Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9049 total)
84 online now:
xongsmith (1 member, 83 visitors)
Newest Member: Wes johnson
Upcoming Birthdays: Coragyps
Post Volume: Total: 887,675 Year: 5,321/14,102 Month: 242/677 Week: 47/54 Day: 0/4 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Mechanisms of sea transgression and regression
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003

Message 15 of 16 (813983)
07-03-2017 9:56 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Faith
04-28-2017 11:03 AM

Re: Increased Cretaceous seafloor spreading rates
So, to be clear, is all such dating to time periods done by radiometric methods?

No, although radiometric methods are by far the most accurate and convenient.

One thing you are forgetting is that "radiometric methods" covers a plethora of different and independent techniques that are used to cross-check each other. Nobody's ever come up with any physically possible ideas on how the results of all these techniques could be changed and still agree.

Of course for times less that 50,000 years there is a score of methods, all of which agree. That agreement the most difficult thing for creationists to address, so they never try. But for significantly older ages there are some techniques.

Milankovitch cycles leave evidence behind that we can use for absolute dating.
Sunquakes have changed over time as helium accumulates in the core, and that can used to calculate the ages of meteorites, and that calculation agrees with radiometric methods.
Amino Acid Racemization can date items as old as two million years if they happen to have been preserved in ideal conditions (e.g. Antarctica).

Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Faith, posted 04-28-2017 11:03 AM Faith has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021