angelluv47, Was your high school band praying to God, or were they showing off how holy they were? There is something in the Bible about praying in the closet.

You can take all public authorization of the acknowledgement of God away, but you can not stop people from praying! What would happen if the entire student body all stood up together and recited the "Lord's Prayer" together at the graduation? They couldn't arrest everyone or refuse to give them their diplomas! Our high school band did this in what was Madeline O'Hare's hometown before a football game in 2000, along with a majority of the people in the football stadium. We all took the time to go out onto the field and hold hands while we prayed. Believers need to strike back at rampant atheism by public affirmation of the Christian priniples that our country was founded upon! In the next life if you have denied Jesus He will deny you!

It is very odd that scientist seem to think they can determine age by appearance. I have seen twenty five year olds with grey hair. Doctor's have said that a person has the body of a sixty year old to a person that is only forty. Appearances can be deceptive.

Word of the day:

airhead: a flighty scatterbrained simpleton

agentorange

I am sorry but I will not listen to anyone tell me that mankind and all life for that matter has been on this planet longer than approximately 6000 yrs. The Word of God is my authority not the opinions of man.

Good night agentorange. Rest well. God bless you with the truth of His Word.

“Yes, I get it but do you? You have no idea how old anything is before you test it.”

Actually we do, I told you already we use multiple dating techniques, it’s not just radiometric.

“What if your lava flow or your rock, or whatever isn't as old as you think it is?”

Well star if we just saw the lava come out of the volcano we already know it’s age, however as soon as it hardens it’s taken back to the lab for dating, so I think we can know the dates pretty accurately based on that. Additionally we use numerous dating techniques to establish accuracy. IE, we use Dendrochronology (tree rings) and those go back over 10,00 years and ice cores go back over 700,000 years.

“The ages would be off by a large anount wouldn't they be? Millions of yrs, wouldn't they be?”

Please read up on it on Wiki, I am going to bed. Please read it and get back to me, you should find answers from the Wiki page and the related links attached to it. Go ahead, be skeptical, read into it and objectively look at what that creationist site tries to pawn off as being poor dating and you'll see they are ignoring the details.

star2,

Do some research on the miniumum dating ranges for Ak-r, it's around 100,000 years, so obviously it would result in an error for anything recent. Different particles decay after different rates and this decay rate is used to establish a 1/2 life for it and that's how we establish the dates.

agentorange

Yes, I get it but do you? You have no idea how old anything is before you test it. What if your lava flow or your rock, or whatever isn't as old as you think it is? The ages would be off by a large anount wouldn't they be? Millions of yrs, wouldn't they be?

What if the earth was only about 6000 yrs olds and the different stratas were created by the flood, then all the non-carbon 14 dating methods wouldn't be applicable nor realiable would they be?

You don't know how old the earth is.

The methods used are correct for each sample type in the examples given.

“If you don't make that assumption then you tell me big boy what was the parent to daughter ratio in the beginning?”

Star, when the isotopes are analyzed we can know what the ratios are for parent to daughter elements and know based on continued observation how fast certain isotopes in the same sample will decay at. Read up on it on Wiki. All you stated were old creationist regurgitation that fails to mention WHY the K-Ar method revealed such hig dates for recent material. It’s b/c it’s not used to date recent material in the first place. DUH! If one uses the wrong measuring device, of course it’s going to result in an error. It tries to give the impression that they are flawed, but ignores to metioned the DETAILS that not all isotopes decay at the same rates and thus dating recent material with an slowly decaing isotope obviously results in an error. You're getting lied to star, get a clue.

star,

You still didn't show me anywhere when we must know that no daughter elements are present, so again I afraid I have caught you in a lie.

“lava dome at Mount St. Helens that was formed in 1986”

Star, you can’t use the Potassium-Argon [K-Ar] method do date recent material b/c it’s ½ life is very looooong. Learn to read about dating methods. If the K-Ar dating method has a Looooooong ½ life, then obviously it can’t be used to date recent material as it decays too sloow, now can it?

Same thing goes for number 2 and 3. C-14 has a SHORTER ½ life than the K-Ar method and therefore b/c it decays faster it’s used for dating recent material which K-AR can’t do. Get it?

agentorange

Oh yea, big boy, tell me how you know? Where is your evidence?

agentorange

Re:No offense star, but you’re pretty thick. Show me anywhere in here where it says it relies on no daughter elements being present. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating


If you don't make that assumption then you tell me big boy what was the parent to daughter ratio in the beginning?

Re: Unreliability of dating methods.

Part 1

Re: Radiometric dating of the earth and fossils: Are they trustworthy?

According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_earth:

Modern geologists consider the age of the Earth to be around 4.54 billion years.

Can we be so sure?

Taken from http://www.angelfire.com/sc3/creation_truths/evo_radiodating2.html

Anomalies of Radiometric Dating

1. Rock from a dactite lava dome at Mount St. Helens that was formed in 1986 during the eruption there was dated (using the Potassium-Argon [K-Ar] method) at 0.35 ±0.05 million years. (S.A. Austin, "Excess Argon within Mineral Concentrates from the New Dactite Lava Dome at Mount St. Helens Volcano," CEN Technical Journal, 10(3):335-343, 1986)

2. A British Engineer, Sidney P. Clementson, studied a variety of modern volcanic rock. Knowing their ages as 200-300 years old, he carefully compared them to Soviet uranium tests of the same volcanic rocks. What he found was surprising. In every instance the dates were found to be hugely incorrect with a 14 billion year (the dates varied from 50 million years to 14.5 billion) discrepancy. ("Critical Examination of Radioactive Dating of Rocks," in Creation Research Society Quarterly, December 1970.)

3. Five andesite lava flows from Mt. Ngauuhoe in New Zealand. They were Potassium-Argon (K-Ar) dated from <0.27 to 3.5 million years. The only problem was that one was laid down 1949, three were laid down 1954 and one in 1975. (A.A. Snelling, "The Cause Of Anomalous Potassium-Argon ‘Ages’ for recent andesite flows at Mt Ngauruhoe, New Zealand, and the Implications for Potassium-Argon ‘Dating’" Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Creationism, Creation Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, ed. E. Walsh, 1998, pg. 503-525.)

Re: Unreliability of dating methods.

Part 2

4. A single uranium deposit in the Colorado Caribou Mine had a radiometric error spread of 700 million years. (G.A. Kerkut, Implications of Evolution, pp. 139-140.)

5. Swedish kolm from Scandinavia was (using the uranium method) dated with an error spread of 420 million years. (G.A. Kerkut Implications of Evolution, pp. 139-140.)

6. Granite from the Black Hills gave strontium/rubidium and various lead system dates varying from 1.16 to 2.55 billion years. (L. Ferrell, "Dating Methods", Evolution Disproved, 2001)

7. In 1800-1801, lava flows off the coast of Hawaii near Hualalei formed volcanic rock. It was dated using K-Ar (Potassium-Argon). The K-Ar dating gave dates ranging from 160 million to 2.96 billion years. (Journal of Geophysical Research, July 15, 1968; Science, October 11, 1968)

8. Doctor Read, in a presentation before a special meeting of the California State Board of Education, presented his research into the radiometric dating of lunar (moon) rocks. Many lunar samples were brought back from the missions and carefully dated usingthorium dating, uranium dating, potassium-argon dating, and agglutinate dating. Yet the dates vary from 2 million to 28 billion. ("Proceedings of the Second, Third and Fourth Lunar Conferences," Earth and Planetary Science Letters, Volumes 14 and 17)

9. Oxford Castle in England was built 725 years ago, and yet its mortar has been radiocarbon dated at 7,370 years old. (E.A. Von Fange, "Time Upside Down," quoted in Creation Research Society Quarterly, November, 1974, p. 18.)

10. Wood only a few days cut out of living, growing trees was dated, using radiocarbon, to have existed for 10,000 years. (B. Huber, "Recording Gaseous Exchange Under Field Conditions," in Physiology of Forest Trees, ed. by K.V. Thimann, 1958.)

Re: Unreliability of dating methods.

Part 3

11. Here is a quote which further demonstrates the accuracy problems of radiometric dating, and the carbon-14 method in particular:

"Hair from the Chekurovka mammoth that was found in the Lena River delta region of Russia has a radiocarbon age of 26,000 [years], while the radiocarbon age of peat only eighteen inches above the carcass is 5,610. At normal [present] growth rates, between 500-2,000 solar years would be required for the development of an eighteen inch peat layer.

"Muscle tissue from beneath the scalp of a mummified musk ox found in frozen muck at Fairbanks Creek, Alaska, has a radiocarbon age of 24,000, while the radiocarbon age of hair from a hind limb of the carcass is 17,200. A life span exceeding 7,000 years for a specimen of this species is doubtful.

"In a gravel deposit at the Union Pacific Mammoth Site near Rawlins, Wyoming, a mammoth skeleton was found together with artifacts that indicate the animal was killed by man. Radiocarbon dating of ivory from the center of the tusks establishes the kill date at approximately 11,300 radiocarbon years ago. Wood fragments from the gravel in which the remains were buried have a radiocarbon age of approximately 5,000 years. The bones would not have survived 6,000 solar years of exposure, nor could they be expected to remain in an articulate relationship during erosion and reburial by natural processes.

"A mastodon skeleton found at Ferguson Farm near Tupperville, Ontario, provided a radiocarbon age of 8,900 for the collagen fraction of bones and a radiocarbon age of 6,200 for high organic-content mud from within the skull cavities. It is unlikely that this skeleton could have survived exposure for 2,700 solar years before emplacement in peat." --Robert H. Brown, "Radiocarbon Age Measurements Re-examined," in Review and Herald, October 28, 1971, pp. 7-8.

Re: Unreliability of dating methods.

Part 4

12. Basalt from Mt. Etna, in Sicily (122 BC) was tested using the K-Ar method and found to be 250,000 years old. (G.B. Dalyrmple, Earth and Planetary Science Letters, 6-47 55; also see Impact, #307, Jan. 1999)

13. "One part of Dima [a baby frozen mammoth] was 40,000, another part was 26,000 and the 'wood immediately around the carcass' was 9-10,000." (T.L. Pewe, Quaternary Stratigraphic Nomenclature in Unglaciated Central Alaska, Geological Survey Professional Paper 862 (U.S. printing office, 1975) pg. 30)

14. "The lower leg of the Fairbanks Creek mammoth had a radiocarbon age of 15,380 RCY, while its skin and flesh were 21,300 RCY." (H.E. Anthony, "Natures Deep Freeze," Natural History, Sept. 1949, pg. 300)

15. "The two Colorado Creek mammoths had radiocarbon ages of 22,850 ±670 and 16,150 ±230 years respectively." (R.M. Thorson and R.D. Guthrie, "Stratigraphy of the Colorado Creek Mammoth Locality, Alaska," Quaternary Research, Vol. 37, No 2, March 1992, pg. 214-228)

Conclusion:

Every one of these anomalies are on the dating of objects of known age. Why then should we trust radiometric dating to be accurate about objects and rocks for which we do not know the ages for?

These examples show that radiometric dating is totally useless for age determining.

"There was water underneath the earth. A mist came up from the ground to water everything.
(Genesis 2:5-6)'

So you're telling me a single 'mist' of rain was enough to allow for life to live all tha time till your no-way flood? Ok...get real star.

"Your assumption is that there were no daughter elements in the beginning. It is only an assumption. You have no evidence to back that up.”

No offense star, but you’re pretty thick. Show me anywhere in here where it says it relies on no daughter elements being present. - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating

2 Timothy 3:16-17

16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

agentorange

Re:Ya, and how exactly did people live back then wise guy? You need water to grow things, all living things on earth require water to live. Get a clue. Oh, let me guess…another miracle to explain it away!


There was water underneath the earth. A mist came up from the ground to water everything.
(Genesis 2:5-6)

Re:Fail again star. We don’t use that assumption for dating radiometric techniques star, we rely on the ratio of parent to daughter elements which results in decaying isotopes decaying into others, by knowing the ratio we can measure it as it decays and establish how old it is.

Your assumption is that there were no daughter elements in the beginning. It is only an assumption. You have no evidence to back that up.