Dating fossils and rocks mike riddle Free online ipad cams chats
Creationists do admit that radioactive decay has occurred, but “it is important to understand the simple, fundamental principle behind all dating methods, and why they are not able to produce objective, absolute dates…The fatal flaw is that all scientific measurements are made in the present, whereas a date relates to a time in the past.We cannot go back into the past to measure all the parameters we need in order to do the dating calculation.In radiocarbon dating, there is limited precision and “given the way the atmospheric radiocarbon concentration has varied [based on tree ring dating results], there might be several possible ranges” of dates for the object being analyzed.[vi] Plants and trees that are near volcanic areas appear older because the carbon they absorb will be older, from underground, and thus should have very little if any C-14.
Some were only millions of years old, while others were 28 billion years old.”[xvi] “Conflicting radioactive dating results are reported all the time and, on their own, there is no way of knowing what they mean.
The three main assumptions that affect the results of radiometric dating are: 1) the rate of decay has always been constant, 2) there has been no contamination (no movement of elements into or out of the object over time), and 3) we can determine how much daughter element there was to begin with.[ii] There are many test results that make the reliability of these dating techniques very questionable.[iii] Naturalists try to explain these questionable results, but still can’t adequately explain them from their worldview.[iv] Evidence from “as far back as 1971” may show “that high pressure could increase decay rates very slightly for at least 14 isotopes.”[v] Naturalists even admit that radiocarbon dating does not work on living mussels because of the lack of new carbon in that environment.
So what other situations and conditions create unreliable results that we must also throw out the dating because of?
We would expect more volcanic activity due to the effects of the flood, naturalists would not expect or account for that.
There is also a lot of evidence that there is too much C-14 within supposedly old materials.[viii] C-14, which can’t last more than 100,000 years, has been found in coal, in oil, in fossils, in fossil wood, in diamonds, and even in deep strata where it should not exist.[ix] This evidence is above what naturalists can simply claim as contamination.
“For example, the radioactive decay of uranium in tiny crystals in a New Mexico granite yields a uranium-lead ‘age’ of 1.5 billion years.