The fatal flaw with radioactive dating methods – Biblical Geology
Carbon dating has a certain margin of error, usually depending on the age and material of the sample used. Carbon has a half-life of about. The great promise of radiocarbon (C14) dating is that it provides a method for dating That is why C14 dates are always reported with a ± margin of error. THE MARGIN of error with radiocarbon dating, an analytical method for finding out the age of ancient artefacts, may be two to three times as.
Many times we read that he was instructed to write down things.
In other words, there is a good case that the biblical record of historical events is vastly more reliable than the speculations of modern academics who were not there to see what happened and whose conclusions are driven by their secular ideology. Glauron October 22, I think ANDROLOMA was challenging the premise that the entire Bible is based on eyewitness accounts and to support the statement, points out there was no eye witness to the creation itself, which is completely valid.
- Carbon dating
- Radiocarbon dating
- The fatal flaw with radioactive dating methods
Tradition would dictate that the creation account was revealed to Moses by God. An eye-witness acocunt of a historical event, such as the battlefield conditions at the Battle of Hastings, would carry more weight than a historians conjecture based on circumstantial evidence.
I appreciate your patience and gracious replies to some of the posts here. What I can offer is my own experience as it relates to the accuracy of the Bible. The truth found there transformed my life from one of confusion, selfishness, and uncertainty to one of peace, purpose and understanding.
When I realized that Jesus died on a cross because of people like me or more specifically for me, I chose in that moment to surrender my life to Him. From that moment I was filled with peace in knowing that regardless of where the path would lead, as long as God was in control, it mattered very little which direction it took. Only that if God was leading it would be right and good. Well, 24 years later I can say that has been true and so has the Bible.
Yes, believing in a young earth sometimes takes faith but not near as much faith as it takes to believe in evolution. I think one has to work hard to believe that the intelligent design behind even the simplest organism is due to random formations of the elements around us. Since I have a personal and intimate relationship with the One who gave me new life, and since His Word the Bible has proven itself true over and over in spiritual things, I feel the other facts found there pertaining to creation etc.
My prayer for them is that the God of all creation will have mercy on them and open their eyes to the glorious truth revealed in Jesus Chist, that they might find peace and eternal life with the One who is love. November 27, Glauron got me right. Their admissions of no eyewitnesses are enough to lead one to presume that these stories have been embellished. The Torah is the Hebrew name for the five Books of Moses.
If the texts were embellished then you would think that they would have whitewashed their heroes. December 31, Adam was there. He could have easily recorded the events after he was created.
Radiocarbon dating - Wikipedia
And we know from the biblical record that he personally talked with God. He is only six days out from the original creation. Light March 8, ALL recorded history goes back only a little over years which is also the age of man according to the Bible — there is no older written history. Earthquakes in one place after another were all predicted and if you study the statistics for earthquakes you will find that they have increased exponentially starting with There are many more prophesies that are coming true NOW.
To see why, we need to look deeper into radiometric dating methods. A very important tool in radiometric dating is the so called isochron diagram and it holds the key to refuting the central creationist claims about radiometric dating.
One of the most beneficial things about it is that it can check itself for accuracy; the method tells you how well the rocks have been closed systems. An isochron diagram is obtained by looking at many minerals from the same rock or from rocks forming from the same parent mineral. Data is plotted on a simple two dimensional graph; the parent isotope on the x-axis and the daughter isotope on the y-axis. Both of these are divided or normalized by a stable isotope of the same elements as the daughter element.
If the samples have been undisturbed closed systems since formation, the data will fall on the same line the isochron from which the diagram is named. The slope of this line is a function of the age of the rock. If the rock is older, the slope is higher.
The reason scientists normalize with another stable isotope of the same element as the daughter is because most chemical or physical processes that occurs normally in nature does not differentiate between different isotopes of the same element when the difference in mass is as small as it is between isotopes of the same element that is used in radiometric dating.
This means that the while different rocks contain different absolute amounts of the two isotopes, the ratio is same. At the time of formation for a rock, the isotopes for an element are homogenized and so the composition of a certain isotope is the same in all the minerals in the rock. But what happens when the rocks have been disturbed? If so, the data will not fall on an isochron line, but will be all over the place.
This tells scientists that the sample has been disturbed and cannot be dated with this particular method.
Refuting “Radiometric Dating Methods Makes Untenable Assumptions!”
So far from rejecting samples because they do not fit a preconceived notion of what the age should be, scientists reject samples because there is ample evidence that it has been disturbed: Scientists do not assume that rocks have been closed systems; it is a well-supported conclusion from experiments. But what about assuming that initial amounts are known? Radiometric dating and initial conditions A second property of isochron diagrams is that it actually gives the initial amount of daughter isotope as a result of the method.
It is just the y-intercept of the isochron line. The initial conditions are just read off the graph; it is not just assumed.
Radiometric dating and decay rates In a last ditch effort, young earth creationists exclaim that scientists just assume, without warrant, that decay rate are constant. However, this is not the case.
Decay rates have been shown to be constant, despite very high pressure and temperature. Furthermore, by studying supernovas far away, scientist have determined that decay rates have been constant in the ancient past as well. Not only that, different radioactive isotopes decay differently and it is enormously improbable that a postulated difference in decay rates would affect all of them in the same way, yet as we have seen, different radiometric dating methods converge on the same date within margins of error.
Fourthly, decay rates can be predicted from first principles of physics. Any change would have to correspond to changes in basic physical constants. Any such change would affect different forms of decay differently, yet this has not been observed. As a final blow to the already nailed shut coffin of young earth creationism, had decay rates been high enough to be consistent with a young earth, the heat alone would have melt the earth.
Conclusion Scientists do not assume that rocks have been closed systems, but they test for it.