Rebutting Genesis Impact 8 - Radiometric Dating

Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @aronra
Here is a link to the whole playlist:
• Rebutting Foundations ...
I am addressing this pseudoscience apologetics video, "Genesis Impact"
• Genesis Impact (Full M...
www.pnas.org/d...
If you like what I do, please consider supporting my efforts.
PATREON► / aronra
PAYPAL► www.paypal.me/...

[@sphericalchess]

Biased actor successfully defeats another biased actor in a carefully scripted series of plays about subjects that neither of them knows anything.

[@page8301]

That encapsulates what this (s)hit piece on evolution entails quite well.

[@CaptFoster5]

About the only positive thing that can be said about all the actors in that nonsense religious diatribe is the lead actress is at least easy on the eyes. Overall, the acting on the part of everyone was middle school level at best. No offense to middle school drama class students

[@EdwardHowton]

It's kind of funny that Jon B. seems to think the girl is just sincerely wrong and the docent is 1) an actual docent and B. just really bad at his job. The way he talks, it's like he thinks they're just honestly wrong instead of paid actors lying to a script.

[@dross4207]

It’s almost as if they are playing the role in a personal fantasy skit, one where they get up on stage and befuddle a scienctist with their scientific prowess. Unfortunately for them, they only get to realize their fantasies amongst each other.

[@averyzaliasylvia4026]

But she's cute tho 👌😂

[@TirarADeguello]

I would love to see a parody version of this where a Museum Docent is confronted by a creationist, only for the reverse to happen, and he corrects all her propaganda and mistruths?

[@nicholaskalemusic982]

Isn't this the parody of reality? I'd imagine a phone camera could do this in many museums around the world on an almost daily basis

[@braelonoliver3529]

Nothing more satisfying then watching a creationist get blasted with facts.

[@Krocodillian]

I believe this would be the reality of this exchange

[@katieheys3007]

They'd just stick their fingers in their ears and go "lalala god diddit"

[@dross4207]

You just have to watch a debate with Aron Ra or Prof Dave against one of these people to realize that wish.

[@chriscasperson5927]

When is Wanda Wonderwig going to collect her Nobel Prize for her groundbreaking work in Nuclear Physics? Asking for a friend.

[@johngleeman8347]

Thank you for reminding me of the character's "official" name. XD

[@gaynomadic]

The only prize she has any chance of winning is for making anyone who listens to her puke.

[@Shermanbay]

And when is Answers in Genesis going to win ANY Nobel prize for research?

[@matthewtucker2103]

I'd say whenever thier God shows up and explains how they are correct. Too bad that'll never happen. Ever.

[@Z4r4sz]

I always ask creationists that question. They ignore it or stop talking.

[@craig3226]

Aron has experts in all different scientific backgrounds on his channel. The apologists have diploma mill know nothings as their “experts”. I never get tired of seeing apologists getting dunked on repeatedly

[@Akira625]

These apologists are so blatantly and shamelessly dishonest, while at the same time they expect others to believe that they are some sort of moral authority.

[@zemorph42]

Or if they are real experts on the apologists' shows, they almost never speak within their fields, or they lie about the facts they definitely were trained better(because their work in those fields show that they know better) about.

[@amodernalchemist432]

And their diplomas were from religious colleges or universities. Where they don't teach by science and facts but by scriptures and mythology!

[@Knightyme]

Very easy to win arguments like this when the script for the actors in the movie is written as such.

[@Pablo668]

I have to say it is quite disconcerting to know I am living in an age where too many people have stopped listening to experts in a given field.

[@DermotKieran1]

@@EdGein542 Hmmm, creating a brand new account just to make an idiotic post. I totally guessing here's, but I strongly suspect that you are either an ignorant creationist or a shit stirring troll.

[@ErrantMasa]

@@DermotKieran1 why not both? but if ya ask me, eddy-boy here is a yipping inflatable meatclown.

[@Leszek.Rzepecki]

The problem is, when you are faced with religious fundies who have a vested religious (and it has to be said, pecuniary) interest in maintaining biblical literalism, is they'll only cite isolated bits of evidence they can spin to suit their narrative, and simply ignore the mountains of evidence that would bury it if they dared acknowledge it. They don't do or acknowledge honest science. They are, in a word, liars. Lyin' fer Jeebus ain't no sin!

[@fredarroyo7429]

Sounds like you don’t know what you are talking about

[@Leszek.Rzepecki]

@@fredarroyo7429 I've talked to Christian evangelical fundies for almost 30 years. Never met one who understood biology.

[@Carlphish]

As a recovering young earth creationist I absolutely needed what you’re doing here. It is SO easy to find the confirmation bias data. YEC arguments are all over the place in public media like KZbin. We need someone like you who is slow and methodical and refutes each point being made one by one with experts working in the fields rather than just seeing the one person who is ideologically committed to finding the wrong answer like we see in these creationist studies.

[@realmchat6665]

Their media is so creepy and cringe.

[@EdwardHowton]

If radiometric dating's assumptions about the reliability of decay rates as a dating mechanism are wrong, here's what happens: the planet explodes in a ball of incandescent plasma. If radioactive decay as "faster" to the tune of "we think the universe is 14.7 billion years old but it's actually 6,000 years old" then ALL the energy released by radioactive decay (and everything else for that matter) has to be released two and a half million times faster. Put something in a slow cooker for 48 hours, add up all the energy you dumped into your meal, and then try dumping all of that same amount of energy into an identical meal in exactly five microseconds. Drop a nuke on it, basically, and even that's too slow. What happens to the second one? It's the heat problem. Gutsick Gibbon's favorite debunk of YEC nonsense, which YECs have simultaneously 1. _recalculated on their own and MADE WORSE_ and 2. _dismiss with a handwave and a 'we can't solve this so God did a magic trick so it's fine.'_ The same amount of energy has to exist in both cases. In an old universe, that's alright; heat can radiate out into space so it never adds up too much. In a young magic-godman universe all that heat gets dumped into the planet in one ridiculously fast go and makes atomic bonds impossible, never mind idiotic wooden zoo-boat fairytales. A slow cooker heats up, but it radiates excess heat into the room. Releasing a massive amount of energy all at once is called *_a bomb._* The dumb hick pastor and his bimbo useful idiot think making the entire planet explode in a ball of plasma is a good plan for disproving evolution. Good luck with that, twits.

[@r1pster05]

In a similar vein, the "variable speed of light" argument fails when you consider the whole E=mc2 thing; make light 100 times faster, and you'll blow yourself to smithereens lighting a match.

[@RichWoods23]

I resolved the heat problem by changing Boltzmann's Constant. Unfortunately the sun then went out (although only after flash-frying the inner planets with gamma rays). I tried to stop the sun from going out by changing Planck's Constant, but then the atomic bonds in the molecules of the solar system dissolved and all the planets disintegrated into monatomic dust. I think we can conclude that any YEC who makes the fine-tuning argument is not allowed to challenge uniformitarianism, and vice-versa. And yet this still isn't an argument *for* fine-tuning.

[@chezeus1672]

and thus, after not proving any gods in any way, the "finetuning argument" came back to bite the theologian in the ass.

[@FrozEnbyWolf150]

Reminds me of how if the YECs are correct, not only does radiation need to occur at a hyper accelerated rate, but also evolution has to occur at a super fast rate. They utilize the very thing they were trying to disprove, and make it way more extreme in the process. I would add a third item, which is that the development of human civilization would have to occur at an accelerated rate, since all the social and technological progress humans have made would need to be squeezed down into 6,000 years. If that's the case, then I think we've clearly moved beyond the need for Bronze Age fairy tales and superstitious thinking.

[@shadowmax889]

@@r1pster05 with the variable speed of light, is even worse than what you said. C, as a universal constant, is in the formula for gravity, strong nuclear force (gluons travel at c) and electromagnetism. Any change of the value of C would change all the fundamental forces of nature

[@thebravesoul]

I got God's Not Dead vibes from this scripted argument. I do however know the exodus happened. Aron Ra led me out of captivity to those nonsensical beliefs.

[@lesfreresdelaquote1176]

This is always the same problem. Media have transformed scientific consensus into one opinion among others. We see it playing at length with climate change, which by way, is handled by certain corporations with exactly the same communication tools as the ones that were used to seed confusion into the tobacco issue. In France, but I suspect it is the same in the US, every time scientists are invited to a talkshow, the journalists will always invite some agressive weirdos to contradict their assertions, you know to _balance_ the information. As if a PhD professor with 20 years of experience in a field was on the same footing as someone who has searched the internet for an hour, with a jolly level of confirmation bias.

[@pansepot1490]

Yup. How (bad) the media reports on science is a big problem.

[@chezeus1672]

you see, if some dipshit with a whole minute of google search experience has the same confidence level as the professor, it's basically equal between the two...

[@Z4r4sz]

Fox news does exactly that in the US.

[@hob991]

Fox news makes a LOT of money from sensationalism, whoever said it had to be the truth or even close?

[@CookiesRiot]

​@@pansepot1490 which is why YEC outlets almost invariably use pop science news articles instead of peer-reviewed scientific literature to address nearly any topic. AiG's entire Answers News segment is literally just reading from news articles which are littered with [probably unintentionally] misleading or erroneous information and then lambasting them with even worse replies. This script is basically a highlight reel of Genesis Apologetics articles which cite the same sorts of news sites or other Creationist sources.

[@dr_ned_flanders]

These Genesis Impact videos are about as convincing as a Dhar mann video. We're not just telling stories, we're making shit up.

[@lnsflare1]

I thought that you said "Genshin Impact" for a moment, and after my brain finished rebooting from that I realized that game actually does scientific research in a world with actual gods and magic better than any Creationists I've seen, including a random NPC talking about how he's got a hypothesis that the world is round, but all the actual research and experiments he performs keeps indicating that it's flat (and a lot of the secret/lost information we ourselves can find in the game seem to be pointing towards the world actually being flat).

[@posivy]

You see...

[@vasedasg]

Adult actress debunking someone paid to pretend to be scientific in order to promote pseudoscience

[@kylebookout1789]

That hurts my head. Lol

[@nagranoth_]

8:40 riiiiiiggghhhtt... he just happened to have that slide on his computer (why a "professor" would have a slide with the false results of dishonestly manipulated tests that only creationists pretend are valid is a whole other story), and she just happened to know where to find it even though even he didn't know about it. Very realistic, much convincing.

[@SR-ry6hs]

😊😊 22:35 25:08 😊 26:39

[@kellydalstok8900]

He’s not even pretending to be a professor but a (not necessarily expert) docent.

[@iansaxby9264]

The parade of guest experts on this series has been awesome. Nice work, everyone!

[@JesusIsTheSaviour-hr7pj]

#JESUS FIRST Jesus Desires Your Life To Be With Him

[@iansaxby9264]

@@JesusIsTheSaviour-hr7pj Please keep your imaginary friends to yourself, there's a good lad.

[@JesusIsTheSaviour-hr7pj]

@@iansaxby9264 #JESUS FIRST Jesus Desires Relationship All Things Are Made Through Him

[@JesusIsTheSaviour-hr7pj]

@@iansaxby9264 #JESUS FIRST The Lord Jesus Only Looks At Whom You Are In Him

[@JesusIsTheSaviour-hr7pj]

@@iansaxby9264 #JESUS FIRST Salvation Is In No Other Besides Jesus And i Wake Up On The 7th Minute After Sharing The Gospel He's The Christ

[@silviu-georgepantelimon1423]

I know it's not like beating a dead horse, it's more like nuking a cambrian fossil but knowing how much the Noah's flood series helped some people this surely will do the same.

[@thebravesoul]

It helped me leave Christianity

[@JesusIsTheSaviour-hr7pj]

#JESUS FIRST Jesus Desires Fellowship With You And He Pursues You Anyway

[@JesusIsTheSaviour-hr7pj]

@@thebravesoul #JESUS FIRST I Wake Up On The 7th Minute After Sharing The Gospel

[@JesusIsTheSaviour-hr7pj]

@@thebravesoul #JESUS FIRST Come Back Too The Father

[@ljramirez]

@@JesusIsTheSaviour-hr7pj imagine believing in ghosts like a dumfuk...

[@page8301]

They closed the comment section. Figures that these cowards would do so.

[@WilbertLek]

ALL their videos are such.

[@Leszek.Rzepecki]

Yeah, none of these propagandists open their comments, they know they'd get blown out of the water!

[@page8301]

@@WilbertLek Figures.

[@vincentcomeau7844]

Of course they closed the comment section. This is a religious sermon and during such sermons, everyone needs to sit down and be quiet because no one is allowed to ask questions.

[@chezeus1672]

you're funny. goebbels didn't want anyone in the sportpalast who wouldn't mindlessly scream "yes", either. bullshit propaganda doesn't work nearly as well if you allow people to explain why it's bullshit.

[@michaelramon2411]

Girl: "All of your scientific theories require assumptions, unlike belief in God and the Bible, which demand no assumptions whatsoever!"

[@fredarroyo7429]

Every single person will make one assumption

[@QueenB33-s3b]

I'm starting to think maybe the actress was chosen to be the eye candy for all the poor, sad repressed fundy males who fell victim to Purity culture.

[@mitch.el420]

how does this not have more views already?!

[@tschorsch]

It's only been out less than an hour and it's ridiculously early in the morning in North America

[@randalltufts3321]

Its unbearably hard to watch her create loopholes where none exist lol

[@antiHUMANDesigns]

Lawrence Krauss is correct. He's talking about a physical nothing -- what you get when you remove everything that can be removed, so that you have nothing left to remove. Because he is a physicist, talking about physical things, he must obviously refers to physical nothingness, not a "conceptual" or "philosophical" nothingness, which is not something that could ever be real to begin with, because it is nonsensical.

[@Vandalia1998]

Can they at least get Better scripts for the actors pretending to be Scientists

[@katieheys3007]

Seriously!

[@chezeus1672]

no, they can't. if the straw man is solid enough to not catch fire on its own, they can't knock it down anymore.

[@brianstevens3858]

If we understood people as well as we understand radioactive decay, we would be able to tell you why otherwise smart can people believe stupid things.

[@simongiles9749]

We kind of do.

[@brianstevens3858]

OH wait:: we can and we now have that word RJ coined for the resultant of those processes. {Tortucan}.

[@brianstevens3858]

@@simongiles9749 Yea: I was building up to it. lol

[@WilbertLek]

Indoctrination into emotional investment...

[@katieheys3007]

Hahaha the dramatic music at the start is hilarious! GOTCHA ATHEISTS! If this apparent professor didn't know, they'd say "I don't know but let me find out" rather than that ridiculous moment

[@martinmckee5333]

To be honest, the music was *really* bugging me. It is so aggressively manipulative... and it no doubt works. Using it certainly wasn't an accident. It was done with a purpose.

[@jaredgreen2363]

It’s physically impossible for decay rates to change. Even in the one experiment where one decay rate appeared to change, the process observed is more akin to fission.

[@mathiasrryba]

They are perfectly aware that their argument for "but how do we know the decay rates were the same?" implies that the laws of physics would, too, change. Some like to argue that it's those changing laws of physics that allowed, somehow, for Noah's flood to happen, or at least solving the Heat Issue.

[@r1pster05]

Iirc it also required converting the sample of bismuth to 6 million degree plasma, conditions unlikely to exist in a volcano.

[@RecMike]

​@@mathiasrryba Isn't it interesting how they'll say something like "a universe in which everything is fine tuned...where if even one parameter was different, nothing would exist" then say that decay rates and associated heat, continental drift, etc all changed for an unknown but relatively short time to miraculously make the flood even remotely possible? They're so stupid it hurts.

[@mathiasrryba]

@@RecMike lol yea

[@mathfairy]

The whole premise of this "movie" is so next level cringe... Watch how we make a movie where we pretend to debunk science, and we are the heroes against the evil educated people... because in a movie, we can do this, so it must be true in reality also.

[@Duchess_Van_Hoof]

It is like they heard that science educators debunk their bullshit and went "We can do that to" and decided to write a script with a strawman docent. Either they do not understand that lying undermines their integrity and their position, or they do not care.

[@ThatGuy-ot1gt]

Let me guess.. Volcanic rock?

[@simongiles9749]

Yep. Ticked off the Mt St Helens square on my YEC bingo card.

[@lukemartin8975]

Seems like the only way creationists are only ever going to win arguments is in a scripted debate

[@vidarlystadjohansen9829]

just bumping your algorithm

[@craiggoldberg1539]

Anyone ever ask them why the stupid looking wig and why they have her talk like that? Why is everything they do making a parody out of themselves?

[@kellydalstok8900]

Acting, apparently, is another subject creationists are ignorant on.

[@MetallicAAlabamA]

The day I see 99% of scientists or professors sit back and let apologetic religious nonsense leave them pondering their life choices, will be the day I sky dive with no parachute. Cause either a god is real and he will save me before I hit the ground. Or I've lost my will to live because I've stopped being rational. Either way, it's not happening lol.

[@philwhitehouse4290]

At least Chief Wiggum's daughter Wanda makes a better case than Ralph would have.

[@dethspud]

Every accusation a confession with these folks.

[@r0bw00d]

Damn! Cancer Girl keeps hitting home runs! Who knew that science was so flemsy that a teenager can out think an expert? I want to hear her thoughts on medicine, technology, and agriculture next! Where's Part II, Mr. Docent?!

[@kellydalstok8900]

Or she could have alopecia. Whatever it is, the whig makes her look like a creepy realistic robot.

[@istvansipos9940]

02:16 since we can't go back in time to watch juni0r and his spells, some clear model of magic would be nice to hear. A testable claim. Yes, it can be about micro magic, too.

[@WilbertLek]

A rabbit out of a hat, for example...

[@dustinfurness2155]

Wow. Before Jonathan Baker got on to respond I already saw huge flaws in her claims. In terms of uranium-lead in zircons it’s partly because zirconium can incorporate uranium but it doesn’t incorporate lead during the formation of zircons so it is “assumed” that the starting lead is 0%. It’s partly because there are two different isotopes of uranium in the same zircon. It’s partly because we have whole decay chains for both isotopes. We can assume that radon and lead were both completely absent during formation. And also, potassium-argon isn’t useful for less than a couple hundred years (i.e. the Mount Saint Helens example) but it does confirm the eruption to the year for the eruption of Mount Vesuvius when it destroyed Pompeii.

[@kiwiruna9077]

To paraphrase our favorite Gibbon-The Fossil Fuel industry will beg to differ

[@MarkC88]

Another fantastic guest. Dr Baker explained the topic very well but clearly has an understanding of common creationist pitfalls which really helps with the communication.

[@mattfrazier5025]

The continuing saga of Wanda Wonderwig and The Evil "Evolutionists". Ready to facepalm

[@fepeerreview3150]

Aron Ra - Thank you for taking on this series. I find it almost painful to watch because AIG's work is such propaganda, almost cultish in its attempts to emotionally manipulate and deceive their audience. You make it bearable to watch while also brilliantly exposing their falsehoods and deceptions.

[@mosherj666]

Despite the overwhelming body of evidence for a natural evolution of the universe and everything in it, Ijust don't get why, or how, these people can still hold onto this supernatural fantasy. Holding to this deluded, pre-scientific, Bronze/Iron Age myth, despite so much evidence against it, and with no evidence whatsoever for their own beliefs, is why I strongly believe that an adherence to a belief in creationism is tantamount to mental illness.

[@marcolorenti9637]

Sadly the religious inheritance from the obsolete past is still strong, as is the following indoctrination, and adults grown up with those lies have an hard time leaving their delusion. That's the damage religions can do. They are disappearing but it's a slow process.

[@kellydalstok8900]

@@marcolorenti9637 Als, they breed faster. Educated people tend to have fewer children and later in life.

[@thecollector6746]

Fear of the unknown.

[@puppyash9656]

She's gonna say st Helens. She's gonna say St Helens. She's gonna- Student: Mount St Helen! Me: well color me totally unfazed.

[@charlestownsend9280]

The first point that it's highly unlikely therefore it couldn't have happened and must have been magic shouldn't have stumped the professor at all. Just cause it's unlikely it doesn't mean it's impossible, especially in such a huge universe, the probability for abiogenesis might be 1 in a trillion but in a universe as large as ours and with 14 billion years, it would have happened at some point somewhere. Literally half a minute in and it's already painful. I also like how they give scientists the creationist mentality or jumping to another point when they don't know how to defend the current one. Everyone has to be as dishonest as they are.

[@CookiesRiot]

The Creationist obsession with how "likely" something sounds and how to shoehorn their intuitive idea of likelihood into statistical math is frustrating. Something with a statistical probability of 0 can be physically possible in mathematics, as in the probability of hitting a single point or even a circle on a dartboard (points and curves have no area, but the probability is calculated by area of the board). They also like to compare to winning lotteries, without the wherewithal to realize the difference between somebody winning the lottery (a mundane occurrence with essentially a 1 in 1 chance) to accidentally randomly choosing in advance who the winner of a specific lottery will be (1 in millions). And then they arbitrarily conflate the latter with the universe as if a metaphor about mathematically pure randomness has any correlation to the outcomes of natural processes. Genetic change is not a random process; there is some apparently random input, but it is constrained by predictable effects. Their application of pseudo-statistics to push an intuitive conclusion is typically not just wrong on the face of it, but has fractal wrongness that becomes more painful the deeper you dig.

[@Stratosarge]

When someone brings up the "what is the probability of this and this prebiotic event happening" I just respond with the question of what is the probability of the Maillard's reaction. Because that points out the stupidity of the question.

[@EnkiduIX]

I think it's a funny propaganda technique, how they keep panning to the erstwhile audience as the 'docent' speaks. The audience keeps expressing doubt or incredulity at what he's saying, as if reality is determined by what makes sense to the un- or under-educated.....

[@Leszek.Rzepecki]

Well, when you consider the words put in the docent's mouth, I'd say a dose of incredulity is indeed called for. The idiots who wrote the script don't know a hell of a lot about evolution!

[@CookiesRiot]

They're also using really on-the-nose character decisions to play the girl as an underdog coming out on top and the docent as an arrogant idiot, but the attempt to portray meek and humble to avoid coming across as a condescending prick is both grating and unconvincing. The quiet stammering and closed posture clinging to the clipboard is either an infuriatingly terrible acting choice by the actress or (more likely, I think) a cringe-inducing director's note.

[@smashexentertainment676]

Young christian student is challenging a priest and not a real evolutionary biologist. All you need to know about this movie. I mean a lot don't like Dawkins, but I've seen his lecture in a religious class where he made students ask and answer their own questions and then took 'em on a field trip. Although it didn't deconvert anyone, but at least kids started being a little more skeptical.

[@TecknoNinja]

Its about as fake as her wig!

[@page8301]

In the grand scheme of things Dawkins was fairly progressive for his generation. It is a shame that he struggles to keep up now. Remember though, you too might struggle to keep up with current societal and scientific changes when you are past 80. The older you get the more difficult it becomes to change.

[@Leszek.Rzepecki]

I've had differences with Dawkins recently over his antediluvian attitudes towards sexual minorities which might as well have come straight from a fundie church, but his prior work on evolution and countering theistic BS still stands robust as an example of how to do good science. He's just one of the last people I'd quote in support of science these days, as I'm not sure he retains all his marbles.

[@smashexentertainment676]

@@Leszek.Rzepecki I'm not a fan of Dawkins in any way, I was just amazed by his such an elegant way to deal with indoctrinated kids, that's all. A video is called: Richard Dawkins Teaches Evolution to Religious Students. I disagree with him on many points myself and veganism is one of them, yet he's a brilliant biologist and a teacher tho. Somehow all theists believe that atheists worship Dawkins, even tho it's perhaps the opposite. But you can expect dishonesty from theists.

[@Leszek.Rzepecki]

@@smashexentertainment676 Oh, I agree, his past contributions to this are justifiably praiseworthy. Pity he's just come off the rails recently.

[@hob991]

A bad actress talking to a priest in his own church with a load of creationists chirping in from the darkness.

[@parabellum4622]

Did she say that they knew that, that rock was 10 years old? Hollup wait they saw this rock being born?!

[@martinmckee5333]

Well, yes. Radiometric time is reset when a rock is melted. So, lava solidifying after a volcanic eruption is equivalent to its "birth". Not that that helps the argument any, as there are plenty of ways they could have gotten incorrect dates regardless, but the whole "we know the age of this rock" thing isn't actually unreasonable in itself.

[@parabellum4622]

@@martinmckee5333 That's actually what I meant... Her dates have had to be incorrect.

[@tron.44]

My brain is recreating these scenes in this biased garbage of a film. And in this particular scene, the docent is finishing his beat down of the adult in a wig who is "correcting" the docent. He is actively correcting her face with a radiometrically dated baseball bat, no god required!

[@Waniou137]

Every time I see Creationists bring up a bunch of numbers like "radiometric dating showed rocks from Mt St Helens to be 340,000 years old", I'm always reminded something one of my professors at uni said: "If you're not showing the error number in your answer, you're not doing science, you're doing aromatherapy." Those results should be 340,000 ± 100,000 or something or whatever the actual error is. I suspect a big part of why they don't do this (besides the fact they almost certainly wouldn't calculate it properly and wind up with a far too small figure) is because I have genuinely seen more naive creationists say something like "radiometric dating showed the age to be 1 million years ± 1 million years." In other words, the rock is anywhere between 0 years old and 2 million years old and that accidentally proves that yes, the rock is actually new.

[@CookiesRiot]

In fairness, Dr. Austin actually does include error bars. He dates some compounds between 0.34±0.06 Ma or 2.8±0.6 Ma and the general rock containing them at 0.35±0.05 Ma. But, of course, this is only published in the "Creation ex Nihilo Technical Journal" [now called "Journal of Creation"], which is _not peer-reviewed_ and *is owned by Genesis Apologetics (who made this film).*

[@chezeus1672]

@@CookiesRiot is an error this large normal in geology? +-17%? "could be almost anything from a to 1.41 times a" doesn't sound like a very useful result. it's been a while, but the first phrase that comes to my mind when i read about an error this big is "chaos theory".

[@CookiesRiot]

@@chezeus1672 Potassium-40 has an insanely long half-life, so the distinction between several thousand years is almost immeasurable, and the equipment required to get good results is prohibitively expensive. Austin took his samples to a lab which explicitly stated they could not reliably measure K-Ar with enough accuracy to date less than 2 million years, and the type of equipment they used is known for getting "memory" results from previous samples leaving enough argon to detect. Less than 0.00000002% of the potassium-40 in a rock formed 30 years before measurement would decay to argon-40. You would have to sample a rock bigger than your fist to find a cubic millimeter of argon scattered throughout it. A sample the size of a virus would maybe have a single decayed atom in that time. Edit: If you are dating something from hundreds of millions of years ago, though, an error bar less than a million years is useful. Does it matter that much to a general audience whether the dinosaurs died 65Mya or 66Mya? There are people who argue that the difference in a yard and a meter is basically irrelevant, and that's nearly 10% off.

[@chezeus1672]

@@CookiesRiot so the answer is no, it's not normal to choose a method with a giant error on purpose. now i'm just surprised he didn't use bismuth-209 for the biggest possible error.

[@CookiesRiot]

@@chezeus1672 Reminiscing on Potholer54's, "Oi, Hovind! We can't carbon-date this; there's no f***ing carbon in it!"

[@bryanreidsands6854]

My family was in a big Ford Station wagon. That's right. A land yacht. We named it Evinrude. We pulled into a JCPenny parking lot to watch the black plume on the horizon. In the following days, the ash fell like grey snow. When it stopped, there was about 8 inches of ash on everything.

[@randalltufts3321]

Creationists manufacture loop holes 🕳 😆 where none exist.

[@davidwatson2399]

Disgusting blatant lies from start to finish.😠 They dont even follow their own commandments.

[@northshoregirl8173]

Ugh. There's no way that they don't know that they're cherry picking. They've put way too much work in to find some data that support their fables.

[@CookiesRiot]

To give context, the entire Mount Saint Helens section comes from a *non-peer-reviewed* paper published *by a creationist* in a journal owned by *the organization that made this film.* They aren't just cherry-picking; they literally made their own example to cherry-pick.

[@northshoregirl8173]

@@CookiesRiot Of course! 😆

[@lnsflare1]

​@@CookiesRiot IIRC, they sent in inclusions (rocks which hadn't melted), and therefore didn't have their ages reset, so they got accurate ages for the pre-existing inclusion, which obviously wouldn't be an accurate age of the new material.

[@anthonycrumb5753]

The Mount St. Helens rocks again, what's next soft tissue in dinosaur bones ?

[@robertmccone3992]

That wig was the best actor there .

[@v0id616]

Great video yet again, and interesting topic.

[@br1qbat]

Another exciting episode of WANDA WONDER WIG!!!! Let's go!!!

[@GlorifiedTruth]

My nephew took a comparative religions course he really liked, and he asked me what I believed. I said, "I believe what seems reasonable to me to believe." But as time goes on, I realize that's not exactly true. I keep uncovering beliefs, longstanding and unexamined, generated either by wishful thinking or assumed from my upbringing, that I haven't properly challenged. It's a process. Lots of things I believe now I only accepted when I was ready. I mean, I'm not saying these people here aren't lying through their teeth, because they are, but I think I'm a little more charitable toward the typical YEC than I used to be.

[@dross4207]

I find it helpful to question every myth, urban legend, and old wives tale that reappears in my mind, and ask myself if I have ever seen any evidence to support its truth, or rather, if I believe it blindly just because I have been told that it’s true. Often is the case that I had believed nonsense solely because of being told that it’s true. It’s really an uncomfortable feeling to take a long held belief and either halt judgement on the truthfulness of it or reverse the conclusion of its truthfulness altogether, and that’s on things that only slightly or rarely had any real impact on your life, and for things that do have a big impact on your life, that uncomfortableness of ridding yourself of those beliefs can truly be agonizing. It’s one thing to come to the realization that your child isn’t going to catch a cold by going outside without a jacket, it’s another thing to come to the realization that you are never going to see them again if they were to die.

[@jasonsabbath6996]

People change. We often believe one thing when we are young, and after learning new things, we alter our assumptions. Normal people change, dogmatic people refuse to change despite new information. That's why science is always changing and religion never does.

[@CookiesRiot]

I'm all for being charitable to the layman who almost certainly has unexamined beliefs or is misled by propaganda like this film. It's more challenging to see the apologists, whose entire career exclusively revolves around telling people this information to get their money, in a charitable light. Try as I may to stick to the mantra, "Never attribute to malice what can be explained with stupidity," there have been times in this series in which it strains belief that somebody can be dumb enough to make a feature film with this many overt errors and omissions. My mind broke attempting to give the benefit of the doubt when they cropped out 96 complete Australopith skulls from a picture of the Hadar find while acting like the incomplete Lucy skeleton in the front is the only useful information we have.

[@dross4207]

@@CookiesRiot “Never solely attribute to malice or stupidity that which can be attributed to both.” I think that I have found you a new mantra.

[@GlorifiedTruth]

@@CookiesRiot Yes, agreed. I meant to make a stronger distinction between the layperson and the professional huckster.

[@darkseid6412]

I had about 20 Buzz Killington moments when watching the "Actors".

[@DermotKieran1]

Scientist: We know because 1+1=2 Creationist: But you're assuming that 1+1 always equalled 2. How can you know that 1+1 didn't equal 3., 80 million years ago! You weren't there and can't go back to check. Me: (facepalming) WTF!!! How can anyone be that dense and wilfully ignorant?

[@CookiesRiot]

It's even worse because we actually cross-check the various dating methods against each other specifically to show that the rates do not change. Cross-checking different radioisotope dates against each other should find discrepancies if one method's rate changes more than another. If the rates change together, then ice core and tree ring dating should show that radioisotope decay is variable by year. The most recent research into variable decay suggests that the decay rates could be being measured incorrectly up to 0.0025-0.01% - a hundred years maximum error for every million. The most variation we've been able to notice is still not enough to change the insurance of the decay rate constant for a

[@DermotKieran1]

@@CookiesRiot I know. I also know that the different radio isotopes are more accurate within certain ranges some are more suitable for shorter time periods, like centuries, or millennia, while others are better suited for measuring millions or billions of years. All the different isotopes have ranges that overlap. This is part of the reason we can be pretty confident in the results were get, because we can compare results from several isotopes. This way if 1 isotope gives a date reading of X but all the others read Y, then we know that the most probable answer is going to be Y.

[@speciesspeciate6429]

The young earth part of young earth creationism has been debunked for how long now? It's gotta be at least 200 years ago when a young earth was disproved.

[@rayanbay]

Thanks!

[@sciencenerd7639]

Thank you Dr. Baker and thank you Aron!

[@brianatbtacprod1989]

His statement of if you know what to look for to collect a sample that will cause controversy was interesting. If you know what will be problematic how can you still believe the test is faulty. As with the tobacco companies, the lure of money is stronger than anything else.

[@IIARROWS]

These people think that "Radiometric Dating" is an app on your phone for getting a soulmate.

[@CyclesMcHurtz]

I was noting one thing about "assuming" also that need to be stated - sometimes the "assumption" is a SPECIFIC value from a RANGE of values that are possible (due to measurement error, etc). This is part of the general scientific process of KNOWING YOUR ERROR RATIO. If you don't know what the possible error range in your calculations might be, you don't really have an answer. So in the "assumptions" it's often "based on research in we are assuming a rate of with a range of " so that people know the amount of accuracy we expect in the outcomes.

[@SamLowryDZ-015]

When are we going to get to the real mystery - Where did she get that wig and why ?

[@jacketrussell]

Damn!! Give Wanda Wonderwig her Nobel Prize now!!

[@nathano2778]

Correlating big tobacco tactics with apologetics rings true as F*(k

[@nathano2778]

Also (one or 2 episodes late) was nice to see you bring on gutsick, she needs more subs

[@tctheunbeliever]

I like how she so easily gets him to repeat her loaded terms like "icon." His character is not just ignorant, he's stupid. I'm sure now there will be creationist larvae everywhere trying to outwit their gullible docents. Did they use the word "docent" to sound smart?

[@samaielyaotzin6783]

waiting for the day a YEC will try to use the arguments in the video in an actual scientific debate 🤣🤣🤣

[@cheesburgr]

Oh my goooooodness Jon. B is so charitable!

[@HappyGoLucky-tr8bo]

Awesome job once again, Aron!

[@fimeilleur]

"I've dated young rocks all the time"... *giggles*

[@benjaminhughes3948]

My uncle Jack was a 7th day Adventist cult leader in Yakama when Saint Helens blew up. They all flocked to his church and he preached that it was the end of the world. He eventually moved to Texas close to Waco and personally knew David Koresh. I remember him telling when he was dying that he knew there was sketchy shit going on..

[@CPCGamer]

3:00 - Why is this extra making bedroom eyes? I don't think the director knew what that face is.

[@user-lb8qx8yl8k]

It's so funny, every time she says something the pretend docent exhales and looks down as if to say, "she's right! And I never thought of that before." Talk about a movie rife with fantasy!!

[@ansfridaeyowulfsdottir8095]

This Creatardonist Christinane video is utterly risible. Next thing you know, they'll be talking about "Cdesign proponentsists". {:o:O:}

[@Kruppes_Mule]

If the decay rate had been enough to change from billions of years to a few thousand years the earth would be vaporized nothingness from the heat involved. No life would have ever been possible.

[@gerarddunford6793]

Main reason you can get inflated aged for volcanics is that there are crystals in the fine grained ground mass that formed much longer ago (within the magma chamber) than the recently crystallised ground mass. If you date the whole rock you’ll get an average date of crystallisation, which doesn’t tell you much. If you dated the ground mass alone you’d get a more recent date. JB touched on this

[@FormerA-theist5354]

Aronra I would love to see you debate Jeff Durbin and after that SFT

[@cocobutter3175]

"Watch this young creationist successfully challenge a leading scientist on evolution!" Does this movie fall into the comedy or fantasy category?

[@Kyeudo]

Why not both?

[@kylebookout1789]

It's basically Time Bandits. Lol

[@everythingman987]

Wow I never new Michael Jackson was a creationist!

[@Akira625]

Creationist videos like this are so completely divorced from reality, but I suspect it was made so that creationists can then go and pretend that they're smarter and more knowledgeable than scientists.

[@spatrk6634]

yea, if they cared about reality they would call actual scientist and send a little girl with notebook to debunk him.

[@kellydalstok8900]

@@spatrk6634 that would constitute as child abuse

[@pjosephlthewonder5082]

Just as a point of interest, when they stole the sample from the National Volcanic Monument, the places they were allowed to be in were several miles from the actual 'volcanic site.' The sample they gathered was from what the park rangers explain it the turned up rubble of the surface rock of the mountain and not in fact actual "new rock." So they took something they in fact knew was not what they claimed and was never going to give the results they were going to claim later. It is funny that when one sets out to lie about something, all they need to do is read the wholly fable book for pointers as just how to do that. LOL Peace

[@project_nihilist]

She didn’t just repeat what she heard. She was PROT in the scene from Kpax. She knows the rate of rotation of that binary star and it’s planets orbits. She plugged the data in on the spot in 3d in 5 seconds and I’m still in awe.

[@Pibblepunk]

They're not even pretending to be anything but strawmen at this point

[@mtbee9641]

The Mt StHelens dating is not in error because most of the rock didn’t ‘form’ in the eruption. The existing side of the volcano blew out! The rock was there from prior eruptions! The only rock ‘formed’ in the eruption would be from erupting magma!

[@rickkwitkoski1976]

Thank you, Aron

[@petersage5157]

Thank you, Aron, for addressing the 200 pound orange Tang in the room. For quite a while I've been saying that if people are indoctrinated to accept the tenets of their religion on faith, they're likely to fall for other lies that have real-world consequences.

[@MudflapNichols]

I would suggest that all young Christians that watch this silly movie to try it themselves. Go down to your local natural history museum and challenge the museum docent. Not because I think it would be hilarious (which it would be), but because you might learn something.

[@lara-ce2kg]

I despise how they made the lead woman actress. They made her timid and quiet spoken so she is not to offend any of the males that she is attempting to outsmart

[@errantpursuits4249]

I've been waiting for this one. Radiometric dating is something I have a weak understanding of.

[@whatabouttheearth]

First step is understanding what stable isotopes and radioactive isotopes are. Isotopic forensics are fascinating, I have a playlist on isotopic forensics if anyone wants to learn more.

[@petrine5]

As a Dane it is so weird to watch and listen to these creationists😳 I don’t think creationism is even a thing here.

[@kellydalstok8900]

In The Netherlands it exist, but only in a few, very isolated parts of the country.

[@petrine5]

@@kellydalstok8900 I imagine it could be the same here, I’ve just never heard of it🤔

[@tamsinbedford4951]

Why is they guy in the debate looking permanently sad the entire video? It's like the actor saw his dog run over before they started filming

[@Dhurl421]

Another great series.

[@mlambrechts1]

They casted a young woman to look innocent and ask these questions. I mean, lure us in, young lady. It is ridiculous?

[@samanthagibson5791]

Im sure I heard they dated rocks from Vesuvius and they came back to the correct time when they were still having trouble with 'new' rocks. And we know when that happened, it just wasnt only a decade ago

[@nicholoscaudillo]

Could you do a science video on the current known condition of the star bettlegues. I know I misspelled it

[@bighairyviking387]

Niel degrasse Tyson has done one.