Would you radiometric dating info join. agree
Posted in Dating
Radiometric dating is not a reliable way to determine the age of a rock. If you want to know what evolutionists believe about radioactive dating, this is the essay to read. We agree. Radiometric dating methods are the strongest direct evidence that geologists have for the age of the Earth. All these methods point to Earth being very, very old - several billions of years old.
H Hafnium-tungsten dating Hallstatt plateau Helium dating. I Ionium-thorium dating Isochron dating Isotopic signature. K K-Ar dating K-Ca dating. L Lead-lead dating Lutetium-hafnium dating. O Oldest dated rocks. P Pleochroic halo Primordial nuclide.
S Samarium-neodymium dating. T Thermochronology.
Radiometric dating / Carbon dating
U Uranium-lead dating Uranium-thorium dating Uranium-uranium dating. Only rarely does a creationist actually find an incorrect radiometric result Austin ; Rugg and Austin that has not already been revealed and discussed in the scientific literature. The creationist approach of focusing on examples where radiometric dating yields incorrect results is a curious one for two reasons.
First, it provides no evidence whatsoever to support their claim that the earth is very young. If the earth were only years old, then surely there should be some scientific evidence to confirm that hypothesis; yet the creationists have produced not a shred of it so far.
Where are the data and age calculations that result in a consistent set of ages for all rocks on earth, as well as those from the moon and the meteorites, no greater than 10 years? Glaringly absent, it seems. Second, it is an approach doomed to failure at the outset. Creationists seem to think that a few examples of incorrect radiometric ages invalidate all of the results of radiometric dating, but such a conclusion is illogical.
Even things that work well do not work well all of the time and under all circumstances. Try, for example, wearing a watch that is not waterproof while swimming. It will probably fail, but what would a reasonable person conclude from that? That watches do not work? A few verified examples of incorrect radiometric ages are simply insufficient to prove that radiometric dating is invalid.
All they indicate is that the methods are not infallible. Those of us who have developed and used dating techniques to solve scientific problems are well aware that the systems are not perfect; we ourselves have provided numerous examples of instances in which the techniques fail.
We often test them under controlled conditions to learn when and why they fail so we will not use them incorrectly. We have even discredited entire techniques. For example, after extensive testing over many years, it was concluded that uranium-helium dating is highly unreliable because the small helium atom diffuses easily out of minerals over geologic time.
Radiometric dating or radioactive dating is a technique used to date materials such as rocks or carbon, in which trace radioactive impurities were selectively incorporated when they formed. The method compares the abundance of a naturally occurring radioactive isotope within the material and the abundance of its decay products, which form at a known constant rate of decay. Wikimedia Commons has media related to Radiometric dating. The use of radioactive isotopes to determine the absolute age of a material. The main article for this category is Radiometric dating.
As a result, this method is not used except in rare and highly specialized applications. These methods provide valuable and valid age data in most instances, although there is a small percentage of cases in which even these generally reliable methods yield incorrect results.
Such failures may be due to laboratory errors mistakes happenunrecognized geologic factors nature sometimes fools usor misapplication of the techniques no one is perfect. In order to accomplish their goal of discrediting radiometric dating, however, creationists are faced with the daunting task of showing that a preponderance of radiometric ages are wrong - that the methods are untrustworthy most of the time.
Not only that, they have to show the flaws in those dating studies that provide independent corroborative evidence that radiometric methods work. This is a tall order and the creationists have made no progress so far.
It is rare for a study involving radiometric dating to contain a single determination of age. Usually determinations of age are repeated to avoid laboratory errors, are obtained on more than one rock unit or more than one mineral from a rock unit in order to provide a cross-check, or are evaluated using other geologic information that can be used to test and corroborate the radiometric ages. Scientists who use radiometric dating typically use every means at their disposal to check, recheck, and verify their results, and the more important the results the more they are apt to be checked and rechecked by others.
As a result, it is nearly impossible to be completely fooled by a good set of radiometric age data collected as part of a well-designed experiment. The purpose of this paper is to describe briefly a few typical radiometric dating studies, out of hundreds of possible examples documented in the scientific literature, in which the ages are validated by other available information.
I have selected four examples from recent literature, mostly studies involving my work and that of a few close colleagues because it was easy to do so.
I could have selected many more examples but then this would have turned into a book rather than the intended short paper. In the Cretaceous Period, a large meteorite struck the earth at a location near the present town of Manson, Iowa. The heat of the impact melted some of the feldspar crystals in the granitic rocks of the impact zone, thereby resetting their internal radiometric clocks.
The impact also created shocked quartz crystals that were blasted into the air and subsequently fell to the west into the inland sea that occupied much of central North America at that time. Today this shocked quartz is found in South Dakota, Colorado, and Nebraska in a thin layer the Crow Creek Member within a thick rock formation known as the Pierre Shale. The Pierre Shale, which is divided into identifiable sedimentary beds called members, also contains abundant fossils of numerous species of ammonites, ancestors of the chambered nautilus.
The fossils, when combined with geologic mapping, allow the various exposed sections of the Pierre Shale to be pieced together in their proper relative positions to form a complete composite section Figure 1. The Pierre Shale also contains volcanic ash that was erupted from volcanoes and then fell into the sea, where it was preserved as thin beds. Figure 1. There are three important things to note about these results.
First, each age is based on numerous measurements; laboratory errors, had there been any, would be readily apparent. Second, ages were measured on two very different minerals, sanidine and biotite, from several of the ash beds. Third, the radiometric ages agree, within analytical error, with the relative positions of the dated ash beds as determined by the geologic mapping and the fossil assemblages; that is, the ages get older from top to bottom as they should.
Finally, the inferred age of the shocked quartz, as determined from the age of the melted feldspar in the Manson impact structure Meteorites, most of which are fragments of asteroids, are very interesting objects to study because they provide important evidence about the age, composition, and history of the early solar system. There are many types of meteorites. Some are from primitive asteroids whose material is little modified since they formed from the early solar nebula.
Others are from larger asteroids that got hot enough to melt and send lava flows to the surface. A few are even from the Moon and Mars. The most primitive type of meteorites are called chondrites, because they contain little spheres of olivine crystals known as chondrules.
Because of their importance, meteorites have been extensively dated radiometrically; the vast majority appear to be 4.
Some meteorites, because of their mineralogy, can be dated by more than one radiometric dating technique, which provides scientists with a powerful check of the validity of the results. Unfortunately, they mixed measurement units when they expressed the ratio in moles per gram.
So, we have to convert moles the number of atoms to grams the mass of atoms for the mixed ratio to make sense.
One mole of argon 40 gas weighs 40 grams. This cement truck holds 10 cubic yards of sand.
Pretend those 2 million teaspoons of white sand are radioactive and turn to black sand at the same rate as potassium decays to argon. After 1.
Or, if you prefer to look at it another way, if you had 12, cement trucks a convoy more than 35 miles long full of our mythical radioactive white sand, after 1. Just a tiny bit of argon gas trapped in lava will yield an apparent age that is millions of years too old.
It did not work its way into the rock from some external source. It is not experimental error. The amount just exceeds how much they incorrectly think should be there. Despite that, the amount of argon was different in every sample, ranging from the equivalent of 1 million to 43 million years of potassium decay.
Granite is speckled because the minerals were not evenly mixed when the granite was created. Some parts of the rock have more dark minerals, and some parts have more light colored minerals.
Nov 04, Radiometric dating of rocks and minerals using naturally occurring, long-lived radioactive isotopes is troublesome for young-earth creationists because the techniques have provided overwhelming evidence of the antiquity of the earth and life. Some so-called creation scientists have attempted to show that radiometric dating does not work on. Radiometric dating (often called radioactive dating) is a way to find out how old something countryconnectionsqatar.com method compares the amount of a naturally occurring radioactive isotope and its decay products, in countryconnectionsqatar.com method uses known decay rates. It is the main way to learn the age of rocks and other geological features, including the age of the Earth itself. Radiometric dating info - Register and search over 40 million singles: chat. Join the leader in mutual relations services and find a date today. Join and search! Rich man looking for older man & younger woman. I'm laid back and get along with everyone. Looking for an old soul like myself. I'm a woman. My interests include staying up late and taking naps.
One should not expect argon or potassium, or uranium, or lead, or any other mineral to be perfectly homogenously distributed through rocks created by a single process at a specific time. They fudge the data by subtracting an estimated amount of excess argon.
If they subtract too much, they get an age that is too young. Potassium-argon dating is unreliable because it is based on wild guesses of how much of the argon came from decay of potassium, and how much was in the rock to begin with.
Yet a fourth method, rubidium-strontium dating, is even better than potassium-argon dating for old rocks. He says. The nuclide rubidium Rb87 decays to strontium Sr87 with a half-life of 47 billion years.
Strontium occurs naturally as a mixture of several nuclides. If three minerals form at the same time in different regions of a magma chamber, they will have identical ratios of the different strontium nuclides. The total amount of strontium might be different in the different minerals, but the ratios will be the same.
Now, suppose that one mineral has a lot of Rb87, another has very little, and the third has an in-between amount. That means that when the minerals crystallize there is a fixed ratio of RbSr As time goes on, atoms of Rb87 decay to Sr, resulting in a change in the RbSr87 ratio, and also in a change in the ratio of Sr87 to other nuclides of strontium.
The decrease in the RbSr87 ratio is exactly matched by the gain of Sr87 in the strontium-nuclide ratio. It has to be - the two sides of the equation must balance. Rubidium-strontium dating has basically the same problem as uranium-lead dating and potassium-argon dating.
There are different amounts of the various strontium and rubidium isotopes in different parts of the rock.
It merely shows that whatever process produces more rubidium in a rock also produces more strontium in that rock and more potassium, too. Further, radiometric dates can be checked by other dating techniques.
When they are, the dates almost always agree within the range of expected error. But, if they agree, the results are accepted without question. Evolutionists are like a boss I once had, who only thought I was right when I said what he wanted to hear.
An international radiocarbon dating is a material is an international radiocarbon dating and radiometric dating method of articulated bivalves. Web-Info radiocarbon from the genetic information on methods of. Get along with radiometric dating is radiometric dating can be shown to get a very specific rate of something that. Radiometric Dating. Radiometric dating is not a reliable way to determine the age of a rock. Perhaps the best defense of radiometric dating we have ever seen is An Essay on Radiometric Dating by Jonathon Woolf. 1 It is worth examining because Woolf does a much better than average job of presenting the evolutionists' arguments. If you want to know what evolutionists . Other articles where Radiometric dating is discussed: Earth sciences: Radiometric dating: In , shortly after the discovery of radioactivity, the American chemist Bertram Boltwood suggested that lead is one of the disintegration products of uranium, in which case the older a uranium-bearing mineral the greater should be its proportional part of lead. Analyzing .
Of those dates, only 10 of them fall in the isochron range of 4. The non-isochron dates range from 40 million years to 8.
Radiometric dating info
Radiometric dating methods are neither accurate nor consistent because except for C14 ratios of isotopes have absolutely nothing to do with the age of the rock containing them. Carbon 14 dates are accurate for the past 4, years because legitimate correction factors have been determined by calculating the ratio of carbon isotopes in the atmosphere in the past.
These ratios were computed by calibrating carbon 14 dates using known historical dates. Every other radiometric dating method depends upon knowing the initial ratio of isotopes. There is no way of knowing what the initial ratio was.
I congratulate, it seems brilliant idea to me is25.05.2020|Reply