Radiometric dating indicates that the earth is approximately how old
To begin, here is a quick overview of how radiometric dating works.Atoms from a given element will always have the same number of protons, but can have different numbers of neutrons, this is called an isotope of the element (Lutgens and Edward, 20). Rejuvenation of Pitchblende in Hercynian Ore Deposits. One way geochronologists check a radiometric date is to use one or more different methods and compare the results.But more disturbing is the fact that, “radiocarbon dates are often ignored or dismissed as a “bad date” if they do not fit an a priori hypothesis” (Thompson, T. The reason for these examples is to show that this does occur and therefore radiometric dates can not and should not be treated as “scientific facts”. Recently (-10y) Depleted Radiogenic (87/86 Sr=0.706) Mantle Source of Ocean Ridge-Like Thoileitte, Northern Great Basin. Sandstone in Yenisei, USSR from the Tertiary period, expected to be 1 million years old was dated to be 81 million years by K-Ar dating (Firsov L. “However, the [C14] level is not constant as the ground level activity of 1.63 is still rising to a generation rate in the upper atmosphere of 2.5, i.e. This method is quite unreliable for ages over 3,000 years, despite datings up to 40,000 years being quoted” [brackets added] (Bowden, 190). According to evolutionists the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old. Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs 6) (Woodmorappe, 192). A related assumption is that the rate of carbon-14 formation has remained fairly constant in history. 14) so more C is being produced now than in the past. “Radiometric Geochronology Reappraised.” Creation Research Society Quarterly 16.2 (1979). Yet another unprovable assumption in carbon-14 dating is that the level of carbon-14 and carbon-12 in the earth’s atmosphere has remained fairly consistent throughout history, and natural disasters have had little influence on these levels.
Even Willard Libby, who developed carbon-14 dating, found that the rate of production and decay were different. This would further dilute the amount of C ratio to be much smaller than today” (Riddle, 2007). “C14 dating and Egyptian chronology.” Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology, Nobel Symposium 12. So dating any materials before the flood under the assumption that the carbon-14 to carbon-12 ratio was the same in the past would result in giving dates perhaps ten times older than is true (Riddle, 2007). An additional assumption is that the carbon-14 to carbon-12 ratio is a constant. One vital assumption about carbon-14 dating is that the rate of production and decay of carbon-14 is in equilibrium. “Several other geochronologists have also suggested that the C ratio in trees from Australia and Europe (Mac Kie, et. “Long-age chronologists have assumed that the rate of formation of C.