Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: dubyagee
How heavily does evolutionary study rely on radioactive dating?

How reliable is radioactive dating? And, if you'll bear with one more...

Would it be likely that flooding, an ice age, a meteor strike...any type of catastrophic occurrences over a large or small area...affect the outcome of this type of dating?

Radiometric dating is an important tool for getting exact ages. The other forms of dating (stratigraphic, fauna and flora, etc.) can establish relationships: this layer is older than that layer. When you have a lot of layers, that is extremely useful information, as it allows a cross-check on other methods (see my previous post for examples, upthread).

There are several types of radiometric dating, from radiocarbon dating that is useful only back some 50,000 or so years to several types that can measure the age of the earth, and agree with each other, on about 4.5 billion years.

Try this link for additional information:

The American Scientific Affiliation: Science in Christian Perspective Radiometric Dating: A Christian Perspective by Dr. Roger C. Wiens.

To affect the results of radiometric dating you would have to speed up or slow down atomic reactions (i.e., in radiocarbon dating which I know best, you would have to speed up or slow down beta decay. That is tough to do with a flood or any other natural disaster.)

So, the methods themselves are pretty accurate. Care needs to be taken with sample selection though, but that is early grad school stuff. For example, I was taught if you do only one date you know the exact age of your site. If you do ten dates you don't (but with good sample selection you should have a good idea of the range of your site, which is far better data).

208 posted on 04/13/2006 6:21:23 PM PDT by Coyoteman (Interim tagline: The UN 1967 Outer Space Treaty is bad for America and bad for humanity - DUMP IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies ]


To: Coyoteman
Quoting from 208: Radiometric dating is an important tool for getting exact ages. The other forms of dating (stratigraphic, fauna and flora, etc.) can establish relationships: this layer is older than that layer. When you have a lot of layers, that is extremely useful information, as it allows a cross-check on other methods.

You always post accurate information, and I get informed. Dendrochronolgy can be added.

The age of the rocks on planet Earth is extremely well established. And on our nearby moon. Our little planet is about 4.6 billion years since its formation. The evidence is clear, and to deny this is to deny everything we know in physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy. I see nothing that negates an admiration for our Universe in accepting these understandings. Indeed, it is a tribute to our human intellects that we humans have been able to reject ancient myths and figure this out.

Our planet may be small, but there are those of us who love it.

263 posted on 04/13/2006 7:41:11 PM PDT by thomaswest (Just curious)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson