[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Maritime Q-Scout

I believe in evolution. I want to make that clear when I say this next part.

I'm almost done watching this debate and I've yet to hear Ken Ham state that time is relative, and if time is relative it is possible that the ancient earth experienced time differently. Ergo, it's theoretically possible that our dating techniques are flawed if we believe time is a standard unit of measure. Therefore the Earth could only be 6,000 years old which is in accordance with the Bible.

Now I'm not a scientist but couldn't that theoretically be possible under the scientific method?

Again I believe in evolution, but I'm know there is a theory that time is relative, so basic debate would lead to the above question.

The very short answer to your questions is as follows:

Yes, time is relative. Relativity is one of the most well tested theories in the history of science, and to date it has passed all tests with flying colours.

No, that cannot mean the earth is 6000 years old. That's now how relativity works/what it means.