. It told them that they couldn't be a Christian AND accept the evidence. It lied to them because it said that evolution was a satanic lie, and part of a conspiratorial system of corrupt demonic influence in the world and that being against evolution was part of fighting the spiritual fight against the spiritual powers and principalities of the world. The very structures that were supposed to be there to support their faith were built, not on the solid foundation of Jesus Christ, but on the unstable, shifting sand of Young Earth Creationism.

And yet I continue to see Christian structures and institutions fail Jesus' Faithful time and again. And rather than taking accountability, instead blame is shifted and placed on atheists, secularists, humanists. Science itself has become the enemy of faith. And so these institutions fight tirelessly against basic science, not just evolution, or geology, but also climatology. And this has led to ever increasing trends of anti-education, anti-science. It is resulting in isolation and circling the wagons, and rather than engaging the world with the love and good news of Jesus, there is instead a rejection of that love, a rejection of that Good News. As "culture wars" are becoming more important than practicing the Christian faith. It's more important to win a political battle against the demonized opposition than it is to take up the cross and follow Christ.

And what I have continued to witness is a continued dumbing down of Christianity, an exponential increase in biblical and theological illiteracy. A fundamental rejection of basic Christian principles of ethics in favor of culture war BS.

Even in my super conservative Fundamentalist Sunday School classes I was taught that things like empathy and compassion, especially for the vulnerable and the hurting, were GOOD things. Yet I've actually been told, straight up, that compassion is not a Christian virtue, and that things like turning the other cheek, loving one's enemy, praying and blessing instead of cursing aren't things I should even take seriously. It's more important to win the culture war, by any means necessary.

Anti-evolutionism is simply a symptom of this deeply dangerous problem.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
39,688
29,297
Pacific Northwest
✟818,913.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
Are you a wise man?

So what was the game plan with this question? Were you hoping I would say "yes" so you could quote Proverbs 3:7 at me? If I say "no" would you hit me with Proverbs 29:11, or Proverbs 1:7?

No AV, I'm not going to play games with you.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,856,192
52,657
Guam
✟5,150,299.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So what was the game plan with this question? Were you hoping I would say "yes" so you could quote Proverbs 3:7 at me? If I say "no" would you hit me with Proverbs 29:11, or Proverbs 1:7?

No AV, I'm not going to play games with you.

You're very perceptive.

But for the record, I was standing by with Romans 1:22 ...

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

... to warn you to be careful.

The warning in Romans 1:22 is my go-to verse for warning born-again believers against embracing macroevolution.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Warden_of_the_Storm

Well-Known Member
Oct 16, 2015
15,266
7,504
31
Wales
✟431,170.00
Country
United Kingdom
Gender
Male
Faith
Deist
Marital Status
Single
You're very perceptive.

But for the record, I was standing by with Romans 1:22 ...

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

... to warn you to be careful.

The warning in Romans 1:22 is my go-to verse for warning born-again believers against embracing macroevolution.

Even though you twist it and bend it to say something it doesn't say.
 
Upvote 0

dlamberth

Senior Contributor
Site Supporter
Oct 12, 2003
20,175
3,180
Oregon
✟943,170.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Politics
US-Others
You're very perceptive.

But for the record, I was standing by with Romans 1:22 ...

Romans 1:22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

... to warn you to be careful.

The warning in Romans 1:22 is my go-to verse for warning born-again believers against embracing macroevolution.
He was talking from the place of lesson learned from knowledge gained by direct personal experience. That's how life works.
 
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
8,921
4,522
82
Goldsboro NC
✟266,449.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
lol. Who told you that it does not matter?
It does matter--that's one of the things scientists have to take into account when they do radiometric dating. Did you believe they never thought of it?
 
Upvote 0

NxNW

Well-Known Member
Nov 30, 2019
7,194
4,986
NW
✟267,757.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
lol. Who told you that it does not matter?
I never made such a claim. The physical constants of nature don't seem to change. Looking into the distant past via telescopes we can see stars and galaxies behaving according to the same rules we have today. This is very strong evidence that the assumptions upon which radiometric dating is based are correct.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0