5 assumptions of radiometric dating dating wagner cookware
The flaws in radiometric dating methods are considered by creationists to be sufficient justification for denying their use as evidence against the young earth theory.”— that radioactive decay rates are invariable.Stansfield is essentially saying here, “I acknowledge the extreme unreliability of radiometric dating to the tune of hundreds of millions of years but I choose to have faith in it, anyway.” We have seen in previous articles that the unreliability of radiometric dating actually extends to billions of years, and this is all a highly selective process anyway in which the scientists discard more results than they accept! Dudley: “…induced changes in disintegration rates of 14 radionuclides [have been investigated], including C-14, Co-60, and Cs-137.It is well known that the atomic forces within the atoms of radioactive elements are there is to it? 49-50 of “…the decay rates of radioactive elements are changing.” Is there perhaps an external energy source that can interact with matter in such a way as to cause radioactive decay? This is especially mysterious as we are talking about elements with ‘constant’ decay rates – these values aren’t supposed to change…This is the conclusion that researchers from Stanford and Purdue University have arrived at…The sun might be emitting a previously unknown particle [or neutrinos maybe] that is meddling with the decay rates of matter…researchers noticed the decay rates vary repeatedly every 33 days – a period of time that matches the rotational period of the core of the sun.Age estimates on a given geological stratum by different radiometric methods are often quite different (sometimes by hundreds of millions of years).There is no absolutely reliable long-term radiological ‘clock.’ The uncertainties inherent in radiometric dating are disturbing to geologists and evolutionists, but their overall interpretation supports the concept of a long history of geological evolution.In my next article, “THE UN-FOSSILS – SOFT DINOSAUR TISSUE,” we will turn to the subject of the astounding discovery of extant soft dinosaur tissue, dinosaur DNA finds including unracemized DNA, and extant Carbon-14 in original dinosaur tissue.
If the sun affects radioactive decay rates and the solar cycle was more frequent in the past, could this imply that radioactive decay was faster in the past? D., a prominent, highly respected and strident anti-creationist and evolutionist has to say on the subject of radiometric dating and the assumptions upon which radiometric dating is conducted: “If we assume that (1) a rock contained no Pb-206 [lead] when it was formed, (2) all Pb-206 now in the rock was produced by radioactive decay of U-238 (uranium), (3) the rate of decay has been constant, (4) there has been no differential leaching by water of either element, and (5) no U-238 has been transported into the rock from another source, then we might expect our estimate of age to be fairly accurate.
This planet may actually be youthful and not billions of years old.”—pg. Evolutionists claim that Hall and other creationists are biased against evolution and are making bogus claims. Each assumption is a potential variable, the magnitude of which can seldom be ascertained…
“It is obvious that radiometric techniques may not be the absolute dating methods that they are claimed to be.
I have had the suspicion for a long time that neutrino bombardment, especially solar neutrino production, is the primary source of the energy and catalyst of radioactivity. The solar core is the source of solar neutrinos.” never interacts with other matter.
They pass right through the entire diameter of the earth and the other planets without perturbing their constituent elements or being affected by the matter they are passing through.