I see the “what about the appearance of age?” argument come up a lot in debates over Old/Young Earth Creationism. Generally, the Old Earther wants to make the point that, if God created a 6,000-10,000 year old universe to look like it was millions of years old, He is a deceiver.
But, of course, Young Earth Creationists don’t think the universe looks millions of years old at all. In this, as in anything, starting assumptions dictate the conclusions.
To someone who believes that automobiles are the products of spontaneous magnetic fields attracting bits of iron into a functional arrangement over centuries, a car fresh off the assembly line has “the appearance of age.”
Depending upon your initial presuppositions about what something is caused by and what it should look like at any given stage, an ostensibly infinite number of ages could be assumed for something. The question thus turns on whether the starting assumptions can reliably predict and be justified by the observable data.
The “what about the appearance of age” argument badly needs to be retired. It’s simply an example of begging the question. A non-starter.
The post The Alleged “Appearance of Age” appeared first on The Chi Files.
