We cannot go back into the past to measure all the parameters we need in order to do the dating calculation. Hence, all these parameters must be assumed—always. There is no other way. There are many assumptions that have to be made when using radiometric dating methods that might make these techniques unreliable. If any of these assumptions are wrong, then the reliability of the testing method can and should be put in question. The three main assumptions that affect the results of radiometric dating are: 1 the rate of decay has always been constant, 2 there has been no contamination no movement of elements into or out of the object over time , and 3 we can determine how much daughter element there was to begin with. There are many test results that make the reliability of these dating techniques very questionable.
How accurate are Carbon-14 and other radioactive dating methods?
Measuring the uranium-to-lead ratios in the oldest rocks on Earth gave scientists an estimated age It turns out the answers are in Earth’s rocks. the only estimate for the age of the world: about 6, years, with Genesis as the history book.
Is Earth young or old? If old, did that mean the Bible is wrong?
Creation v Evolution: The Nye-Ham Debate
In his notebooks Da Vinci ponders fossil seashells and concludes that they could not have been laid down by the Noachian flood. He wrote: “If the Deluge had carried the shells for distances of three and four hundred miles from the sea it would have carried them mixed with various other natural objects all heaped up together; but even at such distances from the sea we see the oysters all together and also the shellfish and the cuttlefish and all the other shells which congregate together, found all together dead; and the solitary shells are found apart from one another as we see them every day on the sea-shores.
In the mountains of Parma and Piacenza multitudes of shells and corals with holes may be seen still sticking to the rocks Loys le Roy : Of the interchangeable course or variety of things in the Whole world.
As determined by the most recent geological and physical measurements, the Earth is 4. Here are some references that explain the independent scientific methods used to measure this age. Patterson, G. Tilton and M. New Series, Vol. The age of the Earth is a purely scientific issue. It is not a religious, legal, or philosophical issue.
While questions like, “How many people should I be allowed to marry? It is not a moral question. It is a question of the natural world. Some folks, like Terry Mortenson from Answers In Genesis see below, under claimaints , believe scientists cannot address the age of the Earth because no one was there to see it.
What Kind Of Rock Is Used For Radiometric Dating – Radiometric dating
Three-stage method for interpretation of uranium-lead isotopic data. Three-dimensional approach for the iterpretation of uranium-lead isoto e ratios in pnatural systems, development of which corresponds to three stages, has been considered. In the framework of the three-stage model two cases, differing in the character of uranium-lead systems violation at the beginning of the third stage, are discussed.
The first case corresponds to uranium addition or lead substraction, and the second one – to addition of lead of unknown isotopic content. Three-stage approach permits without amending the isotopic content of lead captured during crystallization to calculated the beginning of the second and third stages of uranium-lead systems development and to evaluate parameters of lead added to the system.
Earlier in the year, Dr. Andrew Snelling of Answers in Genesis gave us ample reason to believe that radiometric dating of meteorites is solid.
Flood geology: a house built on sand Dr Alex Ritchie. Dr Alex Ritchie received his B. Hons in Geology and a Ph. D at the University of Edinburgh. He worked as a palaeontologist at the Australian Museum from to where he is currently a Research Fellow. As might be expected by any reader familiar with CEN, the questions posed were classic Dorothy Dixers and less than intellectually taxing, for example: “What are some of the important contributions to geology that creationists are making?
What evidence are they ignoring? The article doesn’t say who conducted the “interview”, leaving open the possibility that Andrew Snelling interviewed himself, posing the questions as well as providing the answers. The interview might have been more informative if another geologist had set the questions but, as we all know, Dr Snelling is extremely reluctant to expose himself to public questioning by his scientific peers.
Who is Dr Andrew Snelling B. Hons Geology , Ph. D and why should we concern ourselves about his beliefs and activities? Snelling is the most prominent young-Earth creationist in Australia with genuine geological qualifications and a published research record in this field. Snelling writes extensively on geological subjects in the creationist literature and travels widely in Australia and overseas lecturing on related topics.
Daa guy dating a m2f transsexual is gay answers yahoo
Earlier in the year, Dr. Why does this matter? By dating certain types of meteorites, geologists arrive at the most precise age estimate of our Earth: 4. Regardless, even Snelling recognizes that multiple independent methods consistently tell us the Earth is billions— not thousands—of years old. Falling Time by Samuel John via Flickr.
Aug 13, – Radiometric dating is often used to “prove” rocks are millions of years old. More information Article by Answers in Genesis.
You know, its amazing how ignorant Dr Snelling is ignorant of the basic principles of geochronology. What he completely omits is how many of his data points fall so far from the isochron line, indicating how horribly contaminated the samples were with the exception of the Rb-Sr isochron Im surprised he didnt outright discard the results. Even a rank amateur like me instantly saw what was wrong.
Tragically, he has basically discarded everything he has learnt and is wholly focused on undermining the validity of the scientific method. By the way, I noticed that some of the readings from the other dating methods fell in the 5. I wonder why? Sorry should have typed “You know, its amazing how ignorant Dr Snelling is of the basic principles of geochronology.
Btw I am currently co-writing a book on the Answers in Genesis gang, will be citing your Snelling posts in it. This new book “The Rocks are Still There” will be on a level with my own solo volume, “Evolution Slam Dunk” on the reptile-mammal transition.
The Dynamics of Dating
Radiocarbon dating can easily establish that humans have been on the earth for over twenty thousand years, at least twice as long as creationists are willing to allow. Therefore it should come as no surprise that creationists at the Institute for Creation Research ICR have been trying desperately to discredit this method for years. They have their work cut out for them, however, because radiocarbon C dating is one of the most reliable of all the radiometric dating methods.
This article will answer several of the most common creationist attacks on carbon dating, using the question-answer format that has proved so useful to lecturers and debaters. Answer: Cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere are constantly converting the isotope nitrogen N into carbon C or radiocarbon. Living organisms are constantly incorporating this C into their bodies along with other carbon isotopes.
Creation science or scientific creationism is a pseudoscience, a form of creationism presented Creation science is based largely upon chapters 1–11 of the Book of Genesis. These and is contrasted with geological science in that it rejects standard geological principles such as uniformitarianism and radiometric dating.
Kevin R. Henke, Ph. For decades, young-Earth creationists YECs have vainly searched the geology and geochemistry literature to find ways of discrediting radiometric dating and protecting their antiquated biblical interpretations. YEC John Woodmorappe a pseudonym , for example, has been at the forefront in misquoting and misrepresenting radiometric dating results from the geology and geochemistry literature e.
Woodmorappe’s shotgun attacks against radiometric dating even include the ridiculous accusation that concordant radiometric dates may be nothing more than products of “chance”; that is, random numbers Woodmorappe, , Figure 20, p. Woodmorappe , p. I often refer to this groundless attack as “Woodmorappe’s Crapshoot”. A small group of YECs with legitimate Ph. Russell Humphreys and John R. Rather than embracing the embarrassing distortions and nonsensical accusations of Woodmorappe or John and Henry Morris, Humphreys and Baumgardner have finally realized that geology and geochemistry are not going to give them the answers that they want.
Do you Understand how Radiometric Dating Works?
Geological time scale — 4. Geological maps. Absolute age dating deals with assigning actual dates in years before the present to geological events. Contrast this with relative age dating, which instead is concerned with determining the orders of events in Earth’s past. Scholars and naturalists, understandably, have long been interested in knowing the absolute age of the Earth, as well as other important geological events.
In the ‘s, practitioners of the young science of geology applied the uniformitarian views of Hutton and Lyell see the introduction to this chapter to try to determine the age of the Earth.
lacustrine deposits, as in Date Creek Basin, Arizona, U.S.A. , A few deposits, particularly genesis of important types of uranium deposits, in Skinner, B..).,. Editor, Seventy-Fifth observed higher IP responses near uranium deposits. The.
Two Basic World-Views. The creationist world-view says that God made the universe about six thousand years ago. The evolutionist world-view teaches that the universe made itself from nothing about twenty million years ago. One of these opposing world-views obviously is wrong. These time-line charts show the time difference presented. The entire theory of evolution is built upon the faulty assumption that the origin of the universe was “billions of years ago” bya.
The human mind cannot grasp “billions of years. Ten years is a long time.