Assumptions behind radiometric dating

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

In other words, the magnitude of the radius of a pleochroic halo in a particular crystal depends on the half-life of the decay responsible for the alpha particle emission. the radii of pleochroic haloes corresponding to a definite decay in a particular mineral are ...

(the same) size, then it can be safely assumed that the half-life of that decay is a constant.

Indeed, by doing almost 20 seconds of research on google (type in “variations in C14”, click on Google Scholar) the second link is this article from 1954: Carbon 13 in plants and the relationships between carbon 13 and carbon 14 variations in nature So, this issue has been known about for a long time. Then we compare the two and adjust the radiocarbon date to the known date. That’s less than 1% if you’re interested in that sort of thing. But this is already almost a thousand words and I’ve only done ONE! Long story short, scientists have always known that variations in C-14 concentration happen.

Do you honestly think that no one has done anything about it? By making thousands (if not millions) of these adjustments we get a very good idea of how old a piece of unknown material can be. The 2009 calibration set extends the ‘well calibrated range’ to 50,000 years using the varves in a Japanese lake. This is unlike the creationists which think it happened, but can’t be bothered to check.

This proves that the half-lives of the uranium and thorium radioactive decays vary ... any age determination using this method of dating will be inaccurate because it is based on an invalid assumption." " ... For example, discordant dates have been obtained on the same rocks by ...

can we be sure the U and Th have always decayed at the same rates we measure today? (various) Given ample evidence observable in the present that decay rates have not been constant throughout the supposed deep time, it is not reasonable to assume they have been uniform through unobservable eons.However, to read any clock accurately we must know where the clock was set at the beginning.Most people think that radioactive dating has proven the earth is billions of years old.They consist of measuring the amount of radioactive (mother) element and comparing it to the amount of stable (daughter) element. Uranium is radioactive, which means it is in the process of changing from an unstable element into a stable one. And after 9 billion years there would be 75% lead and 25% uranium, and so on. (an) episode of drastically accelerated decay has ... When the crystal is looked at under a microscope, these discolourations appear as dark ringshence the name "pleochroic halo".Few people realize it but all radiometric dating methods require making at least three assumptions. Now the magnitude of the radius of a pleochroic halo in a particular mineral depends on the amount of energy that the alpha particle has ... depends on the half-life of the particular decay responsible for this alpha particle emission.(Aside, my dad doesn’t know how old I am, he usually misses by about two years, giving him an error of almost 5%.) Not only, is this not a ‘false assumption’. Oh and here’s a link to the Table of Contents for this set of creationist misconceptions.

Tags: , ,