This belief in long ages for the earth and the existence of life is derived largely from radiometric dating. 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. This age is computed under the assumption that the parent substance say, uranium gradually decays to the daughter substance say, lead , so the higher the ratio of lead to uranium, the older the rock must be. Of course, there are many problems with such dating methods, such as parent or daughter substances entering or leaving the rock, as well as daughter product being present at the beginning. Here I want to concentrate on another source of error, namely, processes that take place within magma chambers. To me it has been a real eye opener to see all the processes that are taking place and their potential influence on radiometric dating.
After mating, the female then builds a nest elsewhere to raise the young alone. Franco Atirador Stephen J. Gould argued that these enormous antlers, which required great mineral resources from plants to support and prevented the elk from navigating through forests, were largely responsible for their extinction. The positioning of the antlers were poor for combat between males, but were great for intimidating rivals and impressing females.
Creationists and evolutionists, Christians and non-Christians, all have the same facts. Think about it: we all have the same earth, the same fossil layers, the same .
While there are numerous natural processes that can serve as clocks, there are also many natural processes that can reset or scramble these time-dependent processes and introduce uncertainties. To try to set a reasonable bound on the age, we could presume that the Earth formed at the same time as the rest of the solar system. If the small masses that become meteorites are part of that system, then a measurement of the solidification time of those meteorites gives an estimate of the age of the Earth.
The following illustration points to a scenario for developing such an age estimate. Some of the progress in finding very old samples of rock on the Earth are summarized in the following comments. It is a compound of zirconium, silicon and oxygen which in its colorless form is used to make brilliant gems. Samples more than 3. Older ages in the neighborhood of 4. The graph below follows the treatment of Krane of Rb-Sr studies of meteorite samples from Wetherill in order to show the nature of the calculation of age from isochrons.
Considering the relative scale of nuclei and atoms , nuclei are so remote from the outer edge of the atoms that no environmental factors affect them.
The Idiocy, Fabrications and Lies of Ancient Aliens
Photo by Andrew A. A model age is calculated by assuming a value for the original isotopic composition of the molten liquid from which the rock solidified. In the case of K-Ar, it is assumed that when the rock formed, there was no Ar in it derived from radioactive decay of K.
It follows that uranium-lead, potassium-argon (K-Ar), and Rubidium-Strontium (Rb-Sr) decay can be used for very long time periods, whilst radiocarbon dating can only be used up to about 70, years.
Public Opinion Introduction The television, newspapers, and textbooks commonly proclaim, as though it were proven fact, that the earth is 4 to 5 billion years old. What is not commonly taught is how the scientists determined that age. What assumptions did they make? What evidence did they use? What evidence did they discard? We will examine these questions in this article.
We will see that the scientists began with the assumptions that a. The scientists did not come to these conclusions based upon on an examination of the evidence.
There are lots of ways to guesstimate ages, and geologists knew the earth was old a long time ago and I might add that they were mostly Christian creationist geologists. But they didn’t know how old. Radiometric dating actually allows the measurement of absolute ages, and so it is deadly to the argument that the earth cannot be more than 10, years old.
A Flood of Evidence, the book created to address the countless questions asked about the Flood and Noah’s Ark over the years! It contains what you need to know in a way that is easy to read. Have you ever been “tongue-tied” when asked to provide geologic evidence that the Genesis Flood really.
Jews in these regions used Seleucid Era dating also known as the “Anno Graecorum AG ” or the “Era of Contracts” as the primary method for calculating the calendar year. Jacob then put this question: How do we know that our Era [of Documents] is connected with the Kingdom of Greece at all? Why not say that it is reckoned from the Exodus from Egypt, omitting the first thousand years and giving the years of the next thousand? In that case, the document is really post-dated!
In the Diaspora the Greek Era alone is used. He [the questioner] thought that Rav Nahman wanted to dispose of him anyhow, but when he went and studied it thoroughly he found that it is indeed taught [in a Baraita ]: In the 8th and 9th centuries AD, the center of Jewish life moved from Babylonia to Europe, so calculations from the Seleucid era “became meaningless”.
In the section Sanctification of the Moon
The assumption that the geologic column is a base from which to calibrate the C dates is not wise. With a half-life of only years, carbon dating has nothing to do with dating the geological ages! Whether by sloppiness or gross ignorance, Dr. Hovind is confusing the carbon “clock” with other radiometric “clocks. Being ancient, the C content has long since decayed away and that makes it useful in “zeroing” laboratory instruments.
It’s just one of the tricks that have been used to make the work a little more precise.
Dr. Hovind (G1): The assumption that the geologic column is a base from which to calibrate the C dates is not wise. a half-life of only years, carbon dating has nothing to do with dating the geological ages! Whether by sloppiness or gross ignorance, Dr. Hovind is confusing the carbon “clock” with other radiometric “clocks.”.
Calendar era It is not known who invented the World era and when. Nevertheless, the first appearance of the term is in the treatise of a certain “monk and priest”, Georgios AD —39 , who mentions all the main variants of the “World Era” in his work. He also already regards it as the most convenient for the Easter computus. Complex calculations of the year lunar and year solar cycles within this world era allowed scholars to discover the cosmic significance of certain historical dates, such as the birth or the crucifixion of Jesus.
AD see Alexandrian Era. The era was ultimately calculated as starting on September 1, and Jesus was thought to have been born in the year since the creation of the world. The Eastern Church avoided the use of the Anno Domini system of Dionysius Exiguus , since the date of Christ’s birth was debated in Constantinople as late as the 14th century. Otherwise the Byzantine calendar was identical to the Julian Calendar except that: The leap day of the Byzantine calendar was obtained in an identical manner to the bissextile day of the original Roman version of the Julian calendar, by doubling the sixth day before the calends of March, i.
After the collapse of the Byzantine Empire in , the era continued to be used by Russia, which witnessed millennialist movements in Moscow in AD AM due to the end of the church calendar. September AD began the year AM. Ben Zion Wacholder points out that the writings of the Church Fathers on this subject are of vital significance even though he disagrees with their chronological system based on the authenticity of the Septuagint , as compared to that of the Hebrew text , in that through the Christian chronographers a window to the earlier Hellenistic biblical chronographers [note 8] is preserved:
Creationist Wisdom #704: An Offended Christian
This age is obtained from radiometric dating and is assumed by evolutionists to provide a sufficiently long time-frame for Darwinian evolution. And OE Christians theistic evolutionists see no problem with this dating whilst still accepting biblical creation, see Radiometric Dating – A Christian Perspective. This is the crucial point: Some claim Genesis in particular, and the Bible in general looks mythical from this standpoint.
Feedback archive → Feedback More on radioactive dating problems A further response to Reasonable Faith Adelaide Published: 20 June (GMT+10) Mass spectrometer. These precision instruments do not measure age.
Leibnitz reworked Descartes’s cosmogony. Protogea was published much later in An essay toward a Natural History of the Earth. Woodward came down fairly strongly for the view that the flood was an act of God that could not be accounted for by normal physical processes. He also postulated hydrological sorting to account for the ordering of fossils. Whiston added comets to Burnet’s cosmogony as the source of the waters of the flood. Lectures and Discourse of Earthquakes and Subterranean Eruptions.
Hooke believed that the fossils were the remains of extinct species and could not be accounted for by the Flood. Using Descartes’s cosmology, the assumption that the earth was once entirely flooded, and the observation that the sea level was dropping three inches per century near his home, he calculated the age of the earth to be greater than 2 billion years. Observation sur la Formation des Montagnards Pallas made extensive observations of Russian mountains.
He observed the results of processes that acted on mountains, e. He argued for occasional catastrophic events as an origin for mountain building. He himself was suspicious that this was much too young and, in manuscripts published after his death, suggested longer chronologies, including one estimate of nearly 3 billion years.
What’s the Best “Proof” of Creation?
Or, at the very least, watching the show would kill about as many brain cells as a weekend bender in Las Vegas. I steeled myself for the pain and watched the mind-melting madness unfold. If they did, my entire review would be little more than a string of expletives.
The Idiocy, Fabrications and Lies of Ancient Aliens The History Channel presents self-appointed challengers of science who take on the idea that aliens caused the extinction of non-avian dinosaurs.
I had a feeling that if I watched the show—which popularizes far-fetched, evidence-free idiocy about how human history has been molded by extra-terrestrial visitors—my brain would jostle its way out of my skull and stalk the earth in search of a kinder host. Or, at the very least, watching the show would kill about as many brain cells as a weekend bender in Las Vegas. I steeled myself for the pain and watched the mind-melting madness unfold.
If they did, my entire review would be little more than a string of expletives. Given my restrictions, I have little choice but to try to encapsulate the shiny, documentary-format rubbish in a more coherent and reader-sensitive way. There was so much wrong with the Ancient Aliens episode that I could spend all week trying to counteract every incorrect assertion.
This is a common technique among cranks and self-appointed challengers of science; it is called Gish Gallop after young earth creationist Duane Gish. When giving public presentations about evolution and creationism, Gish rapidly spouted off a series of misinterpretations and falsehoods to bury his opponent under an avalanche of fictions and distortions. Ancient Aliens uses the same tactic—the fictions come fast and furious.