Radiometric dating--the process of determining the age of rocks from the decay of their radioactive elements--has been in widespread use for over half a century.
There’s not much to debate about these views: One is fact, based on empirical scientific evidence; the other is fiction, based on biblically inspired fantasy.
Nye is an earnest educator; Ham is an exploitative fabulist.
One proposal that has been made by creation scientists to account for this seeming discrepancy between secular science view and the creationist viewaccelerated nuclear decay (abbreviated herein as ACCND). If the rate at which sand moves through the hourglass were accelerated by temporarily widening the neck, allowing more sand to fall through faster, we would have a lot more sand in the bottom half.
Someone might look at the hourglass and conclude, based on the large amount of sand in the bottom part (or the amount of radioisotope decay products in a specimen), that a long time had passed. What perspective should we have when we investigate one of God's greatest miracles, the creation of all living things?
If decay rates were faster in the past, then even the C14 dates could be too old.
Carbon 14 is an isotope of carbon with two extra neutrons in the nucleus. The rate at which this happens varies to some extent.
Organic matter in the fossil record generally dates by carbon 14 (C14) dating to about 20,000 to 40,000 years. Many creationists believe that radioactive decay was faster in the past.
Other radioactive dating methods such as potassium/argon (K/Ar), rubidium/strontium (Rb/Sr), uranium/lead (U/Pb), thorium/lead (Th/Pb) and others that are based on decay of longer-lived isotopes often give ages in the millions or hundreds of millions of years for these fossils. However, in this talk I want to concentrate on reasons to believe the C14 dates are more accurate and that they give evidence that all life on earth is very young.
Wiens has a Ph D in Physics, with a minor in Geology.
His Ph D thesis was on isotope ratios in meteorites, including surface exposure dating.
Perhaps there was less C14 produced in the past, which would imply that even the relatively young C14 dates are too old. It is used to tell time based on an assumed rate at which the sand moves through the neck of the hourglass.