Creationist’s Blind Dates. The standard scientific estimate is that the universe is about 15 billion years old, the earth about 4. It is important to recognize from the start that there are independent procedures for obtaining each of these estimates, and that the procedures yield ranges of values that overlap. In the case of the universe, estimates can be obtained from astronomical methods or considerations of nuclear reactions. Astrophysicists can measure the rate at which galaxies are receding and use these measurements to compute the time needed for the universe to expand to its present size. A second, independent, astronomical method is to use standard techniques to measure some parameters of stars mass, luminosity, compositor, and surface temperature , from which a well-confirmed theory of the life histories of stars enables physicists to compute their. Finally, considerations of radioactive decay make it possible to calculate the time at which certain heavy elements were formed. These techniques are somewhat similar to the radiometric methods of dating rocks, which I shad consider in a little more detail. For an excellent overview of the various ways of assigning an age to the universe, and an exposition of the radioactive decay method, see Schramm Although the clear consensus of physical techniques is that the universe is billions of years old, and although this result controverts the claims of at least some contemporary Creationists, the principal Creationist attack has been directed against the standard geological claim that the earth is about 4.
Young Earth Creationism, Part I
Radioactive dating is a method of dating rocks and minerals using radioactive isotopes. This method is useful for igneous and metamorphic rocks, which cannot be dated by the stratigraphic correlation method used for sedimentary rocks. Over naturally-occurring isotopes are known. Some do not change with time and form stable isotopes i.
in a very young Earth. The purpose of this paper is to explain the basic principles of the major radiometric dating methods, to illustrate how they.
Carbon 14 is used for this example:, which was put out by Dr. The above is offered as a simple fact of research. Knowing how faulty creationist “facts” can be, let’s do a little research of our own. One suspects that the scientific world would not be using the carbon method if it were so obviously flawed. Could it be that the whole scientific community has missed this point, or is it another case of creationist daydreaming? This argument was popularized by Henry Morris , p.
In another creationist, Robert L. Whitelaw, using a greater ratio of carbon production to decay, concluded that only years passed since carbon started forming in the atmosphere! The argument may be compared to filling a barrel which has numerous small holes in its sides. We stick the garden hose in and turn it on full blast.
How Old is Earth, and How Do We Know?
The age of the earth is a central issue in creation -evolution discussions, because a young earth would not permit enough time for evolution to occur, and an old earth would contradict a literal reading of the Bible account of creation. The belief in an old earth is based on conventional dates for geological periods, which are in the hundreds of millions of years range, and are obtained by isotopic dating methods.
Standard isotopic radiometric dating techniques typically yield such dates on fossil-bearing strata. There are, however, numerous disagreements between dates produced by different isotopic dating methods, and there are many cases where the dates obtained are very different from the expected ones.
Petroleum and find a specific method, and dinosaur bones are examples of fossils of radiometric dating has formed from solidified lava. Young earth vs carbon.
Sometimes only one method is possible, reducing the confidence researchers have in the results. Kidding aside, dating a find is crucial for understanding its significance and relation to other fossils or artifacts. Methods fall into one of two categories: relative or absolute. Before more precise absolute dating tools were possible, researchers used a variety of comparative approaches called relative dating.
These methods — some of which are still used today — provide only an approximate spot within a previously established sequence: Think of it as ordering rather than dating.
A Pocket Guide to A Young Earth
Students, particularly Young-Earth Creationists, may come in with misconceptions about how the age of the Earth and of various parts of the fossil record were determined. Your Account. Explore Teaching Examples Provide Feedback. Teaching about Radiometric Dating Students, particularly Young-Earth Creationists, may come in with misconceptions about how the age of the Earth and of various parts of the fossil record were determined. For example, they may assume that the whole geologic timeline is based on radiocarbon dating, which only gives reliable results for dates back to 40, years before present Low, personal communication.
Others will argue that decay rates could have changed Wise, , or that God could have changed them, which might result in too-old dates.
Lisle Oct 27, Geology , Origins , Physics. We are told that scientists use a technique called radiometric dating to measure the age of rocks. We are also told that this method very reliably and consistently yields ages of millions to billions of years, thereby establishing beyond question that the earth is immensely old — a concept known as deep time.
This apparently contradicts the biblical record in which we read that God created in six days, with Adam being made on the sixth day. From the listed genealogies, the creation of the universe happened about years ago. Has science therefore disproved the Bible?
The Age of the Earth
Aristotle thought the earth had existed eternally. Roman poet Lucretius, intellectual heir to the Greek atomists, believed its formation must have been relatively recent, given that there were no records going back beyond the Trojan War. The Talmudic rabbis, Martin Luther and others used the biblical account to extrapolate back from known history and came up with rather similar estimates for when the earth came into being.
During the recent debate between Ken Ham and Bill Nye, the young earth creationist Ken Ham made the claim that some 90% of dating methods.
The rock walls were slippery and steep at points, and some people came in their dress shoes straight from the conference that brought them together. Let me see that. A brightly painted sign in the state park explained that million years ago these ancient creatures lived at the bottom of a warm, shallow sea during the Ordovician period.
But none of these geologists believed it. As young-earth creationists, they think the earth is about 8, years old, give or take a few thousand years. Creationist ideas about geology tend to appeal to overly zealous amateurs, but this was a gathering of elites, with an impressive wall of diplomas among them Harvard, U. They had spent years studying the geologic timetable, but they remained nevertheless deeply committed to a different version of history.
John Whitmore, a geologist from nearby Cedarville University who organized the field trip, stood in the middle of the fossil bed and summarized it for his son. Whitmore, who was wearing a suede cowboy hat, answered in a cowboy manner — laconic but certain. What was remarkable about the afternoon was not so much the fossils the bed is well picked over but the gathering itself, part of the First Conference on Creation Geology, held on the Cedarville campus.
Creationist geologists are now numerous enough to fill a large meeting room and well educated enough to know that in rejecting the geologic timeline they are also essentially taking on the central tenets of the field. But the participants in the conference insist that their approach is scientifically valid. Creationist geologists are thriving, paradoxically, at a moment when evangelicals are becoming more educated, more prosperous and more open to scientific progress.
How are the ages of the Earth and universe calculated?
Philip J. The American Biology Teacher 1 February ; 82 2 : 72— The recent discovery of radiocarbon in dinosaur bones at first seems incompatible with an age of millions of years, due to the short half-life of radiocarbon. However, evidence from isotopes other than radiocarbon shows that dinosaur fossils are indeed millions of years old. Fossil bone incorporates new radiocarbon by means of recrystallization and, in some cases, bacterial activity and uranium decay.
One of the first and most basic scientific dating methods is also one of the Earth’s magnetic polarity flip-flops about every , to , years. to ,year-old range, too old for radiocarbon but too young for K-Ar.
Earth scientists have devised many complementary and consistent techniques to estimate the ages of geologic events. Annually deposited layers of sediments or ice document hundreds of thousands of years of continuous Earth history. Gradual rates of mountain building, erosion of mountains, and the motions of tectonic plates imply hundreds of millions of years of change.
Radiometric dating, which relies on the predictable decay of radioactive isotopes of carbon, uranium, potassium, and other elements, provides accurate age estimates for events back to the formation of Earth more than 4. Historians love to quote the dates of famous events in human history. They recount days of national loss and tragedy like December 7, and September 11, And they remember birthdays: July 4, and, of course, February 12, the coincident birthdays of Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln.
We trust the validity of these historic moments because of the unbroken written and oral record that links us to the not-so-distant past. But how can we be sure of those age estimates? Earth scientists have developed numerous independent yet consistent lines of evidence that point to an incredibly old Earth. But first, a warning: it is difficult for anyone to conceive of such an immense time span as 4. The oldest humans the current record according to Guinness is held by a French woman who lived to celebrate her nd birthday fall far short of living for 4.
All of recorded human history is much less than 4. Yet, geologists claim that Earth formed half-a-million times longer ago than that.
How Science Figured Out the Age of Earth
You’ve got two decay products, lead and helium, and they’re giving two different ages for the zircon. For this reason, ICR research has long focused on the science behind these dating techniques. These observations give us confidence that radiometric dating is not trustworthy. Research has even identified precisely where radioisotope dating went wrong.
See the articles below for more information on the pitfalls of these dating methods. Radioactive isotopes are commonly portrayed as providing rock-solid evidence that the earth is billions of years old. Since such isotopes are thought to decay at consistent rates over time, the assumption is that simple measurements can lead to reliable ages.
But new discoveries of rate fluctuations continue to challenge the reliability of radioisotope decay rates in general—and thus, the reliability of vast ages seemingly derived from radioisotope dating.
Creation 101: Radiometric Dating and the Age of the Earth
Radiometric dating , radioactive dating or radioisotope dating is a technique which is used to date materials such as rocks or carbon , in which trace radioactive impurities were selectively incorporated when they were formed. The method compares the abundance of a naturally occurring radioactive isotope within the material to the abundance of its decay products, which form at a known constant rate of decay.
Together with stratigraphic principles , radiometric dating methods are used in geochronology to establish the geologic time scale.
RADIOISOTOPE DATING AND A YOUNG EARTH. 36 In terms of theological method, this step of integration with extra biblical data is being presented as a.
The use of carbon, also known as radiocarbon, to date organic materials has been an important method in both archaeology and geology. The technique was pioneered over fifty years ago by the physical chemist Willard Libby, who won the Nobel Prize for his work on 14 C. Since then, the technique has been widely used and continually improved. This paper will focus on how the radiocarbon dating method works, how it is used by scientists, and how creationists have interpreted the results.
Carbon is a radioactive isotope formed in the upper atmosphere. It is constantly being produced by a system in which cosmic rays from the sun hit atoms, releasing neutrons. The neutrons may then be absorbed by 14 N nitrogen atoms which lose a proton in the process, becoming 14 C. Carbon becomes a part of the mostly homogenous mixture of air in the atmosphere.
It can combine with other atoms and molecules such as oxygen to create carbon dioxide, or CO2. Through the process of photosynthesis, plants absorb carbon dioxide which contains 14 C along with the much more abundant 12 C and 13 C. Animals then eat the plants and incorporate 14 C into their own bodies, and eventually it is passed through the food chain. Through this process, every living thing eventually absorbs 14 C into its body in a measurable ratio to 12 C and 13 C.
Carbon makes up an extremely small portion of the carbon on earth. In fact, there is about a trillion times more 12 C in the atmosphere than 14 C.
Uranium lead dating vs carbon dating
Custom Search. Young earth dating methods. Best rated dating sites for seniors.
The method for dealing with young-Earth claims of this type is to look for the limiting .. really occurring was simply working the bugs out of a new dating method.
Most people accept the current old-earth OE age estimate of around 4. This age is obtained from radiometric dating and is assumed by evolutionists to provide a sufficiently long time-frame for Darwinian evolution. And OE Christians theistic evolutionists see no problem with this dating whilst still accepting biblical creation, see Radiometric Dating – A Christian Perspective.
This is the crucial point: it is claimed by some that an old earth supports evolutionary theory and by implication removes the need for biblical creation. Some claim Genesis in particular, and the Bible in general looks mythical from this standpoint. A full discussion of the topic must therefore include the current scientific challenge to the OE concept. This challenge is mainly headed by Creationism which teaches a young-earth YE theory.
A young earth is considered to be typically just 6, years old since this fits the creation account and some dating deductions from Genesis. The crucial point here is: if YE theory can be established scientifically, then macroevolutionary theory falls! Here we outline some dating methods , both absolute and relative, that are widely accepted and used by the scientific community.
Absolute dating supplies a numerical date whilst relative dating places events in time-sequence; both are scientifically useful. This is based upon the spontaneous breakdown or decay of atomic nuclei. Radioactive parent P atoms decay to stable daughter D atoms e. The time required for half the original number of parent atoms to decay is called the half life.