How reliable is science? (Assumption 7/7) (The limitations of science)

by xeno6696 , Sonoran Desert, Monday, April 16, 2012, 01:27 (4603 days ago) @ dhw

(7) A basic assumption of all radioactive dating methods is that the clock had to start at the beginning; that is, no daughter products were present, only those elements at the top of the radioactive chain were in existence. For example, all the uranium 238 in the world originally had no lead 206 in it, and no lead 206 existed anywhere else. But if either Creation—or a major worldwide catastrophe (such as the Flood) occurred, everything would begin thereafter with, what scientists call, an "appearance of age."-This one revisits a prior section. -Modern cosmology has discussed and completely explained both the Big Bang and observations about the makeup of radioactive isotopes throughout the cosmos have remained consistent with what was predicted using the big bang model. -This final "assumption" the author objects to more or less states this:-"Our lord and savior, Jumpin Jehosephat, in his divine excellency decided to make the world appear much older than it really is, for reasons he hasn't revealed to us."-I'm done for today. This site really... really taxed me.

--
\"Why is it, Master, that ascetics fight with ascetics?\"

\"It is, brahmin, because of attachment to views, adherence to views, fixation on views, addiction to views, obsession with views, holding firmly to views that ascetics fight with ascetics.\"