Datingdata com sportunterricht zeitschrift online dating
The various confounding factors that can adversely affect the accuracy of carbon-14 dating methods are evident in many of the other radioisotope dating methods.Although the half-life of some of them are more consistent with the evolutionary worldview of millions to billions of years, the assumptions used in radiometric dating put the results of all radiometric dating methods in doubt. Although the half-life of carbon-14 makes it unreliable for dating fossils over about 50,000 years old, there are other isotopes scientists use to date older artifacts.Any radiometric dates that show a supposedly “old” rock to be young are rejected “Few people realize that the index fossil dating system, despite its poor assumptions and many problems, is actually the primary dating tool for geologic time. In other words, radiometric dating methods are actually fit into the geological column, which was set up by [index] fossil dating over 100 years ago.”(Michael Oard, meteorologist and creationist scientist, 1984) All radiometric dating methods use this basic principle to extrapolate the age of artifacts being tested.These long time periods are computed by measuring the ratio of daughter to parent substance in a rock, and inferring an age based on this ratio.Carbon dating cannot be used on most fossils, not only because they are almost always allegedly too old, but also because they rarely contain the original carbon of the organism that has been fossilized.Also, many fossils are contaminated with carbon from the environment during collection or preservation procedures.Carbon-14 cannot be used to date biological artifacts of organisms that did not get their carbon dioxide from the air.
There are so many sources of possible error or misinterpretation in radiometric dating that most such dates are discarded and never used at all, notably whenever they disagree with the previously agreed-on [index fossil] dates.” (Dr Henry Morris, creationist scientist and hydraulicist, Ph D in hydrology, geology and mathematics, Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Society of Civil Engineers, former Professor of Hydraulic Engineering at Virginia Polytechnic Institute, 1974) Michael Oard, Ph. is a meteorologist and creationist scientist who writes, And when it comes to dating any individual rock today, the resulting “date” is forced to conform to predetermined evolutionist “dates” based on these imaginary 19th century index-fossil “dates”.
Nuclear tests, nuclear reactors and the use of nuclear weapons have also changed the composition of radioisotopes in the air over the last few decades.
This human nuclear activity will make precise dating of fossils from our lifetime very difficult due to contamination of the normal radioisotope composition of the earth with addition artificially produced radioactive atoms.
This belief in long ages for the earth and the evolution of all life is based entirely on the hypothetical and non-empirical Theory of Evolution.
All dating methods that support this theory are embraced, while any evidence to the contrary, e.g. Prior to radiometric dating, evolution scientists used index fossils a.k.a. A paleontologist would take the discovered fossil to a geologist who would ask the paleontologist what other fossils (searching for an index fossil) were found near their discovery.
As stated previously, carbon dating cannot be used on artifacts over about 50,000 years old.