Letters to the Editor: March 5, 2014

other_letters_editorRussell’s carbon dating is beyond scientific capacity

This is in regard to Marty Russell’s article on 2/24/14. The disdain that he (and for that matter Rheta Johnson) holds for Christianity and people who believe the Bible is very evident and consistent over the years. Marty wants to show how science contradicts the Bible and implies the majority of his neighbors, the ones who believe the Bible, are idiots. For example, he says, after supposedly showing unimpeachable evidence that the earth is 4.5 billion years old: “But wait, you say, how can that be? I thought the Earth was only about 6,000 years old and just popped into existence one day fully populated with people and platypuses.”

Marty opens his article by saying, “Scientists last week announced the discovery of one of the oldest things ever found on this planet …..based on carbon dating … dates back about 4.4 billion years.”

What? Carbon dating an age of 4.4 billion years? The anti-creationist National Center for Science Education says: “Radiocarbon dating doesn’t work well on objects much older than twenty thousand years ….”

Some other sources say 50,000 years or 100,000. But the limit is in the thousands for carbon dating. But Marty says 4.5 billion for carbon dating, estimating thousands of times beyond the technology?

Now, no big deal. Could just be a typo by Marty, he may have meant some other type of dating than carbon, something that could go back more than 50,000 years. But the point is: If you are going to write articles implying a lack of intelligence of people who come to a different conclusion than you do about what you think happened billions of years ago, it’’s better if you don’t make any blatant scientific errors yourself in the beginning of the article.

William Kline


Click video to hear audio