Defens0rFidei said:
Both, perhaps. But at least one is being honest about its preconceptions.
Just the creationist. They warp data to fit theory. You can't do that in science. Instead, theory must change to fit data. But in creationism, the theory is tied to the existence of God, and changes in the theory are viewed as saying that God does not exist.
Remember, the people who falsified young earth were
all theists/Christians and many of them were ministers. So their "preconception" was belief in God and they all started out as young earthers.
So, by the time you get to Barnes and magnetic field decay what you have is an already falsified theory -- young earth. This means there is data out there that simply can't be there
if the earth really is young. Nothing can make that data go away. There is also literally mountains of data that says the earth is old.
So along comes Barnes and says "hey, I have new data that falsifies old earth -- the decay of the magnetic field." All scientists looked at that and said
"1. A young earth is already falsified.
2. There is considerable data that supports that the earth is old.
3. Therefore, we will test your hypothesis that a decaying magnetic field can
only be due to a young earth. IOW, we will try to falsify your hypothesis about the data."
Now, #3 is what Barnes
should have done, but he didn't want to.
Now the question became: what else (other than a young earth) could give a decreasing magnetic field? The answer was: magnetic fields reverse! So, now the hypothesis is: the magnetic field has reversed several times during earth's long history. The key here is:
can this hypothesis be tested INDEPENDENTLY of the age of the earth? The answer is yes.
1. You can run dynamos and see that the field reverses over time. Dynamos have nothing to do with the age of the earth.
2. You can look for the alignment of iron crystals in once molten rock. They will act like little magnets, freezing in place when the rock cools. Again, this is independent of the age of the earth, since you don't care when the rock has cooled, only that you see different directions for "north" from the magnets. And these have been found.
So, now we still have the evidence that falsifies a young earth, the evidence that supports an old earth, and a supported hypothesis that explains the decreasing magnetic field but is not the hypothesis that the earth is young.