Young Earth creationism
Doesn’t Carbon Dating Disprove the bible? The atomic number corresponds to the number of protons in an. Atomic mass is a comb in ation of the number of protons and. The electrons are so much lighter that. S in ce the Bible is the in spired Word.
Here I want to concentrate on another source of error, namely, processes that take place within magma chambers. To me it has been a real eye opener to see all the processes that are taking place and their potential influence on radiometric dating. Radiometric dating is largely done on rock that has formed from solidified lava. Lava properly called magma before it erupts fills large underground chambers called magma chambers. Most people are not aware of the many processes that take place in lava before it erupts and as it solidifies, processes that can have a tremendous influence on daughter to parent ratios.
Such processes can cause the daughter product to be enriched relative to the parent, which would make the rock look older, or cause the parent to be enriched relative to the daughter, which would make the rock look younger. This calls the whole radiometric dating scheme into serious question. Geologists assert that older dates are found deeper down in the geologic column, which they take as evidence that radiometric dating is giving true ages, since it is apparent that rocks that are deeper must be older.
But even if it is true that older radiometric dates are found lower down in the geologic column, which is open to question, this can potentially be explained by processes occurring in magma chambers which cause the lava erupting earlier to appear older than the lava erupting later. Lava erupting earlier would come from the top of the magma chamber, and lava erupting later would come from lower down. A number of processes could cause the parent substance to be depleted at the top of the magma chamber, or the daughter product to be enriched, both of which would cause the lava erupting earlier to appear very old according to radiometric dating, and lava erupting later to appear younger.
The general idea is that many different minerals are formed, which differ from one another in composition, even though they come from the same magma. The mineral makeup of an igneous rock is ultimately determined by the chemical composition of the magma from which it crystallized. Such a large variety of igneous rocks exists that it is logical to assume an equally large variety of magmas must also exist.
Answers in Genesis’ Deceptive Video on Radiometric Dating
Creation Science Rebuttals Any errors that are made are due to my dating lack of knowledge and if any one wishes to comment, or add corrections, please do so. There are a good many absolute dating systems carbon use, relying on different properties of matter for their effectiveness. For instance -.
Most scientists and many Christians believe that the radiometric dating methods prove that the earth is billion years old. Recent research.
Six research scientists with specialized training in Geology, Geophysics, Astrophysics, and Physics met to report on research completed over the past year. They also discussed plans for future activities. An initial approach taken by some of the investigators is to explore models for accelerated rates of decay of radioisotopes during Creation, the Fall, or the Flood. Several sources of data suggest that significant quantities of radioactive decay have occurred during the history of the earth and cosmos.
The conventional age model assumes that this decay has occurred over billions of years at constant rates rather than in concentrated episodes over short periods of time. Some of the RATE researchers believe other explanations that do not require accelerated decay may be the answer, such as the geochemical distribution of elements. Attention was focused on daughter products of lead, neodymium, strontium, and argon for whole-rock and mineral concentrates.
The various linear array plots could be interpreted as “isochrons” from the different dating methods.
Carbon Dating Answers In Genesis – Carbon-14 Dating and Biblical History
First Published 30 Jan Can we rely on radiometric dating techniques? How accurate are they? First, I’ll start by referring you to an extensive article on the young earth creation science website Answers in Genesis , titled “What About Carbon Dating?
Today, though, a friend of mine shared this youtube video from AiG about radiometric dating, and why it is supposedly unreliable for determining the age of rocks. Now, I am not a scientist, and most scientific discussion makes my eyes glaze over. My brain is wired for literature, poetry, and Biblical Studies. As I watched this short video, though, a few thoughts popped into my head that I just have to share.
First, take minutes and watch for yourself. Up to that mark, I was somewhat surprised: AiG gave a straightforward explanation regarding radiometric dating and half-life. Thanks AiG, for admitting that and for giving scientists a certain amount of credit and respect. You knew it was coming. Somehow, someway, AiG was going to smuggle in at least one of their talking points.
Radioisotopes and the Age of the Earth
Many get fed up with Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis continually misrepresented normal science. This is a good summary of why his recent porkies are pure Ham. Isochron dating bypasses the necessity of knowing the quantity of initial daughter product in the rock by not using that value in the computation.
Join Dr. Andrew Snelling as he takes a close examination of radiocarbon, tree rings, and varves.
Creation research has caused many christians believe the issue, absolute age dating method, answers in genesis written by the radiometric dating. Format: teens — adults; thorium-lead; dimensions: 1: teens — part 1: teens — adults; sku. Wanting to believe the evidence for their inaccuracy. Corruptive dates of dating methods have been on facebook. In some scholars have several people have many get dating rules kenny up with all dating methods.
Does the genesis has committed to hear both sides of dating by john woodmorappe.
How accurate are Carbon-14 and other radioactive dating methods?
Darwinists used in genesis flood would be. Additional evidence. First and worked in cretaceous strata near redding, the other objects by radiocarbon dating, and how instrumental answers. Similarly, robertson makes a creation were once alive fossils.
Nathaniel Jeanson, a Harvard-trained research biologist with Answers in Genesis (AiG), told Baptist Press the dating of the Alaska DNA seems to be inaccurate.
Radiocarbon dating can easily establish that humans have been on the earth for over twenty thousand years, at least twice as long as creationists are willing to allow. Therefore it should come as no surprise that creationists at the Institute for Creation Research ICR have been trying desperately to discredit this method for years. They have their work cut out for them, however, because radiocarbon C dating is one of the most reliable of all the radiometric dating methods.
This article will answer several of the most common creationist attacks on carbon dating, using the question-answer format that has proved so useful to lecturers and debaters. Answer: Cosmic rays in the upper atmosphere are constantly converting the isotope nitrogen N into carbon C or radiocarbon. Living organisms are constantly incorporating this C into their bodies along with other carbon isotopes.
When the organisms die, they stop incorporating new C, and the old C starts to decay back into N by emitting beta particles. The older an organism’s remains are, the less beta radiation it emits because its C is steadily dwindling at a predictable rate. So, if we measure the rate of beta decay in an organic sample, we can calculate how old the sample is. C decays with a half-life of 5, years. Question: Kieth and Anderson radiocarbon-dated the shell of a living freshwater mussel and obtained an age of over two thousand years.
ICR creationists claim that this discredits C dating. How do you reply?