Third, creationists ignore the evidence and deny that [X] exists altogether or assert that belief in a Young Earth is based on faith, not science. These ages weren't just made up — or, worse, accepted to "give evolution enough time".
The Scientific Method is traditionally presented in the first chapter of science textbooks as a simple recipe for performing scientific investigations.
Though many useful points are embodied in this method, it can easily be misinterpreted as linear and "cookbook": pull a problem off the shelf, throw in an observation, mix in a few questions, sprinkle on a hypothesis, put the whole mixture into a 350° experiment and voila, 50 minutes later you'll be pulling a conclusion out of the oven!
This article collects evidences that place a lower limit on the age of the Universe beyond the 6,000 to 10,000 years asserted by most Young Earth creationists (YECs) and the literalist Ussher chronology.
All of this evidence supports deep time: the idea, considered credible by scientists since the early 1800s, that the Earth (and the Universe) is millions These limits usually take the form: "Because we observe [X], which occurs at rate [Y], the universe must be at least [Z] years old".
There are three standard creationist responses: First, creationists assert that current rates (Y) are different than past rates.
It is possible that these rates changed — but under uniformitarianism, which is necessary for science to function, we must assume that rates did not change unless there is evidence for this change.
The exercise they will go through of working backwards from measurements to age should help them understand how scientists use carbon dating to try to determine the age of fossils and other materials.
To be able to do this lesson and understand the idea of half-life, students should understand ratios and the multiplication of fractions, and be somewhat comfortable with probability.
This lesson is the third in a three-part series about the nucleus, isotopes, and radioactive decay.