Assuming something to be true then using that assumption as a “proof” is the essence of circular reasoning. The issue is not the nature of the evidence, but the honesty of the observer. For example all dating systems assume deep time to be true. One very clear example is dendrochronology or tree ring dating. Bristlecone Pines (BCP) have been cataloged with almost 9,000 continuous rings, adding older dead trees to the rings of living trees. That is presented as “proof” of 9,000 continuous years. Without questioning the almost 9,000 continuous rings, this is assuming one ring=one year. For the past hundred years one ring has equaled one year. Using written human history, we can reasonable assume one ring=one year for over 3,000 years. But a tree ring is a growth/dormant cycle, not a year. In rain forests even today, there can be as many as 6 cycles per year, producing 6 rings per year. Even uniformitarians must admit that the Ice Age had a different climate and dendrochronology would not be valid during the Ice Age. That is circular reasoning. Assume that the Ice Age was at least 10,000 years ago, then assume that dendrochronology is valid for 10,000 years. The Bible records a worldwide flood about 2300-2400 BC. The Ice Age would follow that and last at least 500, perhaps 700 years. During that time period there would be many more growth/dormant cycles per year than the one per year we are observing now.
Every other type of dating of deep time uses the same assumptions. First assume deep time, and then claim that the evidence proves the assumption. What was the original condition of a radiometric sample? There were no observers. You assume the sample to be millions of years old and then use the sample to prove that it is millions of years old.
The point is, everything around us is evidence of a young earth if you are willing to examine the evidence honestly instead of attempting to use the evidence to prove pre-existing assumptions.
7 thoughts on “Circular Reasoning”
So then based on your own argument.
Assuming the Bible is real or correct and using the Bible to prove it is real or correct is also false.
This is EXACTLY what you are saying. You cannot use an assumption as a basis of proving the assumption.
Now, what is the difference between these two things my scientifically illiterate friend?
The simple thing that is obviously escaping you is this.
The tree rings are not an assumption you silly man. You can in fact drill a small core sample out and look at the tree rings. Each year, you can see there is a new ring. Therefore your entire anti-intelligent comment is wrong. Tree rings are not an assumption at all but an easily proven fact.
it amazes me how much effort people are willing to put into idiotic ideas. The entire young earth concept is as smart as a flat earth concept is.
The young earth concept was developed by James Ussher in the 1600’s. Would you seriously trust a doctor who practiced medicine form the 1600’s? Why would you trust this guy.
Now I could argue all day, and I know it will do no good because people dedicated to being illogical and superstitious have no interest in becoming smarter.
I will leave you with this interesting little bit of information.
In surveys of people who believe in a young earth, the dumber and less educated you are, the more likely you are to believe it.
Now, now, the emperor’s clothes are really pretty—I think. Having started as a scientist in my youth, it amazes me how the “new science” has let themselves be blinded by the desperate need to assume that God doesn’t exist. One of my writers, Roger Melquist, wrote a whole book on Man sciences compared to true science. The apostate churchians, who are “holding to a form of godliness, although they have denied its power”, are also an integral part of this. Anything to avoid having to deal with a truly almighty God.
And the usual response is mockery.
I’m not sure that’s true any more. It’s gotten real nasty lately. As it cranks up toward the end, the possibility of physical attacks and death can be seen in the future—maybe even in the near future. I’m amazed at how things are accelerating toward judgement.
That was the path the socialists in Germany, Italy and Spain took in the 1930s. It was also the path of the Communists in Russia and China, as well as many other smaller countries.
Yup! As my wife and I say regularly, “It’s amazing how few people see what is happening.” Even when you tell them directly, it’s like the words simply fly by their heads without entering.