ASSUMPTIONS IN RADIODATING.

[KiwiChristian]

ASSUMPTIONS IN RADIODATING.

Evolutionists rely heavily on radiometric dating to give them the billions of years required for evolution to have any chance of happening. Major radiodating methods are:

i) Uranium – Thorium – Lead dating, based on the decay of Uranium and Thorium into Radium, Helium and Lead.

ii) Rubidium – Strontium dating based on the decay of Rubidium to Strontium.

iii) Potassium – Argon dating based on the decay of Potassium into Argon and Calcium.

These dating methods are only accurate if certain assumptions always apply to every specimen tested, these assumptions being:

i) Each system must be closed from any contamination of the parent or daughter products, from water, chemicals, changing radiation from space or rock pressure.
ii) In the beginning there were no daughter products in the sample, only elements at the top of the radioactive chain were present. For example, all the U238 had no lead 206 in it; and no lead 206 existed anywhere else.

At creation, all things were created with the appearance of age. Radioactive minerals would be partially decayed on the first day. How far decayed? No one knows.

Evolutionists think that Polonium only occurred as a daughter product of Uranium decay, yet Robert Gentry’s studies show that Polonium 218 was in granite when it was created in solid form.

It is impossible to know what was initially in any given sample of radioactive mineral.

iii) The decay rate must have always been the same, and never have changed.

The decay rate of any radioactive mineral can be altered:
a) If the mineral is hit by high energy particles from space (such as cosmic rays, neutrons, etc)
b) If there is, for a time, a nearby radioactive mineral emitting radiation.
c) If physical pressure is applied to the radioactive mineral.
d) If certain chemicals contact it.

iv) If any changes occurred in the past in earth’s atmospheric protecting blanket.

Cosmic rays, photons, high energy mesons, etc. enter our atmosphere continually, some travelling up to 100 metres underground and 1400 metres underwater. If our atmosphere was more heavily water saturated than today, it would produce a major change in radioactive minerals decay rates. Before the Flood, there was much more water in the air.

v) The Van Allen radiation belt encircling the earth about 450 miles above us is intensely radioactive. It emits 3000-4000 times as much radiation as cosmic rays entering the earth.

Any change in the Van Allen belt would greatly affect the decay rate of radioactive minerals. But we know little about this belt or whether it has changed in the past, since it was only discovered in 1959.

vi) John Joly of Trinity College, Dublin found evidence that the long half-life minerals have varied in their decay rate in the past. This would invalidate all possibilities of age calculation by radioactive methods. (A.F. Kovarik, Bulletin 80, National Research Council, June 1931, p. 107).

Why we cannot trust Uranium – Thorium – Lead Dating Methods.

3 types of U/Th dating are:

a) Uranium 238 decays to Lead 206, with a half-life of 4.5 billion years.
b) Uranium 235 decays to Lead 207, with a half-life of 0.7 billion years.
c) Thorium 232 decays to Lead 208, with a half-life of 14.1 billion years.

1) Contamination: Lead could be mixed in with the Uranium or Thorium.(Faul, Nuclear Geology,1954)
2) Leaching: Some of the Uranium and its daughter products could have leached out.
Lead can be leached out by weak acid solutions.
3) Neutron capture: Lead 207 (thought to have been formed only by decaying Uranium 235), could have been formed from Lead 206 by capturing free neutrons from neighbouring rocks. Also Lead 208 (thought of as forming only by Thorium 232 decay) could have been formed by capturing free neutrons from Lead 207. Lead 208 could have formed by capturing free neutrons from Lead 207. Cooke extensively checked this, and discovered that almost all radiogenic lead in the earth’s crust could have been produced by neutron capture instead of by Uranium or Thorium decay.

This alone totally invalidates Uranium and Thorium dating methods.

4) Intense heat damages radiodating clock settings.

Evolutionists think the earth was originally molten, yet molten rocks produce wild variations in radioactive materials clock settings.
Question: “Why do the radioactive ages of lava beds, laid down within a few weeks of each other, differ by millions of years?” (Electromagnetics and the Appearance of Age, Glen R. Morton).

Why we cannot trust Potassium Argon dating:

Radioactive potassium decays into calcium and argon gas.

1) Argon gas has been found to quickly leave the mineral, escaping into other rocks and the atmosphere. (G.W. Wetherill, Science, Sep. 20, 1957, p.545).

2) Potassium can be leached out of rocks.

Rancitelli and Fisher found that 60% of potassium can be leached out of an iron meteorite by distilled water in 4.5 hours. (Planetary Science Abstracts, 1967, p.167).
Heavy rainfall transfers potassium from one location to another.
It is unbelievable – but true – that potassium-argon dating is a key dating method used to date sea floor spreading from ocean bottom basalt lava.

Key: Submerged volcanic rocks, produced by lava flows in 1800-1801 off the coast of Hawaii near Hualalai were dated using potassium-argon dating to range from 160 million years to 2960 million years (Science, Oct.11, 1968; Journal of Geophysical Research, July 15, 1968).

Note: Just one major catastrophe – such as a worldwide Flood would have ruined the usefulness of all our radiodating methods because of:

i) Massive contamination problems as water, chemicals and radioactive substances moved from one place to another.
ii) Major Radioactive rate changing activities (such as atmospheric, magnetic and radioactivity changes) would have reset the radiodating clocks.
iii) Redistributing of rock pressure above radiogenic rocks would have reset their clocks.
iv) Reversals of the earth’s magnetic core was caused by shock waves from surface events such as earthquakes, volcanoes, giant geysers, seafloor shrinking, and massive mountain building.

Note: H.C. Dudley, in laboratory tests, changed the decay rates of 14 different radioisotopes by varying the pressure, temperature, magnetic field strength, stress, etc. (H.C. Dudley, “Radioactivity Re-examined”, Chemical and Engineering News, April 7, 1975, p2).

All these forces operated during and after the Flood. They would have dramatically affected rocks radioactive clocks, thus invalidating all radiometric dating methods used today.

[Who me]

3 hours ago, KiwiChristian said:

i) Each system must be closed from any contamination of the parent or daughter products, from water, chemicals, changing radiation from space or rock pressure.
ii) In the beginning there were no daughter products in the sample, only elements at the top of the radioactive chain were present. For example, all the U238 had no lead 206 in it; and no lead 206 existed anywhere else.

These are the two principal problems for radioactive dating of rocks.

The amount of the daughter product present when the rock was formed, the influence/contamination of various effents and the rate of reduction from the parent to daughter product.

 

What also is a major problem is the different results found in different materials in the rock sample.

Granite has quartz in it yet radioactive dating of the different rocks always results in vastly diffeent ages.

Volcanic lava flows have been witnessed and sampled yet the date the rock flowed and cooled has a vastly differnt age to the radioactive date.

[thomas t]

On 1/30/2019 at 7:21 AM, KiwiChristian said:

Evolutionists rely heavily on radiometric dating [...]

These dating methods are only accurate if certain assumptions always apply to every specimen tested, these assumptions being:

Hi Kiwi,

I assume your whole post is to discard their methods altogether.

 

But here for example, they just say this 

Quote

"Independent measurements, using different and independent radiometric techniques, give consistent results (Dalrymple 2000; Lindsay 1999; Meert 2000)."

 

I assume the current dating methods are correct due to the consistent results they proclaim to have.

 

If they did anything wrong, including with regards to their assumptions, their dating techinques would not yield these results they say to have, I think. So I save me the hassle of checking the assumptions (I'm not a natural scientist, by the way).

 

In general, I don't think that God requires believers to go through great scientific detail just to know how to reconcile faith and science.

 

And when I get a new bike and it's working, I won't check the construction procedures of it, either. If it works it works and I'm happy.

 

DISCLAIMER:

I both assume secular dating techniques as used by scientists are correct and I believe in a young creation (i.e. a few thousand years old).

I just think that the post Flood world has an appearance of an ancient age very much in the way Adam was created adult and, thus, had an appearance of age, too. An age he didn't have.

 

Regards, Thomas

 

[Bawcash]

On ‎2‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 5:53 AM, thomas t said:

I both assume secular dating techniques as used by scientists are correct and I believe in a young creation (i.e. a few thousand years old).

I just think that the post Flood world has an appearance of an ancient age very much in the way Adam was created adult and, thus, had an appearance of age, too. An age he didn't have.

So do you believe that only the earth is a few thousand years old or all creation? I don't think that the Bible is any more definite about a <10,000 y/o earth than it is for a flat earth or a geocentric universe. (POSSIBLY 10k years ago for the creation of man.) The biggest problem I have for the argument for God created a mature universe like he did with Adam, and placed the light rays in motion so we would see the stars right away, (and he could if he wanted to) is Supernova 1987A. We saw it explode  186k light years away which means it exploded 176k years before it was created. Ok God created it blew it up and placed the light rays in motion so we wouldn't see it until 1987 just to test our faith in the scriptures and only true believers would hold fast to a 10,000 year old universe. Right? Hmmmm. 1 Corinthians 14:33?

Ok I just read that and I may have come across as a jerk. Sorry. It is a serious question that I have an issue with. Just some beliefs that I have always been sure of because of what I was taught in Sunday school growing up, don't hold water.

Edited July 23, 2019 by Bawcash
Added suplimental

[Still Alive]

Personally, I think when the bible talks of the earth, it is talking, really, about the surface of the earth. I suspect the earth really is billions of years old, but this particular age is only 6,000 years old. Who knows how many ages came before Genesis 1:2?

I think of the earth as a canvas that has had one painting applied, then painted over with another painting, then painted over with another, over and over again. And each painting is an age. So, when you peel back our current painting at the corners, you find things like Neandertal man. Go a little deeper and you find dinosaurs.  And one of those ages looks to be the Cambrian explosion. 

I'm not saying I have it right. I'm saying this description is as good as any other and I can find no scripture to disprove it. 

[pg4Him]

We don’t know how much time passed between Genesis 1:1 and Genesis 1:3. Some theologians say it could have been a long stretch where many of the “fallen angel” happenings took place. There was no concept of a day until God brought light to our planetary system.

[pg4Him]

Heh @Still Alive we crossed each other!

[Still Alive]

3 minutes ago, pg4Him said:

Heh @Still Alive we crossed each other!

Looks like we're on the same page. Your post is exactly what I've said to people in Sunday school. 

[Still Alive]

6 minutes ago, pg4Him said:

There was no concept of a day until God brought light to our planetary system.

And not to sidetrack, but to amplify the "interpreting the bible correctly" meme - In revelation it says that there will be no sun or moon in the new age because we get our light from Him. Then it says those thrown into the lake of fire will receive no rest "day or night".  

One reads the bible literally at their peril. Hence my tag line. 

[pg4Him]

2 minutes ago, Still Alive said:

And not to sidetrack, but to amplify the "interpreting the bible correctly" meme - In revelation it says that there will be no sun or moon in the new age because we get our light from Him. Then it says those thrown into the lake of fire will receive no rest "day or night".  

One reads the bible literally at their peril. Hence my tag line. 

We know John was quite familiar with Genesis 1, so there’s that...