Since the magma generally has old radiometric ages, I don't see how we could have magma without Pb or Sr. But it is more difficult to remove argon that has deposited on cracks in the mineral, which can be difficult to see.
So one sees that there is a tremendous potential for age increases in this way. In words, earth's population should be some million, billion, billion, billion. What is the age of the earth?
Thus just by chance, many dates will be considered within the acceptable ranges. The difficulties associated are numerous and listed as follows: And since this agreement is the strongest argument for the reliability of radiometric dating, such an assumption of agreement appears to be without support so far.
If so, standard radiometric dating must be corrected for an early accelerated decay rate, reducing millions of years to thousands! After the material was quenched, the researchers measured up to 0. In order to explain old isotopic ages on a young Earth by means of accelerated decay, an increase of six to ten orders of magnitude in rates of decay would be needed depending on whether the acceleration was spread out over the entire pre-Flood period, or accomplished entirely during the Flood.
This method is thought to represent the time when lead isotopes were last homogeneously distributed throughout the Solar System and, thus, the time that the planetary bodies were segregated into discrete chemical systems.
The third act sees the entry of a newly discovered set of physical laws—those governing radioactivity. So one obtains a series of minerals crystallizing out of the lava. This will result in artificially increased K-Ar ages. Either the population growth calculation is hopelessly wrong, or the theory of human evolution is suspect!
If it dates too young, one can invoke a later heating event.
And even if the date is one or two geologic periods earlier, it may well be close enough to be accepted as non-spurious. Heating of rocks can also release argon. Yet, when five radiometric dating methods agree on the age of one of the Earth's oldest rock formations Dalrymplep.
Samples giving no evidence of being disturbed can give wrong dates. He performed measurements on rock samples and concluded in that the oldest a sample from Ceylon was about 1. This book is a must-read for anyone who wishes to critique mainstream methods for dating the Earth.
This will make it more difficult to detect this added argon by the spectrum test described below.
Biblical Earth Changes The Bible records two dramatic, worldwide physical changes to the earth: Holmes published The Age of the Earth, an Introduction to Geological Ideas in in which he presented a range of 1. Since there doesn't seem to be any systematic error that could cause so many methods to agree with each other so often, it seems that there is no other rational conclusion than to accept these dates as accurate.
For example, our moral obligations toward God and the method of salvation are discussed in detail. Many dates give values near the accepted ones.
Even if crystals exclude argon as they form, argon will rapidly diffuse into them as the lava cools, by the diffusion equation mentioned above. Pitman, Radiometric Dating Methods, ] If we question these techniques, there is an alternative method called isochron dating.
Henke criticized some statements in my article taken from Slusher about the branching ratio for potassium. In uranium-lead U-Pb dating of zircon, the zircon is found to exclude initial lead almost completely.
Some fossils are found in Precambrian rocks, but most of them are found in Cambrian and later periods.SCIENTIFIC AGE OF THE EARTH. efore analyzing the arguments advanced by creation “scientists” for a very young Earth, I here summarize briefly the evidence that has convinced scientists that the Earth is to billion years old.
The question of the age of the earth has produced heated discussions on Internet debate boards, TV, radio, in classrooms, and in many churches, Christian colleges, and seminaries.
The primary sides are Young-earth proponents (biblical age of the earth and universe of about 6, years)1 Old-earth. The age of the Earth is ± billion years ( × 10 9 years ± 1%). This age may represent the age of the Earth's accretion, of core formation, or of the material from which the Earth formed.
This dating is based on evidence from radiometric age-dating of meteorite material and is consistent with the radiometric ages of the oldest-known terrestrial and lunar samples.
G. Dalrymple has done a wonderful job in writing such a technical work on the history and direct data for the current estimate of the age of the Earth being Billion years old and the Universe being 7 -.
Most people accept the current old-earth (OE) age estimate of around billion years. This age is obtained from radiometric dating and is assumed by evolutionists to provide a sufficiently long time-frame for Darwinian evolution. Introduction. Today, the vast majority of pastors and teachers do not interpret the days of creation to be twenty-four hours long.
Many accept the current secular view of the age of the earth, and rather than questioning the “sure” and “tested” results of “science” they conclude that a literal six day creation is a misinterpretation of Scripture.Download