Accuracy of Fossils and Dating Methodshowever, with radiometric dating, the different techniques often give quite different results.. maas, “nd-sr isotope constraints on the age and origin of unconformity-type uranium deposits in the alligator rivers uranium field, northern territory, australia, economic geology, 1989, 84:64-90. he may suggest that some of the chemicals in the rock had been disturbed by groundwater or weathering. the field relationships, as they are called, are of primary importance and all radiometric dates are evaluated against them. woodmorappe, the mythology of modern dating methods, for one such thorough evaluation. is an unsolved mystery to evolutionists as to why coal has 14c in it,, or wood supposedly millions of years old still has 14c present, but it makes perfect sense in a creationist world view.. fisher, “excess rare gases in a subaerial basalt in nigeria,” nature, 1970, 232:60-61. the rubidium-strontium isochron technique suggested that the recent lava flow was 270 ma older than the basalts beneath the grand canyon—an impossibility. this effect (which is additional to the magnetic field issue just discussed) were corrected for, carbon dating of fossils formed in the flood would give ages much older than the true ages.. hunziker, editors, lectures in isotope geology, “u-th-pb dating of minerals,” by d. … if a contradiction occurs, then the cause of the error needs to be established or the radiometric results are unacceptable’. scientists do not measure the age of rocks, they measure isotope concentrations, and these can be measured extremely accurately. from the mapped field relationships, it is a simple matter to work out a geological cross-section and the relative timing of the geologic events. we suggesting that evolutionists are conspiring to massage the data to get what they want? techniques that give results that can be dismissed just because they don't agree with what we already believe cannot be considered objective. this is consistent with a young world—the argon has had too little time to escape. nguaruhoe, new zealand, and the implications for potassium-argon 'dating,'” proc. whatever process was responsible for the halos could be a key also to understanding radiometric dating. example, a geologist may examine a cutting where the rocks appear as shown in figure 1. unconsciously, the researchers, who are supposedly “objective scientists” in the eyes of the public, select the observations to fit the basic belief system. that is not hypocrisy, but being open and up-front about where we are coming from.. provine admitted:“most of what i learned of the field [evolutionary biology] in graduate (1964-68) school is either wrong or significantly changed. and the composition is a characteristic of the molten lava from which the rock solidified. this would make things look much older than they really are when current rates of decay are applied to dating.’ it describes how geologists use field relationships to determine the relative ages of rocks.
Answers to Creationist Attacks on Carbon-14 Dating | NCSEpeople wonder how millions of years could be squeezed into the biblical account of history. unlike common carbon (12c), 14c is unstable and slowly decays, changing it back to nitrogen and releasing energy. correcting the dates increased the number to a more realistic 1., an expert in the environmental fate of radioactive elements, identified 17 flaws in the isotope dating reported in just three widely respected seminal papers that supposedly established the age of the earth at 4. argument was used against creationist work that exposed problems with radiometric dating. christian response to radiometric datingradioactive dating methodsgeological conflictthe dating gamehow dating methods workradiometric dating and the age of the earthplumbing and paradigmsresponse to geochronology: understanding the uncertainties, a presentation by dr justin paynemore on radioactive dating problemsdating in conflictradiometric backflipradioactive ‘dating’ failureradioisotope methods and rock agesfurther readingradiometric dating questions and answersrelated mediahow dating methods workradioisotope dating—an evolutionist's best friend? this is because they believe that this is an accurate eyewitness account of world history, which bears the evidence within it that it is the word of god, and therefore totally reliable and error-free. thus … a result of two hundred million years is expected to be quite close (within, say, 4 million) to the true age. this happens quite fast, yet so much helium is still in some rocks that it has not had time to escape—certainly not billions of years. this article makes the point that, contrary to the impression we are given, the radio-isotope dates are not a scientific fact but are interpretations driven by the paradigm.., radioisotopes and the age of the earth, institute for creation research, el cajon, california and creation research society, st.. / authors: ken ham, jonathan sarfati, and carl wieland, adapted from the revised & expanded answers book (master books, 2000). forms issued by radioisotope laboratories for submission with samples to be dated commonly ask how old the sample is expected to be. since the flood was accompanied by much volcanism (see noah's flood…, how did animals get from the ark to isolated places?: missing piece of the puzzle—understanding the cause of the decline of christian faith in the once-christian ‘west’ and what we can do about it. again, the stories are evaluated according to their own success in agreeing with the existing long ages belief system. this will make old things look older than they really are. however, careful measurements by dr steve austin showed this criticism to be wrong. of the intermediate decay products—such as the polonium isotopes—have very short half-lives (they decay quickly). however, even with such historical calibration, archaeologists do not regard 14c dates as absolute because of frequent anomalies. then there was a rise in 14co2 with the advent of atmospheric testing of atomic bombs in the 1950s. they rely more on dating methods that link into historical records. geology is dominated by a number of prominent granitic mountains and hills. the concentration of a parent radioactive isotope, such as rubidium-87, is graphed against the concentration of a daughter isotope, such as strontium-87, for all the samples. after this was widely accepted, further studies of the rocks brought the radiometric age down to about 1.
., rocks and landscapes of the townsville district, department of resource industries, queensland, 1990. humphreys has suggested that this may have occurred during creation week and the flood. it is also much younger than the radiometric “dates” assigned to moon rocks. the methods that have been used to estimate the age of the earth, 90 percent point to an age far less than the billions of years asserted by evolutionists. are various other radiometric dating methods used today to give ages of millions or billions of years for rocks. this effectively combines the two uranium-lead decay series into one diagram. total 14c is also proportionately lowered at this time, but whereas no terrestrial process generates any more 12c, 14c is continually being produced, and at a rate which does not depend on carbon levels (it comes from nitrogen).. humphreys, “the sea's missing salt: a dilemma for evolutionists,” proc. doubt, radiometric dating has been carried out and precise ‘dates’ have been obtained.’ and for castle hill, a prominent feature in the city of townsville, the guidebook says, ‘the age of the granite is unconfirmed. if the line is of good fit and the “age” is acceptable, it is a “good” date. again, this indicates a maximum age, not the actual age. the do the radiometric dates of millions of years mean, if they are not true ages? looking at other outcrops in the area, our geologist is able to draw a geological map which records how the rocks are related to each other in the field. these techniques, unlike carbon dating, mostly use the relative concentrations of parent and daughter products in radioactive decay chains. the only foolproof method for determining the age of something is based on eyewitness reports and a written record. gentry has researched radiohalos for many years, and published his results in leading scientific journals. carbon (12c)is found in the carbon dioxide (co2) in the air, which is taken up by plants, which in turn are eaten by animals. snelling has suggested that fractionation (sorting) of elements in the molten state in the earth's mantle could be a significant factor in explaining the ratios of isotope concentrations which are interpreted as ages. must remember that the past is not open to the normal processes of experimental science, that is, repeatable experiments in the present. now the polonium has to get into the rock before the rock solidifies, but it cannot derive a from a uranium speck in the solid rock, otherwise there would be a uranium halo. of his interest in the volcanic dyke, he collects a sample, being careful to select rock that looks fresh and unaltered. this would make things which died at that time appear older in terms of carbon dating. may be surprising to learn that evolutionary geologists themselves will not accept a radiometric date unless they think it is correct—i. such a re-calibration makes sense of anomalous data from carbon dating—for example, very discordant “dates” for different parts of a frozen musk ox carcass from alaska and an inordinately slow rate of accumulation of ground sloth dung pellets in the older layers of a cave where the layers were carbon dated.
)—how the claimed mechanism for evolution does the wrong thing.. russell humphreys gives other processes inconsistent with billions of years in the pamphlet evidence for a young world., such huge time periods cannot be fitted into the bible without compromising what the bible says about the goodness of god and the origin of sin, death and suffering—the reason jesus came into the world (see six days? earth's magnetic field has been decaying so fast that it looks like it is less than 10,000 years old. similar story surrounds the dating of the primate skull known as knm-er 1470. is entering the sea much faster than it is escaping. therefore, the 14c/12c ratio in plants/animals/the atmosphere before the flood had to be lower than what it is now. this contrasts with an age of 1550-1650 ma based on other isotope ratios, and ages of 275, 61, 0,0,and 0 ma for thorium/lead (232th/208pb) ratios in five uraninite grains., the amount of helium in zircons from hot rock is also much more consistent with a young earth (helium derives from the decay of radioactive elements). snelling, “the failure of u-th-pb 'dating' at koongarra, australia,” cen technical journal, 1995, 9(1):71-92. gives the impression that radiometric dating is very precise and very reliable—the impression generally held by the public. the “zero” ages in this case are consistent with the bible. articlesdiamonds: a creationist’s best friendthe fatal flaw with radioactive dating methodshow accurate is carbon-14 (and other radiometric) dating? would he have thought that the radiometric dating method was flawed? this would make things carbon-dated from that time appear younger than their true age. these displaced neutrons, now moving fast, hit ordinary nitrogen (14n) at lower altitudes, converting it into 14c. so, although the assumptions behind the calculation are wrong and the dates are incorrect, there may be a pattern in the results that can help geologists understand the relationships between igneous rocks in a region.'s a great method for anyone who wishes to discredit creationists beliefs; or, at least it would be if it was not so discredited. some of the evidences are: lack of erosion between rock layers supposedly separated in age by many millions of years; lack of disturbance of rock strata by biological activity (worms, roots, etc. his research, our evolutionary geologist may have discovered that other geologists believe that sedimentary rocks a are 200 million years old and sedimentary rocks b are 30 million years old. instead of questioning the method, he would say that the radiometric date was not recording the time that the rock solidified. this timescale deliberately ignores the catastrophic effects of the biblical flood, which deposited the rocks very quickly. will deal with carbon dating first and then with the other dating methods., lowering the total 12c in the biosphere (including the atmosphere—plants regrowing after the flood absorb co2, which is not replaced by the decay of the buried vegetation). cook noted that, in ores from the katanga mine, for example, there was an abundance of lead-208, a stable isotope, but no thorium-232 as a source for lead-208.