Tree-ring dating (see Topic 27) gives us a wonderful check on the radiocarbon dating method for the last 8000 years. That is, we can use carbon-14 dating on a given tree-ring (the 8000-year sequence having been assembled from the overlapping tree-ring patterns of living and dead trees) and compare the resulting age with the tree-ring date.
Read More
Later, this date was confirmed by two other dating methods (paleomagnetism and fission tracks), and was widely accepted. Then Richard Leakey found a skull (called KNM-ER 1470) below the KBS tuff, a skull that looked far too modern to be 3 million years old.
Read More
The chronology is sometimes associated with young Earth creationism,. dating the worldwide flood to 2349 BC and the birth of Terah in 2127 BC. The date of 4000 BC as the creation of Adam was at least partially influenced by the widely held belief that the Earth was approximately 5600 years old (2000 to Abraham, 2000 from Abraham to the birth of Christ, and 1600 years from Christ to Ussher.
Read More
Radiometric Dating and Creation Science The topic of radiometric dating (and other dating methods) 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. Radiometric dating remains a reliable scientific method.
Read More
Using the known rate of change in radio-active elements (radiometric dating), some Earth rocks have been shown to be billions of years old, while the oldest solar system rocks are dated at 4.5 billion years. Astronomers use the distance to galaxies and the speed of light to calculate that the light has been traveling for billions of years.
read more
Another absurdity is that living snails were aged at 27,000 years old by radiometric dating methods. Errors of 1000% or more are common, but the public has been duped into believing radiometric dating is a highly accurate technique and proves an old age of the earth. On the contrary, radiometric dating proves the earth is young.
read more
Within their research, the ICR research team makes many claims that geological evidence, including their findings dealing with dating rocks using the fission track dating method, provides substantial evidence for a young earth. In order to evaluate ICR's findings, one must first establish a proper methodology for fission track dating and compare ICR's methodology and finding to previous results.
read moreThis explains why isotopic dating methods typically give dates in the hundreds of millions or even billions of years on samples that are really only a few thousand years old on a young earth. Faster decay could also be the cause of the Flood, because accelerated decay would have caused the generation of a huge amount of heat, wreaking havoc with the earth’s crust. These evidences do not.
read more
The young Earth creationist belief that the age of the Earth is 6,000 to 10,000 years old conflicts with the age of 4.54 billion years measured using independently cross-validated geochronological methods including radiometric dating.
Read More
The assumption of long ages is an icon and foundational to the evolutionary model. Nearly every textbook and media journal teaches that the earth is billions.
Read More
The old age provided by isochron dating methods obviously conflicts with the young age of only 6,000 years held by these creationists. While isochron dates have been used by both old-Earth and young-Earth proponents to promote their respective viewpoints, attacks on isochron dating have also been made by young-Earth creationists, such as William Overn. These creationists challenge the.
Read More
Broken down, the logic holds that the Bible says that the earth is very young; therefore the earth is very young. Without such a beginning claim, the logic would be extremely bizarre. Basically, the claim made by the RATE team is that the maximum date of 50,000 years given by radiocarbon dating actually equals 6,000 years. However, the entire idea is based on an arbitrary, unproven assumption.
Read More