DATING EXAMPLE 1: THE PLATE THAT BREAKS THE RADIOMETRIC DATING BACK (Dr. Kurt Wise, Ph.D. from Harvard, shows plate tectonics now supports a young earth and can't work with an old earth)
I often ask atheists/Darwinians a question. How are you going to determine if some idea is perfect if you don't have a perfect standard to judge it to begin with. Ask scientists ~40 years ago to judge what was truth in regarding to continental drift/plate tectonics vs. geosynclinical cycles for example. Their textbooks and professors ridiculed continental drift and judged it false. But, now most people on all sides think that that plate tectonics is correct.
Did they have a perfect standard of judgment then? NO. Do we now? It would be pretty foolish to think so. The only entity with perfect knowledge and a perfect standard is God if He in fact exists as much objective evidence indicates (Believe in God in 5 minutes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQVm8RokoBA). No human establishment, atheistic, theistic, scientific, historical, educational or whatever is or ever has had all knowledge or been flawless. We need to question all establishments and follow the theory that has the best and most evidence regardless of whether it's the majority view or the minority view. Neither of those are good guides to find truth.
The area of plate tectonics is a very important issue for 3 reasons:
1) It shows how Darwinism sabotages and sets science back by decades, sending it down wrong roads.
2) It shows how Darwinism harm science by presupposing naturalism and that Genesis can't be true using the truth denying and science killing a priori fallacy of methodological naturalism.
3) It shows why no rational person should ever consider the contemporary consensus view of scientists, esp. secular scientists, to be infallible or certain. The consensus is sometimes right, but it's also been disproven time after time after time, 1000s of times.
4) It shows how naturalism harms lives because it claims that pseudoscience is true and basically infallible. This causes people to reject the Bible's claims and sometimes faith in God completely. And as 1000s of studies have documented, this causes enormous damage to many people at all levels of society, individual, family, community and nation and in some cases has been a direct factor in causing enormous injustice (capitalism/communism) and in some cases as Dr. Weikart has documented genocide.
The Biology of the Second Reich: Social Darwinism and the Origins of World War 1
"Progress through Racial Extermination: Social Darwinism, Eugenics, and Pacifism in Germany, 1860-1918," German Studies Review 26 (2003): 273-94. published by: Johns Hopkins University Press http://www.jstor.org/stable/1433326
Does Darwinism Devalue Human Life? by Richard Weikart,
published in "The Human Life Review", March 1, 2004, www.discovery.org/a/2172
It's a historical fact that continental drift which is a key foundation of plate tectonics was originally discovered and published on by a creationist, Antonio Snider, in 1858 in his book La Création et ses mystères dévoilés (Creation and its Mysteries Unveiled) based on creation thinking. But, it was rejected and ridiculed for decades because his scientific views were based on a global flood which had fallen into disfavor at that time and many of the intellectuals of that time were gungho in trying to reject anything connected with the Bible or a flood. He also had the misfortunate to publish it at about the time Darwin published his sensational claims which captured most of the attention at the time. So, Darwinian/secular scientists developed another hypothesis called geosynclinal cycle which has now been rejected by nearly all scientists (just like every version of universal common descent in history..and the modern synthesis is going down that same path now). Because these Darwinian/secular scientists presupposed that the Bible couldn't be true, they set back the science of plate tectonics by over 100 years. This one of many examples of how the Bible inspired good science and Darwinism crippled research in the right direction.
Robert Ballard, discover of the Titanic has this to say about his education on this topic:
"I'm a geophysicist and all my earth science books when I was a student, I had to give the wrong answer to get an A. We used to ridicule continental drift. It was something we laughed at. We learned of Marshall Kay's geosynclinal cycle, which is a bunch of crap."
Dr. Kurt Wise, a creationist with a Ph.D. in paleontology who studied under the famous Darwinian Stephen Gould at Harvard, gave a lecture about flood geology and shows with some depth how much VERY recent scientific evidence is showing that continental drift/plate tectonics had to have happened rapidly for many objective scientific reasons. Dr. Kurt Wise is someone with the highest integrity in science because he AGREES that there is evidence on BOTH sides of the debate (as anyone with integrity MUST, just as in sports where points on both sides must be recognized to be fair) and he shows this fairly at the beginning of the lecture (anyone who disagrees that there is evidence on both sides is not at all objective and can't fairly move to the next step of evaluating the evidence to find truth). But, then he goes on to show how if we look at all the available evidence, it's a much better fit with creation science theory and how really cool scientific discoveries have been made using creation science hypotheses. This evidence is a mammoth sized back breaker for old earth age concept. It is sort of like Pasteur's falsification of spontaneous generation..or close to it.
Chapel Spring 2014: Dr. Kurt Wise (The Genesis Lectures)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=slmhueHhk5I (esp. ~18:15+)
Dr. Kurt Wise, Dr. Baumgardner and several other scientists, both creationist and Darwinian have found significant evidence that shows that plate tectonics must have happened rapidly. His research has been cited by many scientists on all sides with the Darwinians of course increasing the ages to mythic proportions. The problem is that old age plate tectonics contradicts the observations that we have seen of nature and doesn't really function. When scientists are objective, this is a falsification.
There is one thing that Dr. Wise doesn't make clear. Biblical faith is not something we assume to be true and I don't think Dr. Wise believes that. It has the best track record of truth, accuracy, doing the best good for humanity in all history.
All Bible authors spoke of faith as based solidly on evidence, truth and proof. Only in the 1920s with a misguided Christian named Cornelius Van Til did the notion of faith being assumed gain significant support. See this for more on that:
We trust the Bible because it has been tested and proven true more than anything else in history, bar none. I think Kurt Wise believes this and is saying that because of the great track record and because we've proven God is real, we trust God above all else, including the views of experts now, since experts are repeatedly shown to be wrong over time. As Dr. Arbesman says, the half-life of truth is about 45 years, and what people think is true is proven wrong in part or whole in ~45 years.