Radiocarbon dating volcanoes
The most widely used method for determining the age of fossils is to date them by the “known age” of the rock strata in which they are found.On the other hand, the most widely used method for determining the age of the rock strata is to date them by the “known age” of the fossils they contain. O’Rourke, for example, concedes: The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks.If this trend were to continue, the earth would be 700 thousand-trillion-trillion-trillion years old by the year 4000 AD.
And fourth, one must be certain that the decay rate of parent isotope to daughter isotope has always been the same.
That one or more of these assumptions are often invalid is obvious from the published radiometric “dates” (to say nothing of unpublished dates) found in the literature.
In other words, the less of the parent isotope (and the more of the daughter isotope) we measure in a specimen, the older we assume it to be.
Radiocarbon dating is actually of little use to evolutionists. First, no rocks and relatively few fossils contain measurable quantities of carbon of any kind.
No wonder the laboratories that “date” rocks insist on knowing in advance the “evolutionary age” of the strata from which the samples were taken—this way, they know which dates to accept as “reasonable” and which to ignore.
Of one thing you may be sure: whenever “absolute” radiometric dates are in substantial disagreement with evolutionary assumptions about the age of associated fossils, the fossils always prevail.
As we will see, selected data and unprovable assumptions are a problem with all methods for determining the age of the earth, as well as for dating its fossils and rocks.
It has all become something of a “dating game” in which only the evolutionarily correct are allowed to play.
Second, one must be certain that there were no daughter isotopes present in the beginning.Tags: Adult Dating, affair dating, sex dating