Creation radiometric dating

However, none of the criticisms of young earth creationists have any scientific merit.Radiometric dating remains a reliable scientific method.In radiocarbon dating, there is limited precision and “given the way the atmospheric radiocarbon concentration has varied [based on tree ring dating results], there might be several possible ranges” of dates for the object being analyzed.[vi] Plants and trees that are near volcanic areas appear older because the carbon they absorb will be older, from underground, and thus should have very little if any C-14.“The widespread emanation of C-free volcanogenic carbon dioxide after the Flood would have further inflated the carbon-14 dates of tree rings in a systematic manner in many parts of the world.”[vii] Naturalists have to assume whether wood remains were near volcanic vents or not.Most people think that radioactive dating has proven the earth is billions of years old.After all, textbooks, media, and museums glibly present ages of millions of years as fact.The three main assumptions that affect the results of radiometric dating are: 1) the rate of decay has always been constant, 2) there has been no contamination (no movement of elements into or out of the object over time), and 3) we can determine how much daughter element there was to begin with.[ii] There are many test results that make the reliability of these dating techniques very questionable.[iii] Naturalists try to explain these questionable results, but still can’t adequately explain them from their worldview.[iv] Evidence from “as far back as 1971” may show “that high pressure could increase decay rates very slightly for at least 14 isotopes.”[v] Naturalists even admit that radiocarbon dating does not work on living mussels because of the lack of new carbon in that environment.

Radioactive Dating There are basically two different kinds of radioactive dating methods.

There are many assumptions that have to be made when using radiometric dating methods that might make these techniques unreliable.

If any of these assumptions are wrong, then the reliability of the testing method can and should be put in question.

Yet few people know how radiometric dating works or bother to ask what assumptions drive the conclusions. This figure wasn’t established by radiometric dating of the earth itself. Radiohalos shouldn’t exist, according to conventional wisdom!

Though they are very tiny, polonium radiohalos have a huge message that cannot be ignored.