problems with radioactive dating

Dana Lester, 37 years old


About me:
Petrology Tulane University Prof. Stephen A. Nelson Radiometric Dating Prior to the best and most accepted age of the Earth was that proposed by Lord Kelvin based on the amount of time necessary for the Earth to cool to its present temperature from a completely liquid state. Although we now recognize lots of problems with that calculation, the age of 25 my was accepted by most physicists, but considered too short by most geologists. Then, in , radioactivity was discovered.

To date rocks or other objects, scientists typically use radiometric dating. In short, the ratio of radioactive and stable isotopes in the sample are determined and the measured rate at which the isotopes decay is used as an indicator of the age of the sample. However, it is typically unknown and simply assumed whether these ratios of elements are the result of radioactive decay over time or other processes that have taken place in the rock. Sometimes different methods used on the same rock produce different ages. Furthermore, the same method can produce different ages on different parts of the same rock. Sometimes these are close but other times they are very different. Isotopic Fractionation is a physical separation of isotopes and a non-radioactive source of isotope ratios. It can be caused by heating and cooling, water flow, contact between high and low concentration magma problems with radioactive dating just normal molecular motion.

The formula for the fraction remaining is one-half raised to the power given by the number of years divided radioactive dating problems the half-life loves park dating other words raised to a power radioactive dating problems to the number of half-lives. He then said, based on his observation of the rates of evolution of desert environments he thought the flow was less than 10, years of age. Of course, the isotopic abundances of decay products, especially lead, would follow a 1 — U curve. A Forum.
Interests:
More about problems with radioactive dating:
Radiometric Dating Does Work! Radiometric dating of rocks and minerals using naturally occurring, long-lived radioactive isotopes is troublesome for young-earth creationists because the techniques have provided overwhelming evidence of the antiquity of the earth and life. Some so-called creation scientists have attempted to show that radiometric dating does not work on theoretical grounds for example, Arndts and Overn ; Gill but such attempts invariably have fatal flaws see Dalrymple ; York and Dalrymple Other creationists have focused on instances in which radiometric dating seems to yield incorrect results. In most instances, these efforts are flawed because the authors have misunderstood or misrepresented the data they attempt to analyze for example, Woodmorappe ; Morris HM ; Morris JD Only rarely does a creationist actually find an incorrect radiometric result Austin ; Rugg and Austin that has not already been revealed and discussed in the scientific literature. The creationist approach of focusing on examples where radiometric dating yields incorrect results is a curious one for two reasons.

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.

Understanding the Uncertainties, a presentation by Dr Justin Payne. Kevin Rogers submitted a comment to that article reproduced below, edited to focus on substantive issues , to which Dr Jim Mason replies. Andrew Kulikovsky spoke on one occasion and John Hartnett spoke on 2 occasions. However, we are a house divided. It can be experimentally confirmed that molten Zircon rejects lead.