Creationist’s Blind Dates. The standard scientific estimate is that the universe is about 15 billion years old, the earth about 4. It is important to recognize from the start that there are independent procedures for obtaining each of these estimates, and that the procedures yield ranges of values that overlap. In the case of the universe, estimates can be obtained from astronomical methods or considerations of nuclear reactions. Astrophysicists can measure the rate at which galaxies are receding and use these measurements to compute the time needed for the universe to expand to its present size. A second, independent, astronomical method is to use standard techniques to measure some parameters of stars mass, luminosity, compositor, and surface temperature , from which a well-confirmed theory of the life histories of stars enables physicists to compute their. Finally, considerations of radioactive decay make it possible to calculate the time at which certain heavy elements were formed. These techniques are somewhat similar to the radiometric methods of dating rocks, which I shad consider in a little more detail. For an excellent overview of the various ways of assigning an age to the universe, and an exposition of the radioactive decay method, see Schramm
The Age of the Earth
When asked for your age, it’s likely you won’t slip with the exception of a recent birthday mistake. But for the sprawling sphere we call home, age is a much trickier matter. Before so-called radiometric dating, Earth’s age was anybody’s guess. Our planet was pegged at a youthful few thousand years old by Bible readers by counting all the “begats” since Adam as late as the end of the 19th century, with physicist Lord Kelvin providing another nascent estimate of million years.
Kelvin defended this calculation throughout his life, even disputing Darwin’s explanations of evolution as impossible in that time period. In , Marie Curie discovered the phenomenon of radioactivity, in which unstable atoms lose energy, or decay, by emitting radiation in the form of particles or electromagnetic waves.
Most scientists today believe that life has existed on the earth for billions of years. Of course, there are many problems with such dating methods, such as.
An Essay on Radiometric Dating. Radiometric dating methods are the strongest direct evidence that geologists have for the age of the Earth. All these methods point to Earth being very, very old — several billions of years old. Young-Earth creationists — that is, creationists who believe that Earth is no more than 10, years old — are fond of attacking radiometric dating methods as being full of inaccuracies and riddled with sources of error. When I first became interested in the creation-evolution debate, in late , I looked around for sources that clearly and simply explained what radiometric dating is and why young-Earth creationists are driven to discredit it.
I found several good sources, but none that seemed both complete enough to stand alone and simple enough for a non-geologist to understand them. Thus this essay, which is my attempt at producing such a source. Theory of Radiometric Dating. Common Methods of Radiometric Dating. Possible Sources of Error. Creationist Objections to Radiometric Dating.
Website access code
Planet Earth doesn’t have a birth certificate to record its formation, which means scientists spent hundreds of years struggling to determine the age of the planet. So, just how old is Earth? By dating the rocks in Earth’s ever-changing crust, as well as the rocks in Earth’s neighbors, such as the moon and visiting meteorites, scientists have calculated that Earth is 4.
You’ve got two decay products, lead and helium, and they’re giving two different ages for the zircon. For this reason, ICR research has long focused on the science behind these dating techniques. These observations give us confidence that radiometric dating is not trustworthy. Research has even identified precisely where radioisotope dating went wrong. See the articles below for more information on the pitfalls of these dating methods. Radioactive isotopes are commonly portrayed as providing rock-solid evidence that the earth is billions of years old.
Since such isotopes are thought to decay at consistent rates over time, the assumption is that simple measurements can lead to reliable ages.
Dating Rocks and Fossils Using Geologic Methods
As has been seen, the geologic time scale is based on stratified rock assemblages that contain a fossil record. For the most part, these fossils allow various forms of information from the rock succession to be viewed in terms of their relative position in the sequence. Approximately the first 87 percent of Earth history occurred before the evolutionary development of shell-bearing organisms. The result of this mineralogic control on the preservability of organic remains in the rock record is that the geologic time scale—essentially a measure of biologic changes through time—takes in only the last 13 percent of Earth history.
Although the span of time preceding the Cambrian period—the Precambrian —is nearly devoid of characteristic fossil remains and coincides with some of the primary rocks of certain early workers, it must, nevertheless, be evaluated in its temporal context.
This method compares the direction of the magnetic particles in layers of sediment to the known worldwide shifts in Earth’s magnetic field, which have well-.
Dating , in geology , determining a chronology or calendar of events in the history of Earth , using to a large degree the evidence of organic evolution in the sedimentary rocks accumulated through geologic time in marine and continental environments. To date past events, processes, formations, and fossil organisms, geologists employ a variety of techniques. These include some that establish a relative chronology in which occurrences can be placed in the correct sequence relative to one another or to some known succession of events.
Radiometric dating and certain other approaches are used to provide absolute chronologies in terms of years before the present. The two approaches are often complementary, as when a sequence of occurrences in one context can be correlated with an absolute chronlogy elsewhere. Local relationships on a single outcrop or archaeological site can often be interpreted to deduce the sequence in which the materials were assembled.
Compare and contrast relative age dating and radiometric dating
This page has been archived and is no longer updated. Despite seeming like a relatively stable place, the Earth’s surface has changed dramatically over the past 4. Mountains have been built and eroded, continents and oceans have moved great distances, and the Earth has fluctuated from being extremely cold and almost completely covered with ice to being very warm and ice-free.
These changes typically occur so slowly that they are barely detectable over the span of a human life, yet even at this instant, the Earth’s surface is moving and changing. As these changes have occurred, organisms have evolved, and remnants of some have been preserved as fossils.
Radiometric dating techniques indicate that the Earth is thousands of times older than.
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.
Lava erupting earlier would come from the top of the magma chamber, and lava erupting later would come from lower down.
How is Earth’s Age Calculated?
Aristotle thought the earth had existed eternally. Roman poet Lucretius, intellectual heir to the Greek atomists, believed its formation must have been relatively recent, given that there were no records going back beyond the Trojan War. The Talmudic rabbis, Martin Luther and others used the biblical account to extrapolate back from known history and came up with rather similar estimates for when the earth came into being. Within decades observation began overtaking such thinking. In the s Nicolas Steno formulated our modern concepts of deposition of horizontal strata.
These and other dating techniques are mutually consistent and underscore the reality of “deep time” in Earth history. Historians love to quote.
Radioactive decay has become one of the most useful methods for determining the age of formation of rocks. However, in the very principal of radiometric dating there are several vital assumptions that have to be made in order for the age to be considered valid. These assumptions include: 1 the initial amount of the daughter isotope is known, 2 neither parent or daughter product has migrated into, or out of, the closed rock system, and 3 decay has occurred at a constant rate over time.
But what if one or some combination of these assumptions is incorrect? Then the computed age based on the accumulation of daughter products will be incorrect Stasson In order to use the valuable information provided by radiometric dating, a new method had to be created that would determine an accurate date and validate the assumptions of radiometric dating. For this purpose, isochron dating was developed, a process “that solves both of these problems accurate date, assumptions at once” Stasson A natural clock must meet four requirements.
Isotope dating satisfies this requirement, as daughter products do not decay back to the original parent element. It has been established through extensive experimentation that radioactive decay occurs at a constant rate. In this case, the initial condition is the amount of daughter isotope in the rock when it was formed. This amount is often unknown and is one of the downfalls of conventional radiometric dating. However, isochron dating bypasses this assumption, as explained below.