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

To: stormer
And my “Absolutely” applies to your first question, not your second.

I figured; thanks for the info BTW.
I'm not a geologist, obviously... though there is something you said that casts doubt on dating methods: "(erosion and redeposition of fossil material into sediments of a younger age), infiltration into older or younger material"; if it is the case that the parent or daughter material can move in or out of their environment, then that means that dating via radioactive decay is compromised.

274 posted on 02/04/2013 1:12:09 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 272 | View Replies ]


To: OneWingedShark

This is why radiometric dating may need to be performed on both the found object and the matrix in which it is found. For example, my house was built in 1960, if I open a dresser drawer and find a coin dating from 1905, does that mean that my house is older than I thought or that the date on the coin is wrong?


276 posted on 02/04/2013 1:25:24 PM PST by stormer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 274 | 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