Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A Guide to the Bait & Switch tactics of the Biblical Creationists
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 1 of 2 (364336)
11-17-2006 11:35 AM


I believe that it would be handy to present a list of the common Bait & Switch Tactics used by so many of the Biblical Creationist, ID and YEC websites and lecturers. With each tactic I would like to see an explanation presented of just why the tactic is a con.
The purpose of the thread is to give people a guide to help them identify when they are being conned.
I will start off with a VERY common tactic used related to dating.
One of the most common tactics I see used is misapplication of dating methods. An example is their reference to using 14C to show stuff is younger than claimed or using longer range dating methods to show that material that is actually young dates as older.
The reason that this is a con is that each method has a range where it will be effective. Outside that range what you get is a nonsense answer.
For example:
the 14C method is accurate out to about 50,000 (70,000 using newer ASM direct atom counting methods) years.
If you use 14C to date something that is really 20,000 years old you will get a reading of 20,000 years plus or minus some factor.
If you use 14C to date something that is really 200,000 years old you will get a reading of 50,000 years plus or minus some factor.
If you use 14C to date something that is really 2,000,000 years old you will get a reading of 50,000 years plus or minus some factor.
If you use 14C to date something that is really 20,000,000 years old you will get a reading of 50,000 years plus or minus some factor.
If you use 14C to date something that is really 200,000,000 years old you will get a reading of 50,000 years plus or minus some factor.
If you use 14C to date something that is really 2,000,000,000 years old you will get a reading of 50,000 years plus or minus some factor.
You cannot use a measuring tool to measure an item that is older than the maximum limits of that tool.
There is a second way that such sites misuse tools to fool the unwary. They use tools designed to measure very old things to show that some sample known to be young measures old.
Again, all that they are doing is misusing the tools to try to fool and con the unwary.
Let me give you an example.
A claim I have seen on many (unfortunately Christian) sites is of dating Hawaiian basalt using the potassium-argon method. The samples were known to be only 200 or so years old yet they got readings that were in the hundreds of thousands of years.
Well, frankly no shit. That is to be expected. The potassium-argon method has a usable range of from some 100,000 years to about 4,000,000,000 years.
If you date something that is actually 200,000 years old using the potassium-argon method you will get a reading of about 200,000 years.
If you date something that is actually 20,000 years old using the potassium-argon method you will get a reading of about 100,000 years.
If you date something that is actually 2,000 years old using the potassium-argon method you will get a reading of about 100,000 years.
If you date something that is actually 200 years old using the potassium-argon method you will get a reading of about 100,000 years.
It is like having a stick that is only marked off in yards and being asked to measure a barleycorn.
These people have chosen the tool designed to give the answer they want as opposed to the honest answer.
The big problem is that those posting such examples CLAIM to be scientists. Scientists should know that misusing tools will give you poor results as well as a carpenter knows that using a saw to drive nails is a misuse of the tool.
I hope that other members will post examples of tactics being used as well as ways to identify them.
First choice for forum would be Education and Creation/Evolution and my second choice would be Is It Science?

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024