Radiometric dating errors
The rejection of the validity of fossils and of dating by religious fundamentalists creates a problem for them:. The perspective you present of "depending on the assumptions we make, we can obtain any date we like", certainly seems to match the data.
Results from different techniques, often measured in rival labs, continually confirm each other. From careful physics and chemistry experiments, we know that parents turn into daughters at a very consistent, predictable rate. Most Speleotherms in modern caves are not growing.
Therefore the process is:. Pro is correct when he asserts there are different methods of decay. Radiometric dating relies on the principle of radioactive decay.
Con points out the problem with carbon dating of coal and diamonds. Stratigraphy, the study of rock layers, led to paleontology, the study of fossils. Fission tracks are formed after a mineral crystallizes from the molten state, and it measures times up to about two billion years past.
It works like this:. For example, we can measure its mass, its volume, its colour, the minerals in it, their size and the way they are arranged. Con claims that we cannot know with certainty what the composition of an original sample was.
We therefore cannot determine the field relationships and thus cannot be sure which hills are older and which are younger.
Asteroids in the solar system have been clocked at 4.
The presence of detectable C in fossils, which according to the uniformitarian timescale should be entirely Cdead, has been reported from the earliest days of radiocarbon dating.
Con is correct that rock samples selected for argon dating cannot have been exposed to air. In other words, we can predict the age of a rock within two million years out of two-and-a-half billion years. Early geologists, in the s and s, noticed how fossils seemed to occur in sequences: ArticlesRadiometric Dating.
Climate conditions could have been extremely different. If someone believes it is 3: Snelling is a legitimate scientist who also publishes in peer-reviewed journals.
Did God create over billions of years?
Assumptions are made based upon observations. Michael Benton has written over 30 books on dinosaurs and paleobiology. Scientists do this with all "independent" dating methods, but it is all based on their uniformitarian presupposition, which creates a bias in their interpretation of the data.
I do think that radiometric dating is an accurate way to dating errors the earth, although I am a geochronologist so I have my biases. These diamonds are considered to be billion years old according to uniformitarian geologists, so they should have been radiocarbon-dead.
Some radiometric dating methods depend upon knowing the initial amount of the isotope subject to decay.
Long-age geologists are committed to the long-age paradigm, which assumes naturalism. There has been discussion on this issue in Journal of Creation. Creationists do not agree dating errors these ages of millions of years because of the assumptions they are based on.
In fact, decay rates have been increased in the laboratory by factors of billions of times. Report this Argument Con Again, I would like to think Pro for the opportunity to debate this and for his alacritous response. Darwinist, racist and eugenicist The free vip dating reviews of the Jenolan Caves, Australia more…. Repeated, and tough, regimes of testing have confirmed the broad accuracy of the fossils and their dating, so we can read the history of life from the rocks with confidence.
How do we verify it?