King Clone Creosote Bush

Scientists suggest that the King Clone Creosete bush of the Mojave desert is about 11,700 years old.  How can this be?

The scientists are wrong.  They use carbon dating and growth rates and extrapolate the results backwards in time.  They failed to consider that the natural laws of the universe were only fixed 6,000 years ago, so it is unreasonable to use current day measurements to project backwards in time for any age in excess of 6,000 years.


  1. Scientists don't just use carbon dating to determine ages of various artifacts. They use a combination of methods (such as Cesium, Uranium, and Argon dating, tree ring dating, and even ice cores to date things) and all the independent methods must converge on the same date. The point here is not that one form of dating gave us a certain date. The point is ALL the independent clocks we use give us the same answer. If all these methods were truly false and unreliable, why would they all point to the same date? Wouldn't we expect all the clocks to be all over the place if they were all unreliable?

  2. Actually, my short blurb here on the creosote already mentioned growth rates in addition to carbon dating. Frankly, I haven't investigated the matter here in great detail, but I will assume that both "clocks" are reasonably in synchronization.