From the Amazing Facts article "The Bible and Evolution"
"False Assumptions, Faulty Conclusions
But what about all the supposed scientific evidence that proves evolution? The truth is that the theory of evolution is based on huge assumptions about things that happened in the unobservable past. (Remember that the scientific method requires observation and repeatable research. So calling evolution “science” doesn’t make any sense.
For instance, the theory stands on dubious dating methods. One is carbon dating, a method used to date dead plants and animals. All living plants and animals contain the same ratio of two types of carbon, 14C and 12C, which they get from the atmosphere and from space. When an organism dies, 14C begins disintegrating while 12C levels remain constant. Thus, measuring the 14C/12C ratio in a dead plant makes it possible to estimate how long ago the plant died.
But to precisely determine the plant’s age, at least two questions must be answered: How fast does 14C decay? And how much 14C did the organism contain when it died? In answer to the first question, 14C has a half-life of 5,700 years. (A “half-life” is the amount of time required for half of the atoms — in this case, carbon atoms — in a given sample to decay.)
To answer the second question, scientists made an assumption that the atmosphere’s 14C/12C ratio has remained constant throughout earth’s history. If so, they argue accurate dating is possible up to about 80,000 years — after that the amount of 14C left in a specimen is so small it is undetectable. But if this assumption is wrong, any dates calculated by this method are untrustworthy.
In science experiments, assumptions are critical. But if the starting assumption is false, the ensuing experiment will lead a scientist to draw a flawed conclusion, even if his calculations appear correct. Willard Libby, the developer of carbon dating, drew his conclusions based on the assumption that the earth was millions of years old. He calculated that it would take about 30,000 years for an atmosphere’s 14C/12C ratio to reach equilibrium. When he discovered that earth’s ratio was not in equilibrium, meaning it must be younger than 30,000 years, he dismissed it as an experimental error!
Suppose you enter a room with one door and no windows. In the middle of the room, a burning candle sits on a table. With nothing else to do, you try to figure out how long the candle has been burning. You start by observing how fast the candle is currently burning; how many inches per hour, for example. Does that tell you how long it’s been burning? No, because you don’t know how tall it was when it started burning. Suppose a note on the table stipulates that the candle was three feet tall when it was first lit; now you can calculate how long it’s been burning based on how tall it was to begin with and how fast it’s burning now.
But wait. When you entered the room, the open door let in more oxygen, so now the candle would be burning at a faster rate than before. Even if you know the present oxygen level of the room, you wouldn’t know what it was before you opened the door. Without an observer taking careful notes during the entire process, you can only guess as there are simply too many unknowns to make an accurate calculation.
It’s the same with carbon dating: There are simply too many variables. Scientists don’t know how old the earth is because they don’t know and can’t observe what has happened in the past. Or how the environmental factors have changed. Amazingly, an entire religion has been established on these dubious assumptions. It seems strange then that evolutionists ridicule the faith of Christians. Believing in evolution requires far more faith than believing in creationism."
Click here to read the entire article.