Would you like to merge this question into it? MERGE already exists as an alternate of this question. Would you like to make it the primary and merge this question into it? MERGE exists and is an alternate of. In many instances, absolute dating is considered more accurate than relative dating because it gives a specific time or age to an event or object but with an accuracy that varies with the particular technique and particular object. Relative dating gives one the ordering of events or gives one the relative ages, i.
An imprint of a leaf, an insect preserved in amber or a footprint are all examples of different types of fossils. Scientists use fossils to gather information about the lives and evolutionary relationships of organisms, for understanding geological change and even for locating fossil fuel reserves. The Facts The oldest fossils on Earth are about 3. Hard body parts like teeth, bone and shell are most likely to be preserved reference 1. Peeking into the Past Fossil remains can give us insight into how prehistoric plants and animals obtained food, reproduced and even how they behaved.
reasons why you cant trust carbon dating creationist creationism evolution dinosaurs. Since carbon dating measures the amount of carbon still in a fossil, then the date given is not accurate. This is just one of many inaccurate dates given by Carbon dating. Mollusks.
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. To me it has been a real eye opener to see all the processes that are taking place and their potential influence on radiometric dating. Radiometric dating is largely done on rock that has formed from solidified lava. Lava properly called magma before it erupts fills large underground chambers called magma chambers. Most people are not aware of the many processes that take place in lava before it erupts and as it solidifies, processes that can have a tremendous influence on daughter to parent ratios.
Such processes can cause the daughter product to be enriched relative to the parent, which would make the rock look older, or cause the parent to be enriched relative to the daughter, which would make the rock look younger. This calls the whole radiometric dating scheme into serious question. Geologists assert that older dates are found deeper down in the geologic column, which they take as evidence that radiometric dating is giving true ages, since it is apparent that rocks that are deeper must be older.
But even if it is true that older radiometric dates are found lower down in the geologic column, which is open to question, this can potentially be explained by processes occurring in magma chambers which cause the lava erupting earlier to appear older than the lava erupting later.
Dating a Fossil
Critics have suggested the fossils, which are invisible to the naked eye, are just unusual shapes in the rock and not evidence of life at all. Now, work led by Professor William Schopf, the palaeobiologist who first described the specimens in , has put the matter to rest. The image’s colours have been enhanced after it was sent back to Earth.
The tallest of the skeletons uncovered measured at 1. The park is famous for its geothermal activity — which includes its spectacular, flowing springs as well as the famous “Old Faithful” geyser that sprays water out every hour or so. Used for conditions such as myopia and cataracts.
The fact that dating techniques most often agree with each other is why scientists tend to trust them in the first place. Nearly every college and university library in the country has periodicals such as Science, Nature, and specific geology journals that give the results of dating studies.
Another example of this is God and The Sun at Fatima. She said that something really amazing is going to happen here at this certain date and they told everybody. Everybody showed up and they all saw it. This book is by Stanley Jaki, who is a physicist and a Catholic priest and a science historian. He goes into pages of interviewing people and documenting all this. This is as close as you can get to a scientific investigation of a miracle.
The lab was closed in , but for almost 30 years there was a lab at Princeton and they would investigate paranormal phenomena. They proved that they could send and receive telepathic messages.
More Bad News for Radiometric Dating
Frequently Asked Questions and their answers The following is a list of questions that appear frequently in the Usenet newsgroup talk. Brief answers are given for each question along with a pointer to one or more relevant files. Outside links will open in new windows. The purpose of the talk. What is the purpose of the Talk. The purpose of the TO Archive is to provide easy access to the many FAQ frequently asked question files and essays have been posted to the Usenet newsgroup talk.
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? We need to begin with the premise that it is impossible for the Bible to contradict true science, as God is the author of all truth and knowledge. That is to say, the Bible may be misinterpreted by men, but it will never be wrong. The scientific observations may be wrong, the biblical interpretations may be wrong, but the Scriptures never are. Yet the Bible is not always specific on all points. This, of course, is illogical.
At the most, all that might be disproved is that particular interpretation of Scripture. All that being said, we as Young Earth Creationists feel there are reasons to doubt the prevailing view of the fossil record.
Scientists tell why evolution is not supported by the facts!
Everything Worth Knowing About Scientific Dating Methods This dating scene is dead. The good dates are confirmed using at least two different methods, ideally involving multiple independent labs for each method to cross-check results. Sometimes only one method is possible, reducing the confidence researchers have in the results. Methods fall into one of two categories: These methods — some of which are still used today — provide only an approximate spot within a previously established sequence:
If the fossils, or the dating of the fossils, could be shown to be inaccurate, all such information would have to be rejected as unsafe. Geologists and paleontologists are highly self-critical, and they have worried for decades about these issues.
Maybe you define answer as somethng apprehensible, acceptable and palatable. Vinny This answers my question; why are atheists always consumed with everything God? You know who spends a lot of energy on conversion efforts? Do you understand this concept at all??? Anthony Zarrella Why should we? If you think you have some truth about the way people ought to behave, you share it and try to convince others. They are not reasonable, but they are obviously shareable.
Since religious ideas are irrational, there is a grave limitation on the ability to share them. But you certainly should be free to talk about them to anyone willing to listen. For the record, I also fully support your legal right to disseminate atheist philosophies in whatever non-coercive way you wish, and to support laws that embody atheist principles to the extent that they do not directly or indirectly compel the abandonment of religious belief or practice.
How Is Radioactive Dating Used to Date Fossils
Models successfully reproduce temperatures since globally, by land, in the air and the ocean. Models are unreliable “[Models] are full of fudge factors that are fitted to the existing climate, so the models more or less agree with the observed data. But there is no reason to believe that the same fudge factors would give the right behaviour in a world with different chemistry, for example in a world with increased CO2 in the atmosphere.
Scientists use a technique called radiometric dating to estimate the ages of rocks, fossils, and the earth. Many people have been led to believe that radiometric dating methods have proved the earth to be billions of years old.
Introduction Radiocarbon, or Carbon dating, was developed by W. It is perhaps one of the most widely used and best known absolute dating methods and has become an indispensable part of an archaeologist’s tool-kit. In , Libby was awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry for radiocarbon dating. This will enable the reader to gain an appreciation of the advantages and disadvantages of this process.
Is carbon dating applied to the Qur’anic manuscripts? Can radiocarbon dating provide more accurate results than traditional palaeographic techniques and associated methods? We will focus on these questions below. Principles And Practice Carbon has two stable, nonradioactive isotopes: In addition, there are tiny amounts of the unstable radioactive isotope carbon 14C on Earth. These isotopes are present in the following amounts 12C – In other words, one carbon 14 atom exists in nature for every 1, , , , 12C atoms in a living being.
Although 14C takes up only a minute fraction of the carbon content, its presence in carbon-bearing materials form the basis for important geochronological and environmental applications. These energetic neutrons dissociate a nitrogen molecule into atoms and then reacts with these atoms to form 14C. The reaction can be written as:
Why everything you’ve been told about evolution is wrong
First let me just give you a philosophical overview as to why the question is disingenuous and you are barking up the wrong tree. Was Richard Leakey correct, did they toss out the fossil, or the theories on early man? No, he was not. Of course, that is because he was taken out of context in that selective quote a favorite creationist tactic.
C14 dating is very accurate for wood used up to about 4, years ago. This is only because it is well calibrated with objects of known age. Example: wood found in a grave of known age by historically reliable documents is the standard for that time for the C14 content.
C Dating , Fossil Dating , Fossils. To begin with several processes have to take place in order for fossil formation to occur and no matter which of these processes causes the fossil to form it requires a bit of luck as most remains of plants and animals do NOT become fossils. Freezing is one way of fossil formation and, in fact, is the best way although it happens rarely. In this process the remains bones, shells, etc must be continually frozen from the time of death until some bright-eyed Paleontologist comes along and digs them out of the ice.
Many remains of mammoths and wooly rhinos have been found in the ice in the far northern reaches of Alaska, Canada, Greenland, and Siberia. Some are so perfectly preserved they look as if they are simply asleep. Flesh, hair, and even skin are often times found still intact on the animal. Some of these animals appear to have been Flash Frozen frozen instantly as they still have food in their mouths and stomachs.
In fact, frozen mammoth fossils have been found with half eaten buttercups still in their mouths. Additionally, some animal fossil remains have been found frozen in what appears to be running motion as if they were trying to escape some cataclysm.
Several Christian ministries promote the idea that the earth is less than 10, years old, which they say comes from the Bible. In reality, the Bible makes no claim as to the age of the earth, although it does establish a minimum age. This page examines some of the history of the controversy—what the Bible actually says and does not say—and the scientific evidence surrounding the age of the earth. Age of the earth according to the Bible The following is a summary of the biblical evidence presented on this website regarding the age of the earth.
Radiometric dating is a much misunderstood phenomenon. Evolutionists often misunderstand the method, assuming it gives a definite age for tested samples. Creationists also often misunderstand it, claiming that the process is inaccurate.
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.
5 Major Reasons Why Creationists are Dead Wrong
What he does is dig things out of his backyard and then send them to the Smithsonian Institute. Scot labels his exhibits with scientific names, insisting that they are actual archaeological finds. This man really exists and does this in his spare time! Bear this letter in mind next time you think you are challenged in your job to respond to a difficult situation in writing.
Williams, Thank you for your latest submission to the Institute, labelled ‘ D, layer seven, next to the clothesline post Rather, it appears that what you have found is the head of a Barbie doll, of the variety that one of our staff, who has small children, believes to be ‘Malibu Barbie.
the air. Thus, a freshly killed mussel has far less C than a freshly killed something else, which is why the C dating method makes freshwater mussels seem older than they really are.
Cells are most susceptible to damage by ionizing radiation when they are dividing. As you might have inferred from this, this means that if the radiation experienced by these cockroaches was consistent over a long period of time, they are going to be significantly more susceptible to problems than the numbers quoted in this article. The above numbers are using specific bursts of radiation over a short span.
More accurate research would then have to be done to see what levels of radiation kill or otherwise will significantly harm the roaches that are currently having their cells divide. Further, ionizing radiation is cumulative, so that would have to be factored in as well. The largest nuclear bomb ever detonated was the Tsar Bomba, detonated by the Soviet Union. This bomb was estimated at around megatons of TNT or about just shy of times more powerful than the nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
The Deinococcus radiodurans microbe was first discovered growing on rotten canned meat that had been sprayed with an ionizing substance meant to preserve it. This microbe had no problems surviving such low levels of radiation. This is also why radiation is effective at such low doses at killing cancer cells, relative to what is required to damage healthy cells. Cancer cells divide much quicker than most other cells in the human body; thus, you can kill the cancer cells faster than the healthy cells and hopefully find a happy medium where all the cancer cells die, but enough of the healthy cells remain and are undamaged enough for the person to continue living on more or less as before.
While cockroaches may not be well equipped to survive nuclear fallout, relative to various microbes and most of their insect brethren, these little critters are extremely hardy with fossil records of cockroaches dating all the way back to million B.