List at least 9 of the false assumptions made with radioactive dating methods. There are only two I'm aware of. The first is that atoms have. Once you understand the basic science of radiometric dating, you can see how wrong assumptions lead to incorrect dates. I will attempt to give you a few answers to your questions concerning radiometric dating. If you want to study what creationists say about radiometric dating in.
- Is radiocarbon dating based on assumptions?
- Restoring the Authority of the Bible, Starting with the very first Book
Another possible avenue is C13, which has a small but non-zero neutron absorption cross section. By either mechanism, this is essentially internal contamination. Other methods of dating are more appropriate. Bill Huningahke explained in detail on creation. You believe what you like. You are meaningless to the scientific community and if you try to promote teaching of your religion in schools, then I will be involved with the groups who stop you.
The evidence for evolution and physics working is unbelievably massive and the evidence that creationists lie and misrepresent real science is also massive. Many of the same principles that are important to things like computers, clocks, and GPS systems are also the same principles that define why radiometric dating works.
You accept some, but not all, not because of evidence, but because your beliefs refuse to allow you accept it. You really need to think about a belief system that prevents you from seeing reality for what it is. Doc Bill Geeze, Creepto-guru, what a load of malarky you can generate.
Did you write a word salad program? Well, you did a great job. The paper you referenced is totally useless, as are you, to your argument. The variation was on the order of 1. From your little avatar you look like a happy sort of hobbit.
The paper I referenced was useful, as you mentioned, in showing testable and measurable variation in a decay-rate. That was the point. Do you have scientific experiments that show that all those assumptions hold up for the methods over the period of time that are of interest to you? Or do you pretend that never happens. I suppose ignorance IS bliss … is it? SmilodonsRetreat Fujii, Yasunori et al. The nuclear interaction at Oklo 2 billion years ago. Nuclear Physics B Constraints on stellar yields and Sne from gamma-ray line observations.
An Essay on Radiometric Dating
New Astronony Reviews Nucleosynthesis in type 1A supernovae. Nucleosynthesis in type II supernovae.
Discovery of a supernova explosion at half the age of the universe and its cosmological implications. Calibration against Pliny the Younger. Direct test of the constancy of fundamental nuclear constants. Oklo interactions have also been used to validate a young earth view after analysis of the restraints imposed on the alpha-decay half-lives.
The researchers chose a fluence monitor that is only 1. What is your field of study? What do you do Kevin??
Assumptions of Radioactive Dating
Are you a disgruntled Science Teacher at a secondary school in Texas raised amidst bible-thumping nitwits who hate gay people and struggle to formulate sentences?? Explain in English how it works in the face of contamination and untrustworthy decay-rates.
Let me go through it real slow and maybe the penny will drop. Let me demonstrate your faulty logic with an anology: We use a stopwatch to calculate the laptime of runners around a race track. The stopwatch can only count long enough to accurately measure runners that run the track faster than 12mph.
I tell you that my 92 year old Grandma would like to have her lap timed, she used to be a great runner when she was young, and would love to see how fast she it now. I ask you to do it anyway just to humour her. You cannot now claim that the stopwatch was the wrong way to measure her.
The radioactive isotopes created in supernova explosions produce gamma rays with frequencies and fading rates that are predictable according to present decay rates. Therefore, there is has been no measurable change in decay rates overyears and no factors that could affect decay rates have changed in over 1.
Your paper by Overman is pretty funny. Nine references, one of which is a business statistics book and two of which are creationists. But I enjoy watching your confirmation bias. And there is no way to measure the one way speed of light. Try again, loser, with another creationist. How about Kurt Wise? Or maybe Hugh Ross? Come on, Creepto, get cracking! See how I did that?GC B14 Accuracy and assumptions of radiometric dating
I suppose the problem comes down to the origin of the granite samples and whether or not they are primordial granite or not. Tell you what though … the diamond Po halos stuff by Snelling is more compelling, as the location of the diamond is not important. I gave the AiG link to Kevin too … I know you love those guys https: Do you only like to argue when your mates are with you?
Again, boo fucking hoo. Right, all of chemistry is based on assumptions pulled out of the air because that explains why chemistry works so well.
Oh, and nuclear chemistry is a total mystery; nobody knows why decay happens and analytical chemistry is just lucky I guess.
Tell you what, Creepto, you go ahead and believe that. Sucks to be you, Creepto.
So unless you can manage to pull an interesting fact for grown-up debate out of your arse you should probably avoid the device with letters on it in front of you that has enabled your communicative diarrhoea. I have not failed anything. I have been approached several times by the department to go back and finish what I started, as I had discovered some new useful things in the field that they would like to get published.
That is all completely beside the point … and a cunning diversion from your inability to answer any actual scientific questions. Or does it happen all the time irrespective of how badly your side of the argument is going?
Assumptions vs. inductive logic: is radiometric dating based on assumptions? | The Logic of Science
Arrogance is in the eye of the beholder. And the need to explain everything from first principles every post, because the basic arguments get distorted and misrepresented at every turn. Doc Bill You are too funny, Creepto! Radiometric Dating - The Assumptions Many of the ages derived by radiometric dating techniques are highly publicized. Nevertheless, the fundamental assumptions employed are not. Here are the three major assumptions for your consideration: The rate of decay remains constant. There has been no contamination that is, no daughter or intermediate elements have been introduced or leeched from the specimen of rock.
We can determine how much daughter there was to begin with if we assume there was no daughter to begin with, yet there was daughter at the formation of the rock, the rock would have a superficial appearance of age. Are these foundational assumptions reasonable? Recent findings seem to indicate that though we ourselves have not been able to vary the decay rates by much in the laboratory, the decay rates may have been accelerated in the unobservable past .
If this were the case, the first assumption would be deemed unreasonable. This would completely upset our current standardized view of earth's history. Dr Carl Wieland summarizes the recent findings: Certain crystals called zircons, obtained from drilling into very deep granites, contain uranium which has partly decayed into lead.
By measuring the amount of uranium and 'radiogenic lead' in these crystals, one can calculate that, if the decay rate has been constant, about 1.
This is consistent with the geologic 'age' assigned to the granites in which these zircons are found. There is a significant amount of helium from that '1. This is at first glance surprising, because of the ease with which one would expect helium with its tiny, light, unreactive atoms to escape from the spaces within the crystal structure.
There should hardly be any left, because with such a slow buildup, it should be seeping out continually and not accumulating. Drawing any conclusions from the above depends, of course, on actually measuring the rate at which helium leaks out of zircons. This is what one of the recent RATE  papers reports on.