Posted on 10/02/2014 12:55:33 PM PDT by fishtank
Clocks in Rocks? Radioactive Dating, Part 1
by Vernon R. Cupps, Ph.D. *
Radioactive dating is a key concept in determining the age of the earth. Many secular scientists use it to dismantle the faith of Christians and cause them to accept uniformitarian assumptions that, in addition to being scientifically erroneous, demand a figurative and distorted interpretation of Genesis. Being knowledgeable about such a widespread dating method is essential for Christians to address opposing arguments and critics. Is radioactive dating valid?
(Excerpt) Read more at icr.org ...
* Dr. Cupps is Research Associate at the Institute for Creation Research and received his Ph.D. in nuclear physics from Indiana University-Bloomington.
Cite this article: Vernon R. Cupps, Ph.D. 2014. Clocks in Rocks? Radioactive Dating, Part 1. Acts & Facts. 43 (10).
Really? Is it that fragile? Hardly.
But the rate of radioactive decay is a reliable constant and makes for a useful tool.
I once dated a much older woman. Some of my friends called it “carbon dating”. Does that count?
Clocks in rocks?
In a box?
With a fox?.............
Pffftt!
Everyone knows it is far more accurate to add up the ages of people mentioned in the Bible to come up with a figure of 6,000-10,000 years old.
Debatable, which is why several methods are utilized, more than 40 IIRC.
One inconsistency I have found is in the 'birth' of igneous rock. Solidified lava from Mt. St. Helens was dated at over 35,000yo which was impossible as it cooled less than 1 year from when the sample was taken. Additionally, sedimentary rock cannot be dated radiometrically and that is where fossils are found.
To those of us that believe in an all mighty God, it is not that difficult of a concept. Also, God never said that the Earth was that old/young. That was the work of a monk some time ago who set about to record the lineage and coordinate it with the (then) current timeline.
“But the rate of radioactive decay is a reliable constant and makes for a useful tool.”
Is it though? The rate of radioactive decay is dependent on the speed of light, so if c is not constant, then radioactive decay cannot be constant either.
Here is a TED talk by Rupert Sheldrake:
At the end, he relates an anecdote about the constancy of c, and a surprising revelation from the director of the British institute that sets the values of constants like c. You might be surprised about the reason that scientists take the constancy for granted.
But the ICR, the source of this article, thinks so. They call it "biblical truth".
What a blindly stupid and feeble attempt at mockery!
Of course there are such things as clocks in rocks. Everyone walking around with a quartz wristwatch depends on them. Also, the US official time is set by an atomic clock that measures time by the decay of radioactive isotopes.
http://time.gov/HTML5/
“Everyone knows it is far more accurate to add up the ages of people mentioned in the Bible to come up with a figure of 6,000-10,000 years old.”
Well, you are obviously being facetious, but there is still some truth to your statement.
The method you mention is a historical dating method, that relies on eyewitness testimony. Of course such testimony may be flawed, but nonetheless, it is based to some degree on empirical data.
The radiological dating methods, on the other hand, are based more on deductive methods than on empirical data, and the more you base your science on deduction versus observation, the greater the risk of error.
Hence the distinction, ICR != God.
God could have created the planet in an instant but chose to reveal a process of 6 days to mirror something from His heavenly realm that has yet to be revealed to mortal man.
My thesis is that Adam & Eve existed in Eden for several millennia which is why when Cain left, he was able to find 'cities' to the East of Eden.
Perceptions of time are a human concept relative to the speed of thought. If we thought ten thousand times faster or slower, more, or less, would seem to take place in the same amount of measured time. God operates outside the confines of time. One day is as a thousand years, a thousand years as one day. Was all of God’s work in the beginning done in His frame, or ours, or part his part ours, or his and ours congruently? There are many things beyond us now.
No. I would not be surprised at how some consider constants as changing. It is a function of their suspension of disbelief. Good luck with that.
God crested EVERYTHING with apparent age. Adam was not a baby, the trees were not seeds, and birds were not in eggs. If you grant that God created the world and universe, then the earth having an apparent age greater than 6,000 years is not a problem.
“It is a function of their suspension of disbelief.”
Quite the opposite, it is a function of empirical observations that consistently showed a changing constant, decade after decade.
Did you even bother to check out the video? By the way, the man in that video is not a creationist.
So, then you think the 930 year life span noted in the Bible is an error?
Nobody disputes radioactive decay, or the ability to measure time by it. What is in dispute is if, using the currently observed decay rates, along with a host of other assumptions, to extrapolate dates in the distant past, is a very reliable method.
Yep.
Thanks for the note.
Good post.
Listening to it now.
Interesting.... TED had this talk BANNED
BANNED
BANNED
BANNED.
I’m not sure if that guy is a New-Ager or not, but the talk is pretty good so far at 5:30.....minutes.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.