What is the most accurate method of dating fossils

after this was widely accepted, further studies of the rocks brought the radiometric age down to about 1. isotope concentrations can be measured very accurately, but isotope concentrations are not dates. when a dinosaur or other animal lived is important because it helps us place them on the evolutionary family tree. overall, the energy of the earth's magnetic field has been decreasing,[5] so more 14c is being produced now than in the past. humphreys, “reversals of the earth's magnetic field during the genesis flood,” proc. chemists can measure the half-life of these elements, which is the time it takes for half of the radioactive parent element to break down into the stable daughter element. nguaruhoe, new zealand, and the implications for potassium-argon 'dating,'” proc. but there is a problem, the half-life of carbon-14 is only 5730 years, so the method cannot be used for materials older than about 70,000 years. total 14c is also proportionately lowered at this time, but whereas no terrestrial process generates any more 12c, 14c is continually being produced, and at a rate which does not depend on carbon levels (it comes from nitrogen). earth's magnetic field has been decaying so fast that it looks like it is less than 10,000 years old. that is why radiocarbon dating cannot give millions of years. other methods were also developed, phylogenetic trees of species, mathematical models, carbon dating and radioactive isotope dating were also developed. the level of proof demanded for such stories seems to be much less than for studies in the empirical sciences, such as physics, chemistry, molecular biology, physiology, etc. this effect (which is additional to the magnetic field issue just discussed) were corrected for, carbon dating of fossils formed in the flood would give ages much older than the true ages., lowering the total 12c in the biosphere (including the atmosphere—plants regrowing after the flood absorb co2, which is not replaced by the decay of the buried vegetation). gentry has researched radiohalos for many years, and published his results in leading scientific journals. then cross-matching of ring patterns is used to calibrate the carbon “clock”—a somewhat circular process which does not give an independent calibration of the carbon dating system., the amount of helium in zircons from hot rock is also much more consistent with a young earth (helium derives from the decay of radioactive elements).. russell humphreys gives other processes inconsistent with billions of years in the pamphlet evidence for a young world. because 14c is so well mixed up with 12c, we expect to find that this ratio is the same if we sample a leaf from a tree, or a part of your body. a common problem with any dating method is that a sample may be contaminated with older or younger material and give a false age.” creationists agree that the deeper rocks are generally older, but not by millions of years. accurate dates also allow us to create sequences of evolutionary change and work out when species appeared or became extinct., using hindsight, it is argued that “excess” argon from the magma (molten rock) was retained in the rock when it solidified. we suggesting that evolutionists are conspiring to massage the data to get what they want? these known sequences can be compared with the layers of rock and fossils uncovered at other sites to provide relative dating. this is far too young for evolutionists who claim the moon is 4.[20] this contrasts with an age of 1550-1650 ma based on other isotope ratios,[21] and ages of 275, 61, 0,0,and 0 ma for thorium/lead (232th/208pb) ratios in five uraninite grains. dating in many cases seriously embarrasses evolutionists by giving ages that are much younger than those expected from their model of early history. isotopes can be used for cross-referencing dateswhen radiometric dating was first used around 1920, it showed that the earth was hundreds of millions, or billions, of years old.

What is the most accurate way of dating fossils

. humphreys, “the sea's missing salt: a dilemma for evolutionists,” proc. subtle differences in the relative proportions of the two isotopes can give good dates for rocks of any age. the concentration of a parent radioactive isotope, such as rubidium-87, is graphed against the concentration of a daughter isotope, such as strontium-87, for all the samples. yet there are no very old, widely expanded (stage 3) snrs, and few moderately old (stage 1) ones in our galaxy, the milky way, or in its satellite galaxies, the magellanic clouds. the first technique used was stratigraphy, looking at the sequence of fossils as the appeared in geologic formations. the methods that have been used to estimate the age of the earth, 90 percent point to an age far less than the billions of years asserted by evolutionists. however, even with such historical calibration, archaeologists do not regard 14c dates as absolute because of frequent anomalies. fossils sequence recordit was the study of rock layers in england near the beginning of the 19th century that lead to the study of paleontology and from there to the study of fossils. but these could not last more than a few thousand years—certainly not the 65 ma since the last dinosaurs lived, according to evolutionists. decay releases helium into the atmosphere, but not much is escaping. the long-age dating techniques were really objective means of finding the ages of rocks, they should work in situations where we know the age. this is far too young for evolutionists who claim the moon is 4.[15] this excess appears to have come from the upper mantle, below the earth's crust. this will make old things look older than they really are. gentry has researched radiohalos for many years, and published his results in leading scientific journals. humphreys, “reversals of the earth's magnetic field during the genesis flood,” proc. people wonder how millions of years could be squeezed into the biblical account of history.. provine admitted:“most of what i learned of the field [evolutionary biology] in graduate (1964-68) school is either wrong or significantly changed. is noteworthy is that modern phylogenetic trees derive no input from stratigraphy, scientific comparisons between tree shape and stratigraphy can be used to confirm the fossil record. example, researchers applied posterior reasoning to the dating of australopithecus ramidus fossils. any attempt to make a claim about evolution always comes back at some point to the geologic time scale. isotope concentrations can be measured very accurately, but isotope concentrations are not dates. carbon (12c)is found in the carbon dioxide (co2) in the air, which is taken up by plants, which in turn are eaten by animals.[24] the accompanying checks showed that the 14c date was not due to contamination and that the “date” was valid, within the standard (long ages) understanding of this dating system. carbon (12c)is found in the carbon dioxide (co2) in the air, which is taken up by plants, which in turn are eaten by animals. therefore, the 14c/12c ratio in plants/animals/the atmosphere before the flood had to be lower than what it is now. a stronger magnetic field deflects more cosmic rays away from the earth. were closed or isolated so that no parent or daughter isotopes were lost or added. however, with radiometric dating, the different techniques often give quite different results. the secular scientific literature lists many examples of excess argon causing dates of millions of years in rocks of known historical age.

How do we know the ages of fossils and fossil-bearing rocks?

whatever process was responsible for the halos could be a key also to understanding radiometric dating. so they looked at some basalt further removed from the fossils and selected 17 of 26 samples to get an acceptable maximum age of 4. unconsciously, the researchers, who are supposedly “objective scientists” in the eyes of the public, select the observations to fit the basic belief system. the method involves dividing both the parent and daughter concentrations by the concentration of a similar stable isotope—in this case, strontium-86. humphreys has suggested that this may have occurred during creation week and the flood.[22] the “zero” ages in this case are consistent with the bible. on the inaccuracies found using the Carbon-14 dating method, and the various other radioactive dating methods. we don't have all the answers, but we do have the sure testimony of the word of god to the true history of the world. since the flood was accompanied by much volcanism (see noah's flood…, how did animals get from the ark to isolated places? with modern, extremely precise methods the error bars are often only 1% or so. the sea is not nearly salty enough for this to have been happening for billions of years. (after 70,000 the element is stable, it doesn't decay any longer. in reality, all dating methods, including those that point to a young earth, rely on unprovable assumptions. these include radiometric dating of volcanic layers above or below the fossils or by comparisons to similar rocks and fossils of known ages. the sequences he saw in one part of the country could be matched precisely with the sequences in another.. woodmorappe, the mythology of modern dating methods (san diego, ca: institute for creation research, 1999). the 'progress' shown by the fossils was a documentation of the grand pattern of evolution through long spans of time. the range of recorded history, calibration of the 14c "clock is not possible.[10] most samples of basalt closest to the fossil-bearing strata give dates of about 23 ma (mega annum, million years) by the argon-argon method. rate of decay of 14c is such that half of an amount will convert back to 14n in 5,730 years (plus or minus 40 years). who ask about carbon-14 (14c) dating usually want to know about the radiometric[1] dating methods that are claimed to give millions and billions of years—carbon dating can only give thousands of years. repeated retests, using more sophisticated techniques and equipment have not shifted that date. understand the limitations of dating methods better than evolutionists who claim that they can use processes observed in the present to “prove” that the earth is billions of years old.. maas, “nd-sr isotope constraints on the age and origin of unconformity-type uranium deposits in the alligator rivers uranium field, northern territory, australia, economic geology, 1989, 84:64-90. besides the order of fossils in the rocks, another method is the use phylogenetic trees. again, the only way to know if an isochron is “good” is by comparing the result with what is already believed. andrew snelling worked on “dating the koongarra uranium deposits in the northern territory of australia, primarily using the uranium-thorium-lead (u-th-pb) method.” so, in two half-lives, or 11,460 years, only one-quarter of that in living organisms at present, then it has a theoretical age of 11,460 years. however, the “age” is calculated using assumptions about the past that cannot be proven. this problem is now reduced by the careful collection of samples, rigorous crosschecking and the use of newer techniques that can date minute samples.

How accurate are Carbon-14 and other radioactive dating methods

the total amount in the atmosphere is 1/2000th of that expected if the universe is really billions of years old. a straight line is drawn through these points, representing the ratio of the parent:daughter, from which a date is calculated. early geologists, at the end of the 18th and early 19th century noticed how fossils appeared in certain sequences: some fossil assemblages were always found below other assemblages, not above. that is, they take up less than would be expected and so they test older than they really are. to answer this question, it is necessary to scrutinize further the experimental results from the various dating techniques, the interpretations made on the basis of the results and the assumptions underlying those interpretations. even granting generous assumptions to evolutionists, the sea could not be more than 62 ma years old—far younger than the billions of years believed by the evolutionists. the authors decided that was “too old,” according to their beliefs about the place of the fossils in the evolutionary grand scheme of things. this effect (which is additional to the magnetic field issue just discussed) were corrected for, carbon dating of fossils formed in the flood would give ages much older than the true ages. if the line is of good fit and the “age” is acceptable, it is a “good” date. this is consistent with a young world—the argon has had too little time to escape. these displaced neutrons, now moving fast, hit ordinary nitrogen (14n) at lower altitudes, converting it into 14c. a stronger magnetic field deflects more cosmic rays away from the earth. during this process the pieces of the atom move apart at high speed, causing damage to the rock or mineral.. provine admitted:“most of what i learned of the field [evolutionary biology] in graduate (1964-68) school is either wrong or significantly changed. that is, they take up less than would be expected and so they test older than they really are. wood found in “upper permian” rock that is supposedly 250 ma old still contained 14c.” creationists agree that the deeper rocks are generally older, but not by millions of years.[10] most samples of basalt closest to the fossil-bearing strata give dates of about 23 ma (mega annum, million years) by the argon-argon method. took a canal surveyor circa 1800, william smith in england, who noticed that he could map out great tracts of rocks on the basis of their contained fossils.. fisher, “excess rare gases in a subaerial basalt in nigeria,” nature, 1970, 232:60-61. then cross-matching of ring patterns is used to calibrate the carbon “clock”—a somewhat circular process which does not give an independent calibration of the carbon dating system. they can be applied to fossils found at a particular site and can also be used to make comparisons between sites. coal is an obvious candidate because the youngest coal is supposed to be millions of years old, and most of it is supposed to be tens or hundreds of millions of years old. supernova is an explosion of a massive star—the explosion is so bright that it briefly outshines the rest of the galaxy., an expert in the environmental fate of radioactive elements, identified 17 flaws in the isotope dating reported in just three widely respected seminal papers that supposedly established the age of the earth at 4. they realize that all science is tentative because we do not have all the data, especially when dealing with the past. geologist john woodmorappe, in his devastating critique of radioactive dating,[8] points out that there are other large-scale trends in the rocks that have nothing to do with radioactive decay. it is possible to calculate the age of a sample by measuring the uranium content and the density of the fission tracks.[24] the accompanying checks showed that the 14c date was not due to contamination and that the “date” was valid, within the standard (long ages) understanding of this dating system., there are factors other than age responsible for the straight lines obtained from graphing isotope ratios.

Science and Evolution: Accuracy of Fossils and Dating Methods

. maas, “nd-sr isotope constraints on the age and origin of unconformity-type uranium deposits in the alligator rivers uranium field, northern territory, australia, economic geology, 1989, 84:64-90. techniques that give results that can be dismissed just because they don't agree with what we already believe cannot be considered objective. the amount of cosmic rays reaching the earth varies with the sun's activity, and with the earth's passage through magnetic clouds as the solar system travels around the milky way galaxy. example, researchers applied posterior reasoning to the dating of australopithecus ramidus fossils. coal is an obvious candidate because the youngest coal is supposed to be millions of years old, and most of it is supposed to be tens or hundreds of millions of years old. whatever caused such elevated rates of decay may also have been responsible for the lead isotope conversions claimed by cook (above)., a stable carbon isotope, 13c , is measured as an indication of the level of discrimination against 14c. of the intermediate decay products—such as the polonium isotopes—have very short half-lives (they decay quickly)., “ecological and temporal placement of early pliocene hominids at aramis, ethiopia,” nature, 1994, 371:330-333. techniques, such as the use of isochrons,[17] make different assumptions about starting conditions, but there is a growing recognition that such “foolproof” techniques can also give “bad” dates. it is also much younger than the radiometric “dates” assigned to moon rocks. the total amount in the atmosphere is 1/2000th of that expected if the universe is really billions of years old. the level of proof demanded for such stories seems to be much less than for studies in the empirical sciences, such as physics, chemistry, molecular biology, physiology, etc. ma was settled upon because of the agreement between several different published studies (although the studies involved selection of “good” from “bad” results, just like australopithecus ramidus, above). this gives a maximum age of the moon, not the actual age. williams, “long-age isotope dating short on credibility,” cen technical journal, 1992, 6(1):2-5. and this gave us the familiar list of divisions in the geologic time scale -- jurassic, cretaceous, tertiary, and so on.-14 is made when cosmic rays knock neutrons out of atomic nuclei in the upper atmosphere. he found that even highly weathered soil samples from the area, which are definitely not closed systems, gave apparently valid “isochron” lines with “ages” of up to 1,445 ma. now the polonium has to get into the rock before the rock solidifies, but it cannot derive a from a uranium speck in the solid rock, otherwise there would be a uranium halo. understand the limitations of dating methods better than evolutionists who claim that they can use processes observed in the present to “prove” that the earth is billions of years old. snelling has suggested that fractionation (sorting) of elements in the molten state in the earth's mantle could be a significant factor in explaining the ratios of isotope concentrations which are interpreted as ages. overall, the energy of the earth's magnetic field has been decreasing,[5] so more 14c is being produced now than in the past. the discovery of a different means, one for which absolute dating is possible occurred in the early 20th century. known as the rate (radioisotopes and the age of the earth) group, it combines the skills of various physicists and geologists to enable a multi-disciplinary approach to the subject.[3] this would make things carbon-dated from that time appear younger than their true age. they rely more on dating methods that link into historical records.[3] this would make things carbon-dated from that time appear younger than their true age.[22] the “zero” ages in this case are consistent with the bible. is gas that gradually builds up within rocks from the decay of radioactive potassium.

What are the different fossil dating techniques and how accurate are

this problem cannot be overlooked, especially in evaluating the numerical time scale. absolute dating is not possible with this method because the rate at which the nitrogen content declines depends on the surrounding temperature, moisture, soil chemicals and bacteria. it is also much younger than the radiometric “dates” assigned to moon rocks.. hunziker, editors, lectures in isotope geology, “u-th-pb dating of minerals,” by d. an object can be given an approximate date by dating the volcanic layers occurring above and below the object.[18] again, all sorts of reasons can be suggested for the “bad” dates, but this is again posterior reasoning. involved with unrecorded history gather information in the present and construct stories about the past. sarfati, “the earth's magnetic field: evidence that the earth is young,” creation, 1998, 20(2):15-19. a speck of radioactive element such as uranium-238, for example, will leave a sphere of discoloration of characteristically different radius for each element it produces in its decay chain to lead-206. ma was settled upon because of the agreement between several different published studies (although the studies involved selection of “good” from “bad” results, just like australopithecus ramidus, above). snelling, “the failure of u-th-pb 'dating' at koongarra, australia,” cen technical journal, 1995, 9(1):71-92. are various other radiometric dating methods used today to give ages of millions or billions of years for rocks. are various other radiometric dating methods used today to give ages of millions or billions of years for rocks. sarfati, “the earth's magnetic field: evidence that the earth is young,” creation, 1998, 20(2):15-19. yet there are no very old, widely expanded (stage 3) snrs, and few moderately old (stage 1) ones in our galaxy, the milky way, or in its satellite galaxies, the magellanic clouds. a scientist cannot do experiments on events that happened in the past. a straight line is drawn through these points, representing the ratio of the parent:daughter, from which a date is calculated. it is very much driven by the existing long-age world view that pervades academia today. then there was a rise in 14co2 with the advent of atmospheric testing of atomic bombs in the 1950s. are many examples where the dating methods give “dates” that are wrong for rocks of known age. so they looked at some basalt further removed from the fossils and selected 17 of 26 samples to get an acceptable maximum age of 4. now the polonium has to get into the rock before the rock solidifies, but it cannot derive a from a uranium speck in the solid rock, otherwise there would be a uranium halo., an expert in the environmental fate of radioactive elements, identified 17 flaws in the isotope dating reported in just three widely respected seminal papers that supposedly established the age of the earth at 4.” so, in two half-lives, or 11,460 years, only one-quarter of that in living organisms at present, then it has a theoretical age of 11,460 years. “false isochrons” are so common that a whole terminology has grown up to describe them, such as apparent isochron, mantle isochron, pseudoisochron, secondary isochron, inherited isochron, erupted isochron, mixing line and mixing isochron. rocks – such as tuff and basalt  – can be used in dating because they are formed at a particular moment in time, during an eruption. nguaruhoe, new zealand, and the implications for potassium-argon 'dating,'” proc. useful chemical analysis technique involves calculating the amount of nitrogen within a bone. because 14c is so well mixed up with 12c, we expect to find that this ratio is the same if we sample a leaf from a tree, or a part of your body. this would make things which died at that time appear older in terms of carbon dating.

Dating dinosaurs and other fossils - Australian Museum

this would make things look much older than they really are when current rates of decay are applied to dating. this effectively combines the two uranium-lead decay series into one diagram. dating in many cases seriously embarrasses evolutionists by giving ages that are much younger than those expected from their model of early history. the other nine samples again gave much older dates but the authors decided they must be contaminated and discarded them. they are drawn up mathematically, using lists of morphological (external form) or molecular (gene sequence) characters. it is simply that all observations must fit the prevailing paradigm. next step was for geologists began to build up the stratigraphic column., such huge time periods cannot be fitted into the bible without compromising what the bible says about the goodness of god and the origin of sin, death and suffering—the reason jesus came into the world (see six days? humphreys has suggested that this may have occurred during creation week and the flood. snelling, “the failure of u-th-pb 'dating' at koongarra, australia,” cen technical journal, 1995, 9(1):71-92. used for absolute datingall of this gets us to one of the most important physical techniques, radioactive dating. it continues to be accurate to within a few thousand years. international team of creationist scientists is actively pursuing a creationist understanding of radioisotope dating. krummenacher, “isotopic composition of argon in modern surface rocks,” earth and planetary science letters, 1969, 6:47-55., the genesis flood would have greatly upset the carbon balance. scientists do not measure the age of rocks, they measure isotope concentrations, and these can be measured extremely accurately.[11] this started with an initial 212 to 230 ma, which, according to the fossils, was considered way off the mark (humans “weren't around then"). in fact, if a sample contains 14c, it is good evidence that it is not millions of years old. will deal with carbon dating first and then with the other dating methods. scientists do not measure the age of rocks, they measure isotope concentrations, and these can be measured extremely accurately. ratios or uraninite crystals from the koongarra uranium body in the northern territory of australia gave lead-lead isochron ages of 841 ma, plus or minus 140 ma. the common application of such posterior reasoning shows that radiometric dating has serious problems. total 14c is also proportionately lowered at this time, but whereas no terrestrial process generates any more 12c, 14c is continually being produced, and at a rate which does not depend on carbon levels (it comes from nitrogen). when the isotope concentrations are adjusted for such conversions, the ages calculated are reduced from some 600 ma to recent., the genesis flood would have greatly upset the carbon balance. long ago as 1966, nobel prize nominee melvin cook, professor of metallurgy at the university of utah, pointed out evidence that lead isotope ratios, for example, may involve alteration by important factors other than radioactive decay. whatever caused such elevated rates of decay may also have been responsible for the lead isotope conversions claimed by cook (above). the oldest rocks and fossils are at the bottom and the youngest are on top. when the isotope concentrations are adjusted for such conversions, the ages calculated are reduced from some 600 ma to recent. a speck of radioactive element such as uranium-238, for example, will leave a sphere of discoloration of characteristically different radius for each element it produces in its decay chain to lead-206.

Dating Fossils – How Are Fossils Dated? -

., stratigraphy, older rocks lie below younger rocks and that fossils occur in a particular, predictable order. to derive ages from such measurements, unprovable assumptions have to be made such as:The starting conditions are known (for example, that there was no daughter isotope present at the start, or that we know how much was there). this is true of both creationist and evolutionist scientific arguments—evolutionists have had to abandon many “proofs” for evolution just as creationists have also had to modify their arguments. therefore, the 14c/12c ratio in plants/animals/the atmosphere before the flood had to be lower than what it is now. we don't have all the answers, but we do have the sure testimony of the word of god to the true history of the world. ultimately date the earth historically using the chronology of the bible. unconsciously, the researchers, who are supposedly “objective scientists” in the eyes of the public, select the observations to fit the basic belief system.. fisher, “excess rare gases in a subaerial basalt in nigeria,” nature, 1970, 232:60-61. the latter figures are significant because thorium-derived dates should be the more reliable, since thorium is less mobile than the uranium minerals that are the parents of the lead isotopes in lead-lead system. ultimately date the earth historically using the chronology of the bible. the rubidium-strontium isochron technique suggested that the recent lava flow was 270 ma older than the basalts beneath the grand canyon—an impossibility. the concentration of a parent radioactive isotope, such as rubidium-87, is graphed against the concentration of a daughter isotope, such as strontium-87, for all the samples. if a chemist were measuring the sugar content of blood, all valid methods for the determination would give the same answer (within the limits of experimental error).), fossils formed in the early post-flood period would give radiocarbon ages older than they really are., there are factors other than age responsible for the straight lines obtained from graphing isotope ratios. these techniques, unlike carbon dating, mostly use the relative concentrations of parent and daughter products in radioactive decay chains. forms issued by radioisotope laboratories for submission with samples to be dated commonly ask how old the sample is expected to be. rate of decay of 14c is such that half of an amount will convert back to 14n in 5,730 years (plus or minus 40 years). again, the stories are evaluated according to their own success in agreeing with the existing long ages belief system.. / authors: ken ham, jonathan sarfati, and carl wieland, adapted from the revised & expanded answers book (master books, 2000). this would make things which died at that time appear older in terms of carbon dating. the answer is that you use radioactive carbon dating to get the dates. ratios or uraninite crystals from the koongarra uranium body in the northern territory of australia gave lead-lead isochron ages of 841 ma, plus or minus 140 ma. moon is slowly receding for the earth at about 4 centimeters (1. radiometric dating using one of the following isotope series, such as rubidium/strontium, thorium/lead, potassium/argon, argon/argon, or uranium/lead can be used.. woodmorappe, the mythology of modern dating methods (san diego, ca: institute for creation research, 1999). it is very much driven by the existing long-age world view that pervades academia today. earth's magnetic field has been decaying so fast that it looks like it is less than 10,000 years old. international team of creationist scientists is actively pursuing a creationist understanding of radioisotope dating. relative dating methods are used to work out the chronological sequence of fossils.

Dating | The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program

long ago as 1966, nobel prize nominee melvin cook, professor of metallurgy at the university of utah, pointed out evidence that lead isotope ratios, for example, may involve alteration by important factors other than radioactive decay. the heat from a volcanic eruption releases all the argon from the molten rock and disperses it into the atmosphere.[40] the amount of lead may be consistent with current rates of decay over millions of years, but it would have diffused out of the crystals in that time. is an unsolved mystery to evolutionists as to why coal has 14c in it,[25], or wood supposedly millions of years old still has 14c present, but it makes perfect sense in a creationist world view. who ask about carbon-14 (14c) dating usually want to know about the radiometric[1] dating methods that are claimed to give millions and billions of years—carbon dating can only give thousands of years. the order of appearance in a sequence is well documented, but that is not all. this technique has established a known sequence of reversals from dated layers found all around the world. this is important, for the accuracy of a fossil is not dependent on one finding; other checks are possible. this is just what we would expect for “young” galaxies that have not existed long enough for wide expansion.. gunst, “an analysis of the earth's magnetic field from 1835 to 1965,” essa technical report ier 46-ies, 1965, u.. / authors: ken ham, jonathan sarfati, and carl wieland, adapted from the revised & expanded answers book (master books, 2000). the authors decided that was “too old,” according to their beliefs about the place of the fossils in the evolutionary grand scheme of things. geologist john woodmorappe, in his devastating critique of radioactive dating,[8] points out that there are other large-scale trends in the rocks that have nothing to do with radioactive decay. the latter figures are significant because thorium-derived dates should be the more reliable, since thorium is less mobile than the uranium minerals that are the parents of the lead isotopes in lead-lead system. sedimentary rocks are rarely useful for dating because they are made up of bits of older rocks. snelling has suggested that fractionation (sorting) of elements in the molten state in the earth's mantle could be a significant factor in explaining the ratios of isotope concentrations which are interpreted as ages. this happens quite fast, yet so much helium is still in some rocks that it has not had time to escape—certainly not billions of years.); lack of soil layers; polystrate fossils (which traverse several rock layers vertically—these could not have stood vertically for eons of time while they slowly got buried); thick layers of “rock” bent without fracturing, indicating that the rock was all soft when bent; and more. forms issued by radioisotope laboratories for submission with samples to be dated commonly ask how old the sample is expected to be. they rely more on dating methods that link into historical records., such huge time periods cannot be fitted into the bible without compromising what the bible says about the goodness of god and the origin of sin, death and suffering—the reason jesus came into the world (see six days? are many lines of evidence that the radiometric dates are not the objective evidence for an old earth that many claim, and that the world is really only thousands of years old. similar story surrounds the dating of the primate skull known as knm-er 1470. moon is slowly receding for the earth at about 4 centimeters (1.: the strict rules of the scientific method ensure the accuracy of fossil dating.[38] however, such exercises in story-telling can hardly be considered as objective science that proves an old earth. a scientist cannot do experiments on events that happened in the past.” however, the results from zircons (a type of gemstone), for example, generally lie off the concordia curve—they are discordant. where are the dates coming from and how is the measurement occurring? this newer method converts a stable form of potassium (potassium-39) into argon-39.

the paradigm, or belief system, of molecules-to-man evolution over eons of time, is so strongly entrenched it is not questioned—it is a “fact. of the intermediate decay products—such as the polonium isotopes—have very short half-lives (they decay quickly). familiar to us as the black substance in charred wood, as diamonds, and the graphite in “lead” pencils, carbon comes in several forms, or isotopes. amount of cosmic rays penetrating the earth's atmosphere affects the amount of 14c produced and therefore dating the system. in reality, all dating methods, including those that point to a young earth, rely on unprovable assumptions. similar story surrounds the dating of the primate skull known as knm-er 1470. this meant that the ones below were older than the ones on top.” however, the results from zircons (a type of gemstone), for example, generally lie off the concordia curve—they are discordant. this is because they believe that this is an accurate eyewitness account of world history, which bears the evidence within it that it is the word of god, and therefore totally reliable and error-free. however, the “age” is calculated using assumptions about the past that cannot be proven. similar questions can also arise in applying sm-nd [samarium-neodymium] and u-pb [uranium-lead] isochron methods. familiar to us as the black substance in charred wood, as diamonds, and the graphite in “lead” pencils, carbon comes in several forms, or isotopes. some of the evidences are: lack of erosion between rock layers supposedly separated in age by many millions of years; lack of disturbance of rock strata by biological activity (worms, roots, etc. again, this indicates a maximum age, not the actual age. the older method required two samples for dating and could produce imprecise dates if the argon was not fully extracted. this happens quite fast, yet so much helium is still in some rocks that it has not had time to escape—certainly not billions of years. next observation occurred when geologists noted how fossils became more complex through time. when volcanic rocks and minerals are formed, they do not contain fission tracks. woodmorappe, the mythology of modern dating methods, for one such thorough evaluation. cannot prove the age of the earth using a particular scientific method, any more than evolutionists can.[15] this excess appears to have come from the upper mantle, below the earth's crust.); lack of soil layers; polystrate fossils (which traverse several rock layers vertically—these could not have stood vertically for eons of time while they slowly got buried); thick layers of “rock” bent without fracturing, indicating that the rock was all soft when bent; and more., lowering the total 12c in the biosphere (including the atmosphere—plants regrowing after the flood absorb co2, which is not replaced by the decay of the buried vegetation). cannot prove the age of the earth using a particular scientific method, any more than evolutionists can. on the inaccuracies found using the Carbon-14 dating method, and the various other radioactive dating methods. one records which fossil is younger and which is older. are many lines of evidence that the radiometric dates are not the objective evidence for an old earth that many claim, and that the world is really only thousands of years old., a stable carbon isotope, 13c , is measured as an indication of the level of discrimination against 14c.. hunziker, editors, lectures in isotope geology, “u-th-pb dating of minerals,” by d. however, even with such historical calibration, archaeologists do not regard 14c dates as absolute because of frequent anomalies.

even granting generous assumptions to evolutionists, the sea could not be more than 62 ma years old—far younger than the billions of years believed by the evolutionists. because iron oxide is magnetic, the minerals tend to be oriented in the direction of the earth’s magnetic field at the time the rock was formed. since the flood was accompanied by much volcanism (see noah's flood…, how did animals get from the ark to isolated places?, the amount of helium in zircons from hot rock is also much more consistent with a young earth (helium derives from the decay of radioactive elements). billion years to reach its present distance from the earth. some of the evidences are: lack of erosion between rock layers supposedly separated in age by many millions of years; lack of disturbance of rock strata by biological activity (worms, roots, etc. relatively new technique was developed in order to achieve more accurate dates than those obtained from the potassium-argon method. it is simply that all observations must fit the prevailing paradigm. accordingly, carbon dating carefully applied to items from historical times can be useful. the paradigm, or belief system, of molecules-to-man evolution over eons of time, is so strongly entrenched it is not questioned—it is a “fact. these are:Absolute dating methods that tell us the actual age (in years) of an object. ring dating (dendrochronology) has been used in an attempt to extend the calibration of the calibration of carbon-14 dating earlier than historical records allow, but this depends on temporal placement of fragments of wood (from long dead trees) using carbon-14 dating, assuming straight-line extrapolation backwards. the long-age dating techniques were really objective means of finding the ages of rocks, they should work in situations where we know the age. williams, “long-age isotope dating short on credibility,” cen technical journal, 1992, 6(1):2-5. amount of cosmic rays penetrating the earth's atmosphere affects the amount of 14c produced and therefore dating the system. robert gentry has pointed out that the amount of helium and lead in zircons from deep bores is not consistent with an evolutionary age of 1,500 ma for the granite rocks in which they are found. zheng, “influence of the nature of initial rb-sr system on isochron validity,” chemical geology, 1989, 80:1-16 (p. this is the one preferred by archaeologists prefer to use. to derive ages from such measurements, unprovable assumptions have to be made such as:The starting conditions are known (for example, that there was no daughter isotope present at the start, or that we know how much was there). this would make things look much older than they really are when current rates of decay are applied to dating. now have at their disposal a variety of independent means to look at the history of life. if a sequence of reversals is found at a particular site then it can be compared with this known sequence in order to establish an approximate date. wood found in “upper permian” rock that is supposedly 250 ma old still contained 14c., “ecological and temporal placement of early pliocene hominids at aramis, ethiopia,” nature, 1994, 371:330-333. were closed or isolated so that no parent or daughter isotopes were lost or added. then there was a rise in 14co2 with the advent of atmospheric testing of atomic bombs in the 1950s. andrew snelling worked on “dating the koongarra uranium deposits in the northern territory of australia, primarily using the uranium-thorium-lead (u-th-pb) method. this lead to the recognition of one of the principles of geology, i. ring dating (dendrochronology) has been used in an attempt to extend the calibration of the calibration of carbon-14 dating earlier than historical records allow, but this depends on temporal placement of fragments of wood (from long dead trees) using carbon-14 dating, assuming straight-line extrapolation backwards. whatever process was responsible for the halos could be a key also to understanding radiometric dating.

What is the most accurate way of dating fossils

will deal with carbon dating first and then with the other dating methods. argon then starts to re-accumulate at a constant rate in the newly formed rock that is created after the eruption. the rubidium-strontium isochron technique suggested that the recent lava flow was 270 ma older than the basalts beneath the grand canyon—an impossibility.[12] john woodmorappe has produced an incisive critique of these dating methods. sarfati, “blowing old-earth belief away: helium gives evidence that the earth is young,” creation, 1998, 20(3):19-21. one important result is that some older dates may change by a few million years up and down, but the younger dates are very stable. supernova is an explosion of a massive star—the explosion is so bright that it briefly outshines the rest of the galaxy. techniques that give results that can be dismissed just because they don't agree with what we already believe cannot be considered objective. decay releases helium into the atmosphere, but not much is escaping. if a chemist were measuring the sugar content of blood, all valid methods for the determination would give the same answer (within the limits of experimental error). zheng, “influence of the nature of initial rb-sr system on isochron validity,” chemical geology, 1989, 80:1-16 (p. correcting the dates increased the number to a more realistic 1. the secular scientific literature lists many examples of excess argon causing dates of millions of years in rocks of known historical age. are many examples where the dating methods give “dates” that are wrong for rocks of known age. robert gentry has pointed out that the amount of helium and lead in zircons from deep bores is not consistent with an evolutionary age of 1,500 ma for the granite rocks in which they are found. “false isochrons” are so common that a whole terminology has grown up to describe them, such as apparent isochron, mantle isochron, pseudoisochron, secondary isochron, inherited isochron, erupted isochron, mixing line and mixing isochron. zheng wrote:Some of the basic assumptions of the conventional rb-sr [rubidium-strontium] isochron method have to be modified and an observed isochron does not certainly define valid age information for a geological system, even if a goodness of fit of the experimental results is obtained in plotting 87sr/86sr. at the oldest, or deepest layer of rock there was no record of fossils, but then they noticed that simple sea creatures were found at the next higher level, then more complex ones like fishes at the next higher level and so on. some fossils are particularly useful for these comparisons as they show distinct changes over time. one example is k-ar “dating” of five historical andesite lava flows from mount nguaruhoe in new zealand. this will make old things look older than they really are. must remember that the past is not open to the normal processes of experimental science, that is, repeatable experiments in the present. sarfati, “blowing old-earth belief away: helium gives evidence that the earth is young,” creation, 1998, 20(3):19-21. the wood was “dated” by radiocarbon (14c) analysis at about 45,000 years old, but the basalt was “dated” by potassium-argon method at 45 million years old! this is consistent with a young world—the argon has had too little time to escape. only one sample is required for this method as both the argon-39 and argon-40 can be extracted from the same sample. the other nine samples again gave much older dates but the authors decided they must be contaminated and discarded them.[40] the amount of lead may be consistent with current rates of decay over millions of years, but it would have diffused out of the crystals in that time. the majority of test cases show good agreement, so the fossil record accordingly relates the same story as the molecules enclosed in living organisms.), fossils formed in the early post-flood period would give radiocarbon ages older than they really are.

since then, geologists have made many tens of thousands of radiometric age determinations, using the different isotope pairs and scientists have refined the earlier estimates. again, the only way to know if an isochron is “good” is by comparing the result with what is already believed. a day's there is only a 1% chance of error occurring with the current dating technology. fossils do tell the evolutionary story of live on earth. zheng wrote:Some of the basic assumptions of the conventional rb-sr [rubidium-strontium] isochron method have to be modified and an observed isochron does not certainly define valid age information for a geological system, even if a goodness of fit of the experimental results is obtained in plotting 87sr/86sr. where the rocks are not strongly folded or tilted it is possible to work out the order in which the layers were formed.[38] however, such exercises in story-telling can hardly be considered as objective science that proves an old earth. is plenty of evidence that the radioisotope dating systems are not the infallible techniques many think, and that they are not measuring millions of years.[43] there have been many attempts, because the orphan halos speak of conditions in the past, either at creation or after, perhaps even during the flood, which do not fit with the uniformitarian view of the past, which is the basis of the radiometric dating systems.[39] cook noted that, in ores from the katanga mine, for example, there was an abundance of lead-208, a stable isotope, but no thorium-232 as a source for lead-208.. humphreys, “the sea's missing salt: a dilemma for evolutionists,” proc. involved with unrecorded history gather information in the present and construct stories about the past. people wonder how millions of years could be squeezed into the biblical account of history. this effectively combines the two uranium-lead decay series into one diagram. this boundary marks the end of the dinosaur's period, which was 65 million years ago. this damage is in the form of tiny marks called fission tracks. unlike common carbon (12c), 14c is unstable and slowly decays, changing it back to nitrogen and releasing energy. the dating methods are an objective and reliable means of determining ages, they should agree. these displaced neutrons, now moving fast, hit ordinary nitrogen (14n) at lower altitudes, converting it into 14c.[20] this contrasts with an age of 1550-1650 ma based on other isotope ratios,[21] and ages of 275, 61, 0,0,and 0 ma for thorium/lead (232th/208pb) ratios in five uraninite grains. it is initially formed in the molten rock that lies beneath the earth’s crust. this technique is, however, useful for providing relative dates for objects found at the same site. with this knowledge, they can place the fossils into detailed chronological sequences. fossils and other objects that accumulate between these eruptions lie between two different layers of volcanic ash and rock. these techniques, unlike carbon dating, mostly use the relative concentrations of parent and daughter products in radioactive decay chains. similar questions can also arise in applying sm-nd [samarium-neodymium] and u-pb [uranium-lead] isochron methods.., seeds in the graves of historically dated tombs) enables the level of 14c in the atmosphere at that time to be estimated, and so partial calibration of the “clock” is possible. accordingly, carbon dating carefully applied to items from historical times can be useful. is an unsolved mystery to evolutionists as to why coal has 14c in it,[25], or wood supposedly millions of years old still has 14c present, but it makes perfect sense in a creationist world view. an isotope is an atom having the same number of protons in its nucleus as other varieties of the element but has a different number of neutrons.

inches) per year, and this rate would have been greater in the past. the range of recorded history, calibration of the 14c "clock is not possible.-14 is made when cosmic rays knock neutrons out of atomic nuclei in the upper atmosphere.” a study of pig fossils in africa readily convinced most anthropologists that the 1470 skull was much younger. this form of uranium usually decays into a stable lead isotope but the uranium atoms can also split – a process known as fission. billion years to reach its present distance from the earth. he found that even highly weathered soil samples from the area, which are definitely not closed systems, gave apparently valid “isochron” lines with “ages” of up to 1,445 ma. that is why radiocarbon dating cannot give millions of years.” a study of pig fossils in africa readily convinced most anthropologists that the 1470 skull was much younger. method of dating is based on the changes in the direction of the earth’s magnetic field. isochron technique involves collecting a number of rock samples from different parts of the rock unit being dated.[12] john woodmorappe has produced an incisive critique of these dating methods. krummenacher, “isotopic composition of argon in modern surface rocks,” earth and planetary science letters, 1969, 6:47-55. the dating methods are an objective and reliable means of determining ages, they should agree.[43] there have been many attempts, because the orphan halos speak of conditions in the past, either at creation or after, perhaps even during the flood, which do not fit with the uniformitarian view of the past, which is the basis of the radiometric dating systems. must remember that the past is not open to the normal processes of experimental science, that is, repeatable experiments in the present. thorium has a long half-life (decays very slowly) and is not easily moved out of the rock, so if the lead-208 came from thorium decay, some thorium should still be there. isochron dating technique was thought to be infallible because it supposedly covered the assumptions about starting conditions and closed systems. if the line is of good fit and the “age” is acceptable, it is a “good” date. after this was widely accepted, further studies of the rocks brought the radiometric age down to about 1. again, this indicates a maximum age, not the actual age. in fact new geologic time scales are published every few years, providing the latest dates for major time lines. the sea is not nearly salty enough for this to have been happening for billions of years., using hindsight, it is argued that “excess” argon from the magma (molten rock) was retained in the rock when it solidified. dating methods that can only tell us whether one object is older or younger than another – they cannot pinpoint an actual age in years.[11] this started with an initial 212 to 230 ma, which, according to the fossils, was considered way off the mark (humans “weren't around then"). we suggesting that evolutionists are conspiring to massage the data to get what they want? known as the rate (radioisotopes and the age of the earth) group, it combines the skills of various physicists and geologists to enable a multi-disciplinary approach to the subject. possible, several different methods are used and each method is repeated to confirm the results obtained and improve accuracy. techniques, such as the use of isochrons,[17] make different assumptions about starting conditions, but there is a growing recognition that such “foolproof” techniques can also give “bad” dates.
[18] again, all sorts of reasons can be suggested for the “bad” dates, but this is again posterior reasoning. the methods that have been used to estimate the age of the earth, 90 percent point to an age far less than the billions of years asserted by evolutionists. this problem cannot be overlooked, especially in evaluating the numerical time scale. this is true of both creationist and evolutionist scientific arguments—evolutionists have had to abandon many “proofs” for evolution just as creationists have also had to modify their arguments. this is because they believe that this is an accurate eyewitness account of world history, which bears the evidence within it that it is the word of god, and therefore totally reliable and error-free. this gives a maximum age of the moon, not the actual age. one example is k-ar “dating” of five historical andesite lava flows from mount nguaruhoe in new zealand.[6] such a re-calibration makes sense of anomalous data from carbon dating—for example, very discordant “dates” for different parts of a frozen musk ox carcass from alaska and an inordinately slow rate of accumulation of ground sloth dung pellets in the older layers of a cave where the layers were carbon dated. however, with radiometric dating, the different techniques often give quite different results.[6] such a re-calibration makes sense of anomalous data from carbon dating—for example, very discordant “dates” for different parts of a frozen musk ox carcass from alaska and an inordinately slow rate of accumulation of ground sloth dung pellets in the older layers of a cave where the layers were carbon dated. are able to recognise fossils that are characteristic of various rock layers. is entering the sea much faster than it is escaping.. gunst, “an analysis of the earth's magnetic field from 1835 to 1965,” essa technical report ier 46-ies, 1965, u.. russell humphreys gives other processes inconsistent with billions of years in the pamphlet evidence for a young world. the method involves dividing both the parent and daughter concentrations by the concentration of a similar stable isotope—in this case, strontium-86. the common application of such posterior reasoning shows that radiometric dating has serious problems. again, the stories are evaluated according to their own success in agreeing with the existing long ages belief system. scientists work out the direction of the earth’s magnetic field in the past by looking for traces of iron-oxide minerals that are found in many rocks. in fact, if a sample contains 14c, it is good evidence that it is not millions of years old. it was all clear when in 1859 charles darwin published his "on the origin of species". most importantly, it was recognized that each time-unit was characterized by the appearance of particular fossils. this is just what we would expect for “young” galaxies that have not existed long enough for wide expansion. they realize that all science is tentative because we do not have all the data, especially when dealing with the past. isochron dating technique was thought to be infallible because it supposedly covered the assumptions about starting conditions and closed systems.., seeds in the graves of historically dated tombs) enables the level of 14c in the atmosphere at that time to be estimated, and so partial calibration of the “clock” is possible. unlike common carbon (12c), 14c is unstable and slowly decays, changing it back to nitrogen and releasing energy. thorium has a long half-life (decays very slowly) and is not easily moved out of the rock, so if the lead-208 came from thorium decay, some thorium should still be there. woodmorappe, the mythology of modern dating methods, for one such thorough evaluation. is entering the sea much faster than it is escaping. the wood was “dated” by radiocarbon (14c) analysis at about 45,000 years old, but the basalt was “dated” by potassium-argon method at 45 million years old!