Would ID/Creationists need new, independant dating techniques??

No YEC would ever accept that his position needed any strengthening. The Bible genealogy says that the Earth is 6000 years old. Why is confirmation needed? To YEC, if the earth is any substantially amount older than 6000 years old, then the Son of Man never came so that we might have life and have it more abundantly.A Bible friendly scientific dating technique that appeared to support a 6000 year old earth would probably be taken as some kind of Faustian deal that could start spitting out billion year old dates just when its time for some ICR scientist to start his research.
Edited by NoNukes, : check spelling

That's not how a YEC would view things.As near as I can tell, Creation Science is nothing more than rebuttal of any secular science that conflicts with the Bible, and primarily addresses science that conflicts with the creation and flood accounts in Genesis. CS serves no other purpose excluding selling books and lecture appearances. Still, many Creationists believe that the rebuttals are good science.Given their hearts desire, YECs would have literal Biblical creation taught in public school classrooms, and would eliminate the teaching of evolution, chemicals-to-biology abiogenesis, and Big Bang cosmology in science classrooms.But federal courts have said that the YEC curriculum is religion, and cannot be taught as science in public schools. Teaching Creation Science rebuttals, perhaps disguised as intelligent design, along side secular science is a fall back position.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.Edited by NoNukes, : Make minor corrections

There are plenty of unaddressed criticisms of the ocean salinity aging technique in that old thread of yours. Perhaps participation in that thread would be a more attractive option if you answered some of the stuff already posted.

Even assuming that the ocean salinity age estimate were valid, it isn't really a dating technique is it? We could say that the oceans are less than ninety something million years old, but we cannot date anything else.Unless there is possibility of finding samples of ancient ocean water with its salinity preserved, how would we date anything. We cannot, for example, use ocean salinity to date the Great Sphinx to show that it is younger that 4400 years old. We just know that the Sphinx and everything else are less than ninety or so million years old.

Others are addressing the issue of fitting into a 'whole web of things'. I won't join the pile. I was just confirming that you had not proposed a dating technique. That is after all the topic of the thread.

You are taking my post out of its intended context.YEC do interpret the Bible as providing an estimate of the age of the earth. My post was meant to explain why a person holding such a belief would not need or accept dating methods.

The Bible cannot promote anything without a promoting human. Are you saying that there is no support in the Bible for the YEC interpretation? I cannot agree with that despite the fact that I think the YEC interpretation is wrong.Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.