Absolute dating half life internet dating for college students

Rated 4.21/5 based on 539 customer reviews

This is consistent with the several lines of impeccable evidence that radioisotope decay rates were grossly accelerated during the year-long biblical global Flood cataclysm, and then the decay rates decelerated. That we may still be detecting the radioisotope decay rates decelerating is likewise consistent with the Flood occurring only about 4300 years ago. But there have still been repeated calls for more modern, more accurate direct counting experiments to more precisely determine the U half-life by forced agreement of Rb-Sr, Lu-Hf, Re-Os, Sm-Nd, K-Ar, and Ar-Ar ages respectively with U-Pb ages obtained for the same rocks, minerals and meteorites, none of these decay half-lives are really known accurately. “New Average Values for n(U) Isotope Ratios of Natural Uranium Standards.” International Journal of Mass Spectrometry 295 (1–2): 94–97. Therefore, without accurately known decay half-lives, all radioisotope ages cannot be accurately determined or be considered absolute ages. Ideally, the uncertainty of the decay constants should be negligible compared to, or at least be commensurate with, the analytical uncertainties of the mass spectrometer measurements entering the radioisotope age calculations (Begemann et al. Clearly, based on the ongoing discussion in the conventional literature this is still not the case at present. The stunning improvements in the performance of mass spectrometers during the past four or so decades, starting with the landmark paper by Wasserburg et al. That this is common practice is illustrated with numerous examples cited from the literature by Faure and Mensing (2005) and Dickin (2005).

And the critical reviews and reevaluations have all converged on these same recommended values because of the meticulous care taken in the 1971 direct counting experiments, which then gave those experimental results the dominant weight in the calculation of mean values.

Thus, all these radioisotope dating methods cannot be used to reject the young-earth creationist timescale, especially as current radioisotope dating methodologies are at best hypotheses based on extrapolating current measurements and observations back into an assumed deep time history for the cosmos.

Instead, the actual observable experimentally-determined radioisotope decay data suggest that radioisotope decay rates have been decreasing in recent decades.

Yet these can supposedly be circumvented somewhat via the isochron technique, because it is independent of the starting conditions and is claimed to be sensitive to revealing any contamination, which is still significantly better than any radioisotope method for determining the ages of rock formations.

Data points that do not fit on the isochron are simply ignored because their values are regarded as due to contamination.

Leave a Reply