Question about William Lane Craig argument?

[neodawson]

I'm referring to a claim he makes in his debate with Peter Atkins:


I agree for the most part with Craig's examples of rational beliefs that can't be proven by science. Except for the claim made that the past was created a few minutes ago with the appearance of age could not be proven by science. Can anybody elaborate on this claim?

I sometimes think that carbon-dating would be a way science could shed light that the world was not created a few minutes ago with the appearance of age?

I'm just rather puzzled about this claim.

[ignorantianescia]

I think that when William Lane Craig gives that example, he includes C-14 dating and other methods of scientific dating in "appearance of age". Since C-14 dating depends on the ratios of isotopes, it isn't inconceivable that it could be a deception (it's just not rational).

[unkleE]

But surely if the world was created a short time ago with the appearance of age, that would mean God had created all our memories, and the light that is arriving from distant stars - and the already partly decayed radiocarbon?

[Edit] Oops, I didn't see IN had already said the same thing.