July 19, at Where sampling allowed a second aliquot to be taken, we tested the integrity of the calcite by comparing the dates of the upper layers of the calcite to those closer to the painting. In all cases, the date from the deeper sample was older, supporting the reliability of our method Our U-series ages ranged from 0. If you will notice, the paper mentions that upper layers of the calcite were dated too in addition to those closer to the painting. The point of this is to verify that the U-series dating gives correct results relative to the layer. The actual dating of the paintings, with a lower bound based on the above layer and an upper bound based on the below layer, is given in figure 2 just below the quote http: However, since there are natural disturbances, what is the justification for saying that the values should be closer to 0. Also, the article points out the ratio with disturbances , should be on either side of 0. I look forward to hearing your response to these points.
Methods of detecting exoplanets
Consequently, much attention has been given in the past decade to the development of methods involving the radioactive isotopes of the alkali metals, rubidium and potassium. These are much more common, and the potassium minerals especially are commonly found in sedimentary rocks. One of the main workers in the development of the rubidium-strontium method has been Dr.
His book, The Young Earth (J. Morris, ), has an initial 35 pages which might just as well be the lesson book for a fundamentalist Sunday school. This is followed by about 75 pages of a mixture of geologic interpretation and Biblical themes.
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: Think of it as ordering rather than dating.
One of the first and most basic scientific dating methods is also one of the easiest to understand. Paleontologists still commonly use biostratigraphy to date fossils, often in combination with paleomagnetism and tephrochronology. A submethod within biostratigraphy is faunal association:
Carbon 14 in Diamonds: Evidence for a Young Earth
Young-earth creationism and radiometric dating I received an email from a fellow named Adam recently and thought I’d address it here. Given that last statement, by any definition of the word, these people do not do science. They do Biblical apologetics.
Watch video · Age of the earth evidences for a young age of the earth and the universe. by Don Batten. Published: 4 June , last updated 13 September There are many categories of evidence for the age of the earth and the cosmos that indicate they are much younger than is .
Creationist Geologic Time Scale: Should the scientific community continue to fight rear-guard skirmishes with creationists, or insist that “young-earthers” defend their model in toto? Introduction This manuscript proposes a new approach for science’s battle against the rising influence in America of pseudo-science and the Creationist movement. The framework of Creationist Bible-based earth history, focusing on Genesis and the Noachian flood, can be assembled into a single geologic time scale Figure 1 , enlarged by addition of many geologic facts, difficult for Creationists to explain.
Figure 1 is an abbreviated version of the time scale outlined in the following paragraph which was redrawn and published by the American Scientist. Some of the items are so absurd that all but the most dedicated fundamentalists will see the overall picture as scientific nonsense, even bordering on humor, a most rare commodity in Creationist literature. Science, rather than using its traditional defensive approach of item-by-item rebuttal of Creationist attacks, needs to take the offensive by challenging Creationists to defend their “scientific” view of earth history as represented by this time scale.
Note that the numbered items in this Time Scale are further expanded in subsequent numbered sections which are keyed to these same numbers. Day 2 – Waters above and waters below.
Young Earth creationism
A indicates alpha decay; B indicates beta decay. We can calculate the half-lives of all of these elements. All the intermediate nuclides between U and Pb are highly unstable, with short half-lives. Then any excess of Pb must be the result of the decay of U When we know how much excess Pb there is, and we know the current quantity of U , we can calculate how long the U in our sample has been decaying, and therefore how long ago the rock formed. Th and U also give rise to radioactive series — different series from that of U , containing different nuclides and ending in different nuclides of lead.
With the resurgence of young-earth creationism in recent decades, the debate over the age of the earth and the proper hermeneutical approach to Genesis has intensified within evangelical circles. Most scientists and many Christians believe that the radiometric dating methods prove that the earth is billion years old. Recent research.
The only official collection of quotes by Dr. Don Patton on the internet. An important message from Dr. Patton regarding these quotes: I use most of these quotes as handouts to provide documentation for my lecture series. They were not intended to stand alone as arguments by themselves. However this web site www. I commented at the time that some of the quotes would not make sense without the lecture. A few two have charged that a small number of these quotes misrepresent the intent of the context.
When the charges were investigated, it was discovered, sure enough, if they had heard them used in the context of the lecture, they would have seen that the use was appropriate. It should be remembered that we are not quoting these individuals to imply that they are creationists. Rather, just the opposite.
1. Rate of Decay
Talwani Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. Since these ages were much younger than what Ewing considered to be realistic, he suggested that the rate of deposition of these sediments may have been much smaller in the past. Young-Earth advocates, on the other hand, have cited this paper as claiming that the Earth cannot in fact be older than 2 to 5 million years.
The key to understanding this puzzle is to note the date of Ewing’s paper.
Essay Dating the Rocks of the Grand Canyon (Old Earth Comparative Essay 1 Dating the Rocks of the Grand Canyon (Old Earth vs. Young Earth) Dating the rocks of the Grand Canyon is a scientific way to find out the age of this mysterious landmark.
Meerts response in blue. Steve creationist in green Special Note: At the time, I happened to be in Sweden lecturing for a week and did not get to his post until my return. Steve has never responded to my answers since Dec 5, I will give full citations to every paper I quote. For the sake of simplicity, I will discuss the papers in chronological order.
Young Earth creationism
How accurate are carbon-dating methods? All methods of radioactive dating rely on three assumptions that may not necessarily be true: Rate of Decay It is assumed that the rate of decay has remained constant over time. This assumption is backed by numerous scientific studies and is relatively sound. However, conditions may have been different in the past and could have influenced the rate of decay or formation of radioactive elements.
Evolutionists assume that the rate of cosmic bombardment of the atmosphere has always remained constant and that the rate of decay has remained constant.
Young earth creationists reject radiometric dating methods, including claims that decay rates are not constant. For a critical review, see Randall Isaac “Assessing the RATE Project,” Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, vol 59, no 2, June , p
Carbon and the Age of the Earth From the June issue of the Creation Answers Newsletter Wayne Spencer Radiometric Dating techniques are used to calculate the age of certain types of materials which have radioactive atoms within them. Recent research from creationists has uncovered exciting evidence that the Earth is only several thousand years old, as the Bible implies, rather than 4.
Basics on Radiometric Dating Before delving into the details of the Carbon evidence, some introduction to radiometric dating is in order. There are many radioactive elements used by scientists to date rocks and other materials. In dating rocks, Earth scientists only attempt to date igneous rocks, such as basalt, which is solidified lava from volcanic eruptions. Sedimentary rocks are never dated using radiometric dating, though fossils can sometimes be dated.
Carbon is an especially important element because so many biological molecules are made from it in living things. In any sample of Carbon, a small percentage of the Carbon atoms are different in that they have one or two extra neutrons in the nucleus.