Dating Problems

Key concepts Absolute Dating The problem: By the mid 19th century it was obvious that Earth was much older than years, but how old? This problem attracted the attention of capable scholars but ultimately depended on serendipitous discoveries. Initially, three lines of evidence were pursued: Hutton attempted to estimate age based on the application of observed rates of sedimentation to the known thickness of the sedimentary rock column, achieving an approximation of 36 million years. This invoked three assumptions: Constant rates of sedimentation over time Thickness of newly deposited sediments similar to that of resulting sedimentary rocks There are no gaps or missing intervals in the rock record.

Geochronology

This belief in long ages for the earth and the existence of life is derived largely from radiometric dating. These long time periods are computed by measuring the ratio of daughter to parent substance in a rock and inferring an age based on this ratio. This age is computed under the assumption that the parent substance say, uranium gradually decays to the daughter substance say, lead , so the higher the ratio of lead to uranium, the older the rock must be.

Of course, there are many problems with such dating methods, such as parent or daughter substances entering or leaving the rock, as well as daughter product being present at the beginning. Here I want to concentrate on another source of error, namely, processes that take place within magma chambers.

May 09,  · A large debate has raged in Christian circles about the age of the earth as it is presented in the Bible. Young earth creationists and old earth creationists do not typically get along so discussions often have passions raised.

Radiometric dating Radiometric dating utilizes the decay rates of certain radioactive atoms to date rocks or artifacts. Uniformitarian geologists consider this form of dating strong evidence that the Earth is billions of years old. However, research by creationists has revealed a large number of problems with radiometric dating. In some cases such as Carbon dating , radioactive dating actually gives strong evidence for a young Earth , while other methods such as K-Ar dating and Isochron dating are based on faulty assumptions and are so unreliable as to be useless.

Carbon dating Main Article: Carbon dating Carbon dating is a radiometric dating technique used to deduce the approximate age of organic remains by measuring the quantity of the isotope 14C in the sample and comparing it with the current atmospheric level. The usual isotope of carbon found in living organisms, 12C, is stable, while 14C is not stable.

It is formed when cosmic radiation interacts with the upper atmosphere creating thermal neutrons that strike 14N Nitrogen , converting it into 14C which decays back into 14N with a half-life of years. Isochron dating Main Article: Isochron dating Scientists have realized that there are difficulties in dealing with the assumptions of radiometric dating.

Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon Dating

His calculations did not account for heat produced via radioactive decay a process then unknown to science or, more significantly, convection inside the Earth, which allows more heat to escape from the interior to warm rocks near the surface. For biologists, even million years seemed much too short to be plausible.

In Darwin’s theory of evolution , the process of random heritable variation with cumulative selection requires great durations of time. According to modern biology, the total evolutionary history from the beginning of life to today has taken place since 3.

Radiometric Dating PART 1: Back to Basics. PART 2: Problems with the Assumptions. PART 3: Making Sense of the Patterns. This three-part series will help you properly understand radiometric dating, the assumptions that lead to inaccurate dates, and the clues about what really happened in the past.

Principles of Radiometric Dating. Uranium easily substitutes for zirconium while lead is strongly excluded. Zircon has a high This is only a problem when dating very young zircon dating problems or in dating whole rocks instead of mineral. An answer to Zircon dating problems Faith Adelaide about lead zircon dating problems zircon crystals, More on radioactive dating problems A further response to Reasonable Faith Adelaide. He writes that zircon the reality of dating a zircon is less simple than.

Zircon dating problems Your subscription zircon dating problems sating. An example is cited in one of the online resources cited at zircon dating problems end of Jim’s article:

Apologetics Press

Fossil evidence refutes the static model of evolution. Which of the following specifically supports the idea that we share a common ancestor with other animals? Fossil evidence indicates that species have changed over time.

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.

This age is obtained from radiometric dating and is assumed by evolutionists to provide a sufficiently long time-frame for Darwinian evolution. And OE Christians theistic evolutionists see no problem with this dating whilst still accepting biblical creation, see Radiometric Dating – A Christian Perspective. This is the crucial point: Some claim Genesis in particular, and the Bible in general looks mythical from this standpoint.

A full discussion of the topic must therefore include the current scientific challenge to the OE concept. This challenge is mainly headed by Creationism which teaches a young-earth YE theory. A young earth is considered to be typically just 6, years old since this fits the creation account and some dating deductions from Genesis. The crucial point here is: Accepted Dating Methods Here we outline some dating methods , both absolute and relative, that are widely accepted and used by the scientific community.

Absolute dating supplies a numerical date whilst relative dating places events in time-sequence; both are scientifically useful. Radiometric Dating This is based upon the spontaneous breakdown or decay of atomic nuclei.

More Bad News for Radiometric Dating

First Published 30 Jan Can we rely on radiometric dating techniques? How accurate are they? First, I’ll start by referring you to an extensive article on the young earth creation science website Answers in Genesis , titled “What About Carbon Dating? No, they are not. Yes, I agreed with the young earther on this one. But that doesn’t mean the earth is young.

More Bad News for Radiometric Dating Most scientists today believe that life has existed on the earth for billions of years. This belief in long ages for the earth and the existence of life is derived largely from radiometric dating.

July 19, at Where sampling allowed a second aliquot to be taken, we tested the integrity of the calcite by comparing the dates of the upper layers of the calcite to those closer to the painting. In all cases, the date from the deeper sample was older, supporting the reliability of our method Our U-series ages ranged from 0. If you will notice, the paper mentions that upper layers of the calcite were dated too in addition to those closer to the painting.

The point of this is to verify that the U-series dating gives correct results relative to the layer. The actual dating of the paintings, with a lower bound based on the above layer and an upper bound based on the below layer, is given in figure 2 just below the quote http: However, since there are natural disturbances, what is the justification for saying that the values should be closer to 0.

Also, the article points out the ratio with disturbances , should be on either side of 0. I look forward to hearing your response to these points. July 19, at 7: The problem lies with the variation in ages. I believe the Earth to be approximately years old, so for the samples to span 40, years alerts me to error in the method.

Age Dating the Earth

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.

How does carbon dating work?

Age dating the Earth (Geochronology) is the scientific study of the age of the Earth and the temporal sequence of events related to the formation of the planet and the history of life on Earth.

The burial of these organisms also meant the burial of the carbon that they contained, leading to formation of our coal, oil and natural gas deposits. As the rate of C14 formation is independent from the levels of normal carbon, the drop in available C12 would not have reduced the rate of C14 production. Even if the rate of C14 formation had not increased after the Flood, there would have been a fundamental shift in the ratio towards a relatively higher radiocarbon content.

The amount of C14 present in the pre-flood environment is also limited by the relatively short time less than years which had elapsed between Creation and the Flood. Even if one is generous and allows for the current rate of C14 production to have ocurred throughout this period, the maximum amount of C14 in existence then is less than a fourth of the amount present today. The last years have seen this effect occur in reverse.

Our massive consumption of fossil fuels is releasing the carbon which has been locked up in the Earth’s crust for the last four or five millennia. The effect has been complicated by the addition of manmade radioactive carbon to the biosphere because of nuclear explosions and experimentation. And God said, Let there be a space in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

And God made the space, and divided the waters which [were] under the space from the waters which [were] above the space:

Doesn’t radiometric dating prove the earth is billions of years old Jim Mason PhD