Why Do Scientists Trust Flawed Methods? | The Institute for Creation Research

Why Do Scientists Trust Flawed Methods?

Last month, the Creation Q & A column briefly answered the following question: Does radioisotope dating prove that the earth is millions of years old? We offered four reasons why radioisotope dating does not work.1 Whenever this information is presented to a live audience, someone usually asks the next question.

Q: If radiodating can be scientifically falsified, then why do most scientists continue to trust these flawed methods?

A: Often, those who ask this question assume that scientists objectively weigh all evidence as though they have no biases. But people cannot do science without some set of beliefs about origins, destiny, and meaning. Scientists choose research questions that conform to their pre-existing beliefs, introducing bias at the outset. All experimental results are likewise interpreted according to beliefs, adding more bias to an investigator’s conclusion. Secular scientists trust the million-year time ranges that faulty radiodating methods present for at least four reasons.

First, long ages fit their belief that natural processes, not God, generated man, life, the earth, and the universe. Aligning their results with their belief system can be more important than validating the reliability of radiodating. Peter foresaw that nature-only heresies like these would infect the church.2 He warned believers to refute scoffers who “willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water.”3

In addition, many scientists are “men, who hold [down] the truth in unrighteousness.”4 They may be familiar with the scientific and logical evidence against radiodating, but they suppress this knowledge. In a way, they lie to themselves to ease their pretension that the Bible’s history is wrong or that the holy Creator either does not exist or is distant and unconcerned—views that help justify immorality. Some scientists accept faulty radiodating methods in order to make their sinful lifestyles feel less shameful.

Another reason scientists might cling to faulty dating methods is to retain their secular jobs. The film Expelled5 and the book Slaughter of the Dissidents6 documented credentialed scientists who found their names blacklisted within the scientific community after they dared to question Darwinian dogma. Sadly, this world may never know what fruitful contributions they could have made. Outcasts serve as examples for their peers, demonstrating the consequences of open dissent from status quo doctrines such as dating the earth in millions of years.

Finally, many scientists have never encountered a reason to distrust radiodating. Geology textbooks do not explain its shortcomings, so scientists are not taught to question the results of radiodating. Often after ICR events, scientists will express surprise that they had achieved advanced degrees without ever hearing the specific, legitimate reasons to distrust radiodating.

Those who trust incorrect radiodating age estimates may purposefully limit their knowledge to concepts consistent with their secularized beliefs or sinful choices. Some fear job loss, while others have never heard or fathomed an alternative.

References

  1. In summary, the four reasons we explained in the February Acts & Facts were:
    1) These methods assume that the system’s decay rate is always constant, but experiments show decay rates do fluctuate.
    2) Radioisotope methods often yield grossly old ages for rocks known to be young.
    3) Excessive helium atoms emitted by radiodecay are found trapped in granite crystals. The helium atoms should have escaped the crystals within thousands of years, thus radioisotopes in granites decayed much faster in the past than they do today.
    4) Short-lived polonium radiohalos found next to uranium radiohalos must have formed within a window of several weeks while the granite was at the right temperature to record them.
  2. See 2 Peter 2:1.
  3. 2 Peter 3:5.
  4. Romans 1:18.
  5. Stein, B. 2008. Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed. DVD. Directed by Nathan Frankowski. Premise Media Corporation, L.P.
  6. Bergman, J. 2008. Slaughter of the Dissidents. Southworth, WA: Leafcutter Press.

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research.

Cite this article: Thomas, B. 2013. Why Do Scientists Trust Flawed Methods? Acts & Facts. 42 (3): 19.

The Latest
NEWS
Microscopic Ingenuity: Stentor and the Case for Intelligent Design
What if the smallest creatures held the biggest clues to life’s design? A 2025study in Nature Physics investigates the remarkable behaviors of...

CREATION PODCAST
Dr. Jeff Tomkins | A Scientist's Journey to Creationism | The...
ICR’s science staff have spent more than 50 years researching scientific evidence that refutes evolutionary philosophy...

NEWS
Early Fish Evolution?
The discovery of a new species of a plant or animal would probably not spark much excitement to the non-scientist. But in this case, the conditions...

NEWS
Make Plans to Attend Our Estate Planning Workshop at the Discovery...
Did you know that up to 75% of Americans over 18 have no retirement or estate plans? Don’t wait to prepare for the future. Join us on Saturday, October...

NEWS
Fossil Confusion in Ethiopia: Are Evolutionary Trees Built on...
A new study published in Nature describes the discovery of 13 fossilized teeth from the Ledi-Geraru site in Ethiopia. They have been dated to between...

NEWS
The Only Mesozoic Dragonfly in Canada—Is a Dragonfly
In 2023, an undergraduate student from McGill University discovered a new dragonfly species in Alberta, Canada. In fact, “This is the first ever...

CREATION PODCAST
Dr. Jake Hebert | Journey to ICR | The Creation Podcast: Episode...
ICR’s science staff have spent more than 50 years researching scientific evidence that refutes evolutionary philosophy...

NEWS
Oldest Evidence of Butterflies
Insects such as the ubiquitous butterfly belong to the huge phylum Arthropoda (creatures having paired, jointed appendages and a chitinous exoskeleton)....

NEWS
Another Big Mistake in Evolution
The strange and wonderful coelacanth1 has long been a challenge to evolutionists. The coelacanth has long been hailed as an ancestor...

ACTS & FACTS
ICR 2025 Resource Catalog
At the Institute for Creation Research, our mission is not only to conduct research demonstrating how science confirms Scripture but also to share this...