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.
By Eric Hovind on May 5, in Articles , Beginner Whenever the worldview of evolution is questioned, the topic of carbon dating always comes up. Here is how carbon dating works and the assumptions it is based upon. How Carbon Dating Works Radiation from the sun strikes the atmosphere of the earth all day long. This energy converts about 21 pounds of nitrogen into radioactive carbon
People who ask about carbon (14 C) dating usually want to know about the radiometric dating methods that are claimed to give millions and billions of years—carbon dating can only give thousands of years. People wonder how millions of years could be squeezed into the biblical account of.
Carbon , Radiometric Dating and Index Fossils Carbon dating is used to determine the age of biological artifacts up to 50, years old. This technique is widely used on recent artifacts, but educators and students alike should note that this technique will not work on older fossils like those of the dinosaurs alleged to be millions of years old. This technique is not restricted to bones; it can also be used on cloth, wood and plant fibers.
Carbon dating has been used successfully on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Minoan ruins and tombs of the pharaohs among other things. Carbon is a radioactive isotope of carbon. The half-life of carbon is approximately 5, years. The short half-life of carbon means it cannot be used to date fossils that are allegedly extremely old, e. The question should be whether or not carbon can be used to date any artifacts at all?
The answer is not simple. There are a few categories of artifacts that can be dated using carbon ; however, they cannot be more 50, years old. Carbon cannot be used to date biological artifacts of organisms that did not get their carbon dioxide from the air.
Microbial mats[ edit ] The fossil Charniodiscus is barely distinguishable from the “elephant skin” texture on this cast. Microbial mats are areas of sediment stabilised by the presence of colonies of microbes that secrete sticky fluids or otherwise bind the sediment particles. They appear to migrate upwards when covered by a thin layer of sediment but this is an illusion caused by the colony’s growth; individuals do not, themselves, move. If too thick a layer of sediment is deposited before they can grow or reproduce through it, parts of the colony will die leaving behind fossils with a characteristically wrinkled “elephant skin” and tubercular texture.
Although microbial mats were once widespread, the evolution of grazing organisms in the Cambrian vastly reduced their numbers.
Dating – Rubidium–strontium method: The radioactive decay of rubidium (87Rb) to strontium (87Sr) was the first widely used dating system that utilized the isochron method. Rubidium is a relatively abundant trace element in Earth’s crust and can be found in many common rock-forming minerals in which it substitutes for the major element potassium.
So, how do we know how old a fossil is? There are two main methods determining a fossils age, relative dating and absolute dating. Relative dating is used to determine a fossils approximate age by comparing it to similar rocks and fossils of known ages. Absolute dating is used to determine a precise age of a fossil by using radiometric dating to measure the decay of isotopes, either within the fossil or more often the rocks associated with it. Relative Dating The majority of the time fossils are dated using relative dating techniques.
Using relative dating the fossil is compared to something for which an age is already known. For example if you have a fossil trilobite and it was found in the Wheeler Formation. The Wheeler Formation has been previously dated to approximately million year old, so we know the trilobite is also about million years old.
Scientists can use certain types of fossils referred to as index fossils to assist in relative dating via correlation.
The carcass of the four-legged land creature was not flattened, as is the case with many fossilized vertebrates. But most strangely, it was found in an area known primarily for fossilized marine creatures. Previous vertebrate fossils found in this oil sand formation were marine reptiles, like the ichthyosaur and plesiosaur.
The Energy Return on Energy Invested (ERoEI or EROI) of any energy gathering system is a measure of that system’s efficiency. The concept was originally derived in ecology and has been transferred to analyse human industrial society.
Primary source references As a preface to this document, I want to point out that it is a shame that we have to continue to refute the same arguments that evolutionists keep bringing up over and over again in their attempts to argue against the fact of creation, which fact has been well established since the day the earth was created ex nihilo several thousand years ago. It is also a shame that the masses have bought all this based on some circular reasoning about fossils, where fossils tend to be found buried, similarities between various life forms, the presence of certain decay products in rocks, and other inherently speculative arguments about the past, based on phenomena that exist in the present.
If I hope to accomplish anything, it will be to simply encourage critical thinking. One must get past the arguments ad populum that its popularity counts for something , ad hominem that if you attack the person making the argument, this counts for something , and especially ad baculum that there are people who have the clout to decree it as true , to ask the key questions and challenge the unsubstantiated assumptions and thinking of those who would hold to the evolution position.
Today there are an increasing number of anti-creationist authors who are producing books and periodicals that make this relatively brief presentation insufficient to deal with all the points in dispute. Those defending creation today who don’t have the time to devote their life’s study to gaining expertise in all fields of inquiry must principally be prepared to think critically, logically, and challenge unsubstantiated assumptions made by these people.
How does young earth creationism handle the evidence for millions of years in the fossil record? The trick with interpreting the fossil record is that most paleontologists also subscribe an atheistic version of evolution. They interpret the fossil record in terms of that particular worldview, inspect the interpretation, and note that it confirms the theory, which is more than a little circular. The question, then, is how do creationists interpret the fossil record?
Bones can’t be dated with the potassium/argon method, Bill. Only igneous rock can be dated that way. Now, parts of the geological formation in which the fossils were found have been dated by various radiometric methods, and the consensus is that the rocks themselves are million years old.
Research illuminates inaccuracies in radiocarbon dating June 5, by Daniel Aloi, Cornell University Sturt Manning cores a multi-century old Juniperus phoenicea tree near Petra in southern Jordan. Cornell University Radiocarbon dating is a key tool archaeologists use to determine the age of plants and objects made with organic material.
But new research shows that commonly accepted radiocarbon dating standards can miss the mark—calling into question historical timelines. Archaeologist Sturt Manning and colleagues have revealed variations in the radiocarbon cycle at certain periods of time, affecting frequently cited standards used in archaeological and historical research relevant to the southern Levant region, which includes Israel, southern Jordan and Egypt. These variations, or offsets, of up to 20 years in the calibration of precise radiocarbon dating could be related to climatic conditions.
Pre-modern radiocarbon chronologies rely on standardized Northern and Southern Hemisphere calibration curves to obtain calendar dates from organic material. These standard calibration curves assume that at any given time radiocarbon levels are similar and stable everywhere across each hemisphere. Juniperus phoenicea sample from Taybet Zaman, Jordan. So we wondered whether the radiocarbon levels relevant to dating organic material might also vary for different areas and whether this might affect archaeological dating.
Departures from this assumption are quite common, particularly in areas of complex geological history, but such departures can provide useful information that is of value in elucidating thermal histories. A deficiency of 40 Ar in a sample of a known age can indicate a full or partial melt in the thermal history of the area. Reliability in the dating of a geological feature is increased by sampling disparate areas which have been subjected to slightly different thermal histories. Ar—Ar dating is a similar technique which compares isotopic ratios from the same portion of the sample to avoid this problem.
A collection of awe-inspiring photos from around the world, science infographics and free, high-resolution wallpapers of Earth, nature and space.
Instead they are now publishing an abbreviated version on their Total Energy web page titled: They have just released their latest data through February All the data below is in thousand barrels per day and through February unless otherwise noted. February production was 79, , bpd, or , bpd below the peak. Average for the first two months of was 79, So with world production continuing to decline, there is little doubt that production will be well below production.
Obviously Canada is counting something that the EIA is not. And those May wildfires will not help at all. The only question left to be answered is how fast will she decline?
Such time determinations are made and the record of past geologic events is deciphered by studying the distribution and succession of rock strata, as well as the character of the fossil organisms preserved within the strata. Grand Canyon wall cutaway diagram showing the ages of the rock layers. According to a long-standing principle of the geosciences, that of superposition, the oldest layer within a sequence of strata is at the base and the layers are progressively younger with ascending order.
The relative ages of the rock strata deduced in this manner can be corroborated and at times refined by the examination of the fossil forms present. The tracing and matching of the fossil content of separate rock outcrops i.
Radiometric dating is often used to “prove” rocks are millions of years old. Once you understand the basic science, however, you can see how wrong assumptions lead to incorrect dates. This three-part series will help you properly understand radiometric dating, the assumptions that lead to.
The Radiometric Dating Game Radiometric dating methods estimate the age of rocks using calculations based on the decay rates of radioactive elements such as uranium, strontium, and potassium. On the surface, radiometric dating methods appear to give powerful support to the statement that life has existed on the earth for hundreds of millions, even billions, of years. We are told that these methods are accurate to a few percent, and that there are many different methods.
We are told that of all the radiometric dates that are measured, only a few percent are anomalous. This gives us the impression that all but a small percentage of the dates computed by radiometric methods agree with the assumed ages of the rocks in which they are found, and that all of these various methods almost always give ages that agree with each other to within a few percentage points.
Since there doesn’t seem to be any systematic error that could cause so many methods to agree with each other so often, it seems that there is no other rational conclusion than to accept these dates as accurate. However, this causes a problem for those who believe based on the Bible that life has only existed on the earth for a few thousand years, since fossils are found in rocks that are dated to be over million years old by radiometric methods, and some fossils are found in rocks that are dated to be billions of years old.
If these dates are correct, this calls the Biblical account of a recent creation of life into question. After study and discussion of this question, I now believe that the claimed accuracy of radiometric dating methods is a result of a great misunderstanding of the data, and that the various methods hardly ever agree with each other, and often do not agree with the assumed ages of the rocks in which they are found.
The way it really is: Even the way dates are reported e. However, although we can measure many things about a rock, we cannot directly measure its age. For example, we can measure its mass, its volume, its colour, the minerals in it, their size and the way they are arranged. We can crush the rock and measure its chemical composition and the radioactive elements it contains.
Newly discovered human-like footprints from Crete may put the established narrative of early human evolution to the test. The footprints are approximately million years old and were made at a.
The Potassium Argon Reaction Ar 40 is used for several reasons. First of all, Argon is inert. It does not chemically react with other elements at all. So Argon does not attach itself to the rock or any minerals in the rock. Secondly, Argon is usually a gas. These features are thought to allow any naturally occurring Argon from contaminating our measurements of the Argon 40 that is being produced from the radioactive decay of K When volcanic material flows over the land, the naturally occurring Argon gas is driven off by the excess heat.
When the rock is molten hot, it is more liquid in texture, allowing the Argon gas to escape. If all the gas is driven off, then there should be no Argon left in the rock. Once the rock cools and hardens, it is considered to be a closed system, because any new Ar 40 that is produced by the breakdown of K40 is trapped inside the rock crystal and cannot get out.