Modern dating methods

Tests by other scientists using paleomagnetism and fission tracks confirmed the lower date.

So by 1980 there was a new, remarkably concordant date for the KBS tuff, and this became the one that was widely accepted.

So Curtis and others redated the KBS tuff using selected pumice and feldspar samples, and obtained an age of 1.82 million years.

This new date agreed with the appearance of the new skull.

As earlier in life, John Woodmorappe was intensely curious. He decided to major in both geology and biology because of the pivotal role of these two disciplines in the study of origins.

Then again, he had geology in his blood, as his grandfather had been a geologist who had owned an oil well (at Boryslaw, now in the western Ukraine).

-- Creation Research Society Quarterly, March 2001 Discover: What textbooks and newspapers won't tell you Why discrepancies are common and dating methods are not "self-checking".

-- Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal, Volume 4(1), 2000The book fully develops the insight:"..uniformitarian geochronologist cannot lose, no matter what turns up." -- Origins (Loma Linda) Volume 25(2), designated for 1998You will find it an invaluable trove the next time you face a serious question about isotopic dating.For since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation.” For this they willfully forget: that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of water and in the water, by which the world that then existed perished, being flooded with water.Most scientists and many Christians believe that the radiometric dating methods prove that the earth is 4.5 billion years old.These must be accepted on faith in uniformitarian and naturalistic frameworks.Recent research by a team of creation scientists known as the RATE (arth) group has demonstrated the unreliability of radiometric dating techniques.They said the sample was contaminated with excess argon.

909

Leave a Reply