Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-27-2019 8:31 AM
30 online now:
Hyroglyphx, jar, RAZD, Stile (4 members, 26 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: ooh-child
Post Volume:
Total: 854,846 Year: 9,882/19,786 Month: 2,304/2,119 Week: 340/724 Day: 3/62 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Uranium Dating
Contingent
Junior Member (Idle past 3782 days)
Posts: 2
Joined: 11-19-2008


Message 1 of 2 (488891)
11-19-2008 3:36 AM


"The process of radiological dating has several intrensic flaws, the most glaring of which is that it assumes set levels of the isotopes measured between samples origionally. For example, in U238 dating, the U238 decays into lead. The only problem with dating samples based on the ratio of the two is that lead occurs natrually, and often in the company of uranium and other heavy metals. The ratio of natural lead to uranium is not constant ether, as lead can occur with little or no radiological involvement.
Basically, there is no way of predicting the actual decay time on the remaining U238, as extra natural lead is everywhere and probably with the uranium wherever it may manifest. This same inaccuracy is inherant in all other methods of radiological dating. Nothing says that the levels of carbon 14 are or were constant at any point in history, or that the levels of solar radiation that cause the isotope in the atmosphere were ever constant."
  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12602
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 2 of 2 (488897)
11-19-2008 9:04 AM


Thread copied to the Uranium Dating thread in the Dates and Dating forum, this copy of the thread has been closed.
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019