Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is Radiometric Dating Really that Accurate?
wj
Inactive Member


Message 23 of 114 (15959)
08-22-2002 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Thunderbird
08-22-2002 7:08 PM


Subject to Thunderbird actually providing references for his statements, they appears to be based on creationist Snelling's incompetent or dishonest work.
Examples of successful dating of historical lava flows are included in the links in my message #11 in the "Two questions concerning radioisotope dating" thread. Or are we simply to be persuaded by creationist assertions?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Thunderbird, posted 08-22-2002 7:08 PM Thunderbird has not replied

  
wj
Inactive Member


Message 25 of 114 (15988)
08-23-2002 6:46 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Thunderbird
08-23-2002 1:53 AM


Ah, the incredulity and selective belief of the creationist.
Well Thunderbird, give citations for your claims. I'm sure I know where they come from but you never know, there might be something new in the world of creationism.
I will be absent for about a week so others might demolish your cited sources before I get back. In the meantime, read the links I referred you to which give examples of accurate dating of historical lava flows eg Mt Vesuvius. Explain how accurate dates can be obtained by a methodology which you hope is inaccurate.
Your incredulity at tested rocks showing a "very old age" of 2 million years should be put into context. K-40 has a half life of 1.2 billion years. It's quite understandable that even minute experimental errors can swamp the measurements of radiogenic argon from rocks only hundreds of years old. It's very difficult to do correctly but it can be done, but obviously not by creationists. "Very old rocks" are those which are dated by the K-Ar method at billions of years old.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Thunderbird, posted 08-23-2002 1:53 AM Thunderbird has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by katareen, posted 04-14-2003 3:51 PM wj has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024