Willis> I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t think you have read the article closely enough, when Austin and Humphreys revised figures are added to the missing methods of salt removal, the Ã¢â‚¬Ëœproblem disappearsÃ¢â‚¬â„¢.
Correct me if I am wrong but, with the revised numbers the age goes back only to 80 million. Is that correct? While that is not the nail in the coffin it certainly limits the age of the earth.
You must then add the missing mechanisms of salt removal to the revised Austin and Humphreys figures, then you have Salt in = salt out.
Given that Austin and Humphreys have been more or less silent on the matter for nearly 10 years
Both AIG and ICR are still using the argument which both Humphreys and Austin are affiliated with.
That doesnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t surprise me, perhaps you should ask them why their article has not been updated, yes?
Ã¢â‚¬Å“At all costsÃ¢â‚¬Â is rather broad don't you think? That would include things like misrepresentation, lying, falsification of data, from the scientists who produced the original material.
I don't mean to say that they are intentionally lying I think their purpose is to refute creation. The scientists who originally produced the data are coming from the evolutionary world view which means everything they produced will fit right in with that thinking.
But the scientist come from all walks of life, and old earth, and evolution implications, crosses many disciplines in science. Plus science has an objective to test the unusual, to ensure that all evidence is put through the ringer. The current situation in the USA can hardly have gone unnoticed by even the most closeted scientist, do you not think that they have perhaps said, Ã¢â‚¬Å“hang on, wait a bit, perhaps there is something to this YEC?Ã¢â‚¬Â the reality of it is some of the evidences against evolution are so absurd that real scientist donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t bother to address them in the public forum, it is left to the popularisers of science, to create the database to reference the mass of evolutionary evidence and place it in easy accessible web sites.
The recent court cases (e.g. Dover) I feel will tend to bring this situation to the for, and I expect a bit of a scientific backlash, should ID, or YEC push much harder.