Hwww.dakotavoice.com/2007/05/dating-methods-unreliable.htmlC:/Documents and Settings/Bob Ellis/My Documents/Websites/Dakota Voice Blog 20081230/www.dakotavoice.com/2007/05/dating-methods-unreliable.htmldelayedwww.dakotavoice.com/\sck.s7jx\IHOKtext/htmlUTF-8gzipHJ}/yWed, 31 Dec 2008 22:49:25 GMT"a5db0704-bddd-435c-94b8-20d6f86f7df6"uMozilla/4.5 (compatible; HTTrack 3.0x; Windows 98)en, en, *\IkH Dakota Voice: Dating Methods Unreliable

Featured Article

The Gods of Liberalism Revisited

 

The lie hasn't changed, and we still fall for it as easily as ever.  But how can we escape the snare?

 

READ ABOUT IT...

Friday, May 11, 2007

Dating Methods Unreliable

Answers In Genesis has a good piece on their website today dealing with the accuracy problems inherent in radiometric dating techniques.

The piece is a response to some feedback received from a Christian chemical engineer who is apparently unaware of those dating problems, and unaware that "science" and "naturalism" are two different things.

Here's something most people are unaware of regarding C14 dating:

This uniformitarian method of radiometric dating is not used to date rocks and fossils because of its short half-life of around 5,730 years. Carbon-14 dating can only give a maximum age of 100,000 years. So, it is generally not used to date fossils that are supposedly millions or billions of years old because it is assumed there is no C-14 present. Rocks are not typically dated with C-14 as there is little to no Carbon in most fossil-bearing rock to begin with. However, scientists have now found that C-14 has been found in coal that is allegedly millions of years old.

It also examines the Potassium-Argon and Uranium-Lead dating methods used on inorganic material.

Read the whole thing here.


0 comments:

 
Clicky Web Analytics