Scientist refute carbon dating

Since then, geologists have made many tens of thousands of radiometric age determinations, and they have refined the earlier estimates.A key point is that it is no longer necessary simply to accept one chemical determination of a rock's age.There are three reasons why radiometric data is known to be accurate: 1.

scientist refute carbon dating-44

other isotope pairs cover intermediate time periods between the spans for carbon 14 and uranium.

Some radiometric dating methods depend upon knowing the initial amount of the isotope subject to decay.

There are about two dozen decay pairs used for dating.

Uranium 235 decay to lead has a half-life of 713 million years, so it is well suited to dating the universe.

Methods are precise insofar as they are properly used.

A good explanation of all of the dating methods used for samples up to about 200,000 years old, together with their accuracies and references to the scientific literature is contained in [1] Walker, Mike, "Quaternary Dating Methods," John Wiley & Sons, 2005

The actual accuracy of radiometric dating is about 2%, but there is no point in splitting hairs for this debate as to whether it is 2% or 3%.

An error of 90% would, for example, still disprove Young Earth Creationism.

Every few years, new geologic time scales are published, providing the latest dates for major time lines.

Older dates may change by a few million years up and down, but younger dates are stable.

Sediment columns giving an unbroken history for more than 25,000 years have been identified in about 30 locations around the world.

Tags: , ,