Non radiometric dating methods christian dallas dating service tx
The young-earth creationist belief that the Earth is 6,000 years old massively contradicts the scientific conclusion that it's actually 4.5 billion years old. Imagine, by analogy, that a murder suspect is being questioned by detectives.
In order to maintain this belief of theirs, creationists obviously need to call into question the trustworthiness of the dating methods used by scientists to establish the age of the Earth. They say to him: "Look, the surveillance footage clearly shows you stabbing the guy.
Understand that nobody is saying radiometric dating works perfectly in every conceivable set of circumstances; as with almost every tool in science, there are certain limitations to radiometric dating—and nobody understands these limitations better than the scientists who use these dating techniques. "As we can see here in the table from the study, the two references to mammoths provide one date of 32,700 years for the first one, and 21,300 years for the other.
Ash beds from each of these coals have been dated by 40Ar/39Ar, K-Ar, Rb-Sr, and U-Pb methods in several laboratories in the US and Canada.. And yet the results are the same within analytical error.(And I have to say, I'm excited about this project, because I finally have an opportunity to speak about dating and actually know what I'm talking about! these [radiometric dating] methods provide largely consistent results for the ages of various rock strata throughout the geologic column, which correlate well with non-radiometric dating methods, including cores, varves, dendrochronology, and others." — Allende by 2 laboratories, Guarena by 2 laboratories, and St Severin by four laboratories. the K-T impact produced tektites, which are small glass spherules that form from rock that is instantaneously melted by a large impact . Yet what we actually see is perfect consistency.—Given these facts, why do creationists distrust radiometric dating?)—Before we jump into the specific arguments made by creationists, let's begin by first establishing the veracity of radiometric dating. This pretty much eliminates any significant laboratory biases or any major analytical mistakes. they all give the same result to within a few percent."". One reason is that the half-lives of some elements vary under certain circumstances.During his lecture, he shows this slide which features five examples of the known ages of rocks not matching up with the dated ages of rocks.Notice that four of the examples show a radiometric age of less than half a million years with the fifth example showing an age of about 1.5 million years. they take 27 samples from a formation that they know in advance will give them bad dates." we couldn't trust these dating techniques." This would be like taking a bag of marijuana, rubbing some of it on your skin, and being like: "See, dude?