Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 69 (9049 total)
55 online now:
DrJones*, dwise1, nwr (3 members, 52 visitors)
Newest Member: Wes johnson
Upcoming Birthdays: Astrophile
Post Volume: Total: 887,592 Year: 5,238/14,102 Month: 159/677 Week: 18/26 Day: 0/6 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   The dating game
Junior Member (Idle past 2902 days)
Posts: 28
Joined: 06-08-2006

Message 3 of 94 (392629)
04-01-2007 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Reserve
03-31-2007 2:11 PM

It says that Potasium-argon does not work for recent dates. I wonder, why not? why only for ages older than 100kya? Radioactivity is a recently discovered tool from around the 19th century which is about 200 years ago.

From Potassium-Argon Dating under the subsection "Limits to K-Ar Dating"

At 100,000 years, only 0.0053% of the potassium-40 in a rock would have decayed to argon-40, pushing the limits of present detection devices.

Any lower and it becomes nearly impossible to accurately gauge the amount of decay.

A similar question for radiocarbon dating. If radiocarbon dating is only useful for a maximum date of 100,000 why is it that when dating anything older we would get "back nonsense numbers"?

Here's the exact opposite problem. After 100K years there isn't enough carbon left to accurately gauge the age. So no matter how much older the object actually is you'll probably get back an age of around 100K years.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Reserve, posted 03-31-2007 2:11 PM Reserve has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Reserve, posted 04-01-2007 4:19 PM Iname has not yet responded

Junior Member (Idle past 2902 days)
Posts: 28
Joined: 06-08-2006

Message 26 of 94 (392816)
04-02-2007 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Reserve
04-02-2007 12:40 PM

Re: No mystery
The website I got it from did not mention anything about conspiracy, that is something you guys have placed inside creationists mouths. Stop doing that.

Did you miss the part where the creationist above you, by the name of CTD, said that papers with the "wrong" (ie against the consensus) date will be refused publishing thereby establishing a giant conspiracy to quiet dissenting ideas by the entirety of the scientific community?

No need to put words in creationists' mouths.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Reserve, posted 04-02-2007 12:40 PM Reserve 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