Okay, I don't know if anyone has ever come across this situation before and I'm not sure how to handle it. I'm auditing a rhetoric class and we're currently covering argumentative fallacies. I found out that there is a young earth creationist in the class when he piped up with "Wouldn't the evolutionist's claim that fossils are dated by position in sediment be circular reasoning?" The professor said he didn't know enough about how fossils were dated to comment. I added that the primary method of dating is radiometric, the YEC said we've been dating things via sedimentary position since before that. This is all so absurd to me; radiometric dating is better (and easier) than positional dating. This is science, the methods of today are better than those of yesterday. I'm simply stunned that the guy has no concept of how these things work, and the professor is going along with the idea that there is something to debate here.