How reliable is radiometric dating

How reliable is radiometric dating

The differing amounts of material that were found in separate samplings of the same meteorite were unexpected.

The current standard age assigned to the solar system of 4.6 billion years was determined by studying the Uranium-to-Lead decay systems in meteorites, which are assumed to have formed before the planets did.

This is like the common phrase that Christians like to use when studying the Bible, when we say, "He pulled that out of context." When considering the date of the world, and the universe, you have to consider all the evidence, not just one portion.

We take the radiometric dates, along with stratigraphy (I know, dated radiometrically), the specific fossil species in a rock (I know, dated radiometrically) and come up with a date. Because although not perfect, it is the best tool we have.

The example used here contrasts sharply with the way conventional scientific dating methods are characterized by some critics (for example, refer to discussion in "Common Creationist Criticisms of Mainstream Dating Methods" in the Age of the Earth FAQ and Isochron Dating FAQ).

A common form of criticism is to cite geologically complicated situations where the application of radiometric dating is very challenging.

If there are possible discrepancies, how can I accept these dates as reliable?

This swimmer is competing in a 1,500 metre race and we have an accurate, calibrated wristwatch.I can look in my scientific journals and see apparent discrepancies in dating techniques.Some may be discrepancies…some may just need a bit further explanation.This age was based on the belief that the rate of decay has been constant, and that Uranium 238 will be present in a known ratio to Uranium 235.The varying quantities of these isotopes call into question the calculated age of the solar system, since “one of the equation’s assumptions — that certain kinds of uranium always appear in the same relative quantities in meteorites — is wrong.” CAIs are “calcium-aluminum-rich inclusions” found in the meteorite.

how reliable is radiometric dating-29how reliable is radiometric dating-41how reliable is radiometric dating-18

Gregory Brennecka of Arizona State University and colleagues measured the relative amounts of Uranium 238 to Uranium 235 from several samples taken from the large Allende meteorite, named for the village in Mexico near where it landed in 1969.

Join our conversation (78 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment How reliable is radiometric dating.

Comments:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *