Just believe

[Zzyzx]

.
If I ask someone to accept what I present as truthful and accurate (“believe�), I am prepared to present evidence to support my contentions / statements. Perhaps this comes from a background in, and teaching of, sciences. For instance, if I say something about how different minerals crystallize, I can produce examples for anyone to see (verify).

That does not ask anyone to “believe�.

Another example: When I was a graduate student in the late 1960s I did not accept (“believe�) a professor's descriptions regarding mechanisms of glacial deposition. To prove my point I did an extensive study using seismic data from the Indiana State Geological survey to map preglacial (bedrock) geology that was tens to hundreds of feet below present land surface. Computer mapping (very rudimentary in that era) clearly demonstrated that the professor's contentions were dead wrong. Case made, signed, sealed, delivered (for an A+ in the course and an offer to co-publish the study).

If I say something about the age of a given rock strata, I am prepared to cite multiple, disconnected (independent) sources of radiometric dating using several different techniques. If a person does not understand or accept radiometric dating, I can refer them to multiple sources of information from which they can learn. It is a rather complex area and is not understood with casual or superficial reading.

Is radiometric dating perfected? Heck no. BUT thousands of sincere investigators worldwide devote years or careers to study and verification – actual work in the field. Their results are consistent (with some variation between methods).

Of course, many refuse to “believe� the work of hundreds / thousands of disconnected / independent scientists – and dismiss radiometric dating as “unproved� (without the inconvenience and effort of actually learning what is involved and how results are achieved).

Those same people, however, typically BELIEVE stories written thousands of years ago about supernatural events – with absolutely NO verification that such things actually happened.

In fact, they use the stories in attempts to “disprove� scientific studies . . .

Is this an example of willful ignorance?

[Talishi]

[quote="Zzyzx"]
Of course, many refuse to “believe� the work of hundreds / thousands of disconnected / independent scientists – and dismiss radiometric dating as “unproved� (without the inconvenience and effort of actually learning what is involved and how results are achieved)./quote]

Since the 1930s science hasn't been about "proving" claims but trying to falsify them. The word hasn't filtered down to the home schoolers yet.