Arguments against radioactive dating Sex chat room from china
There is no conflict between science and the Bible..one needs is a proper understanding how to merge science and the Bible.
John Woodmorappe’s books are advertised elsewhere on my web site.
There is a discussion of a few examples of radiometric methods with sedimentary rocks in Creationists believe that the assumptions of radiometric dating are invalid and cannot be proven.
These assumptions are: (1) the radioactive element decays at a constant rate (2) the rock crystal being analyzed is not contaminated by infusion of excess end product (3) the rock crystal contained no end product when it was formed (4) leaching of the parent element out of the rock sample did not occur.
Radiometric dating remains a reliable scientific method.
For articles on the RATE project, see the Rate Index.
Carbon has unique properties that are essential for life on Earth.
Familiar to us as the black substance in charred wood, as diamonds, and the graphite in “lead” pencils, carbon comes in several forms, or isotopes.
In any event, radiometric dating doesn’t disprove the Bible.
The topic of radiometric dating has received some of the most vicious attacks by young earth creation science theorists.
However, none of the criticisms of young earth creationists have any scientific merit.
I have heard that this experiment has been done, demonstrating this effect (I am searching for the reference). Similar studies at the Grand Canyon found volcanic rocks dated at the top of the canyon older than those found in the bottom. One of the tests that has not been done on the method is to subject it to a double blind study.
That is where the sample of interest is tested along with several others of the same rock type, but from different areas. Walt Brown’s book on-line at The Center for Scientific Creation.