Not blasphemous, just incorrect.
Vernon: <<We gather from this that the true context of the discussion is religious rather than scientific - a truth that is further confirmed by the deep faith displayed by 'old-earthers' in respect of radio-isotope decay.>>
Nice strawman. But there is no religious faith in radiometric dating, just pure observations and science. Nice attempt on your part to turn it into what it isn't.
Vernon: <<Following Pim's advice I obtained a copy of 'Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective' by Dr Roger Wiens. Here are a few extracts:>>
Vernon:<<1) " ...radioactive atoms used in dating techniques have been subjected
to heat, cold, pressure, vacuum, acceleration, and strong chemical reactions without any significant change in their decay rate." (p.3)>>
Thank you
Vernon:
<<2) "...for ages to appear longer than actual, all the half-lives would have to be changing in sync with one another." (p.13)>>
Thank you
Vernon: <<3) "It would not be inconsistent with the scientific evidence to conclude that God made everything relatively recently, but with the appearance of age..." (p.13)>
True, a deity can do anything. But then there is the question why would he deceive his people that way ?
Vernon: <<4) His response to the suggestion that decay rates might be slowing down over this time , leading to incorrect old dates: "While we cannot rule out that this could possibly have happened in the past, there is no evidence that anything of the sort has happened in the past century." (p.16) >>
Or before.
Vernon: <<Since the Earth is reputedly 4.5 - 4.6 billion years old and decay rates
have only been measured over the past 40 - 80 years, it follows that the
confidence placed on unchanging decay rates rests upon observations
covering a mere millionth of 1% of the total time. What an
extrapolation! Doesn't this require a faith that moves mountains? Where
do we find 'science' in all this? The sophisticated laboratory
techniques and strategies mean nothing if the hunch is wrong!>>
Where is the data suggesting that there is a change in decay rates ? Do you understand what the impact of this would be on other constants and behaviors ? But we have data from a supernova which shows that speed of light for instance has remained the same.
Vernon: The stimulus for the hunch, of course, is the belief that evolution must
be true >>
Nope, the stimulus is that there is no theoretical nor empirical support for changing decay rates.
Vernon: <<(which was precisely my contention re the geologic column!).>>
Another great example of your misunderstanding of facts.
Vernon: <<The integrity of that plank clearly rests on the gamble that decay rates have remained
constant throughout Earth history. It is ultimately on this that the now towering edifice of evolution rests! - and it is for this that a literal acceptance of the Scriptures has been sacrificed! The biblical parallel must be Jacob's brother Esau who surrendered his birthright for 'a mess
of pottage'! (Gen.25:29-34). How tragic it is that many Christians are
unable to reason these matters for themselves.>>
Indeed. I am sad to hear your insistance on miracles to explain your perhaps faulty interpretation of the Bible.
Vernon: <<Compounding the wickedness, I observe that the USGS Teacher's Guide
"Time and Change/ Using Radioactive Decay to Determine Geologic Age (for
grades 7 - 12) makes no mention of the possibility that decay rates
might have changed; surely a reprehensible omission - but, of course,
entirely in keeping with evolutionist strategy!>>
Yep, not only that but now Vernon accuses and implies improper behavior. I would say that Vernon sounds truely on the wrong track.
I admire Vernon's faith but it surely has lead him on a slippery path of ignorance and accusations. Does not sound like a path Christ would have followed.