Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 4, 2024, 4:52 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Radiometric Dating
#18
RE: Radiometric Dating
(November 20, 2009 at 10:43 pm)Tiberius Wrote:
(November 20, 2009 at 4:53 pm)rjh4 Wrote: That's why you take different measurements with different samples and different equipment. I notice you have ignored my challenge. Please find me one example (just one) and I will take a look.


There have been technique changes, particularly in radiocarbon 14 dating methods over the 60 years that the process has been used. For example, early on they would take a piece of wood from, say, a door post and date it. The problem with this is that c14 only tells us the date that the tree died. In a dry climate that door post might have lasted for 150 years and when you add that to the +/- variable of the test you could easily get a date with is nearly 3 centuries off.

The technique has been refined so that they now look for cereal grains or pollen grains (short-lived specimens) and the have the +/- down to 20 years. Theists look at these changes as a way to denounce the entire test.

They are wrong but then they are wrong about many things.
Reply



Messages In This Thread
Radiometric Dating - by littlegrimlin1 - November 20, 2009 at 2:00 am
RE: Radiometric Dating - by chris - November 20, 2009 at 4:17 am
RE: Radiometric Dating - by rjh4 - November 20, 2009 at 9:39 am
RE: Radiometric Dating - by theVOID - November 21, 2009 at 12:30 am
RE: Radiometric Dating - by lukec - November 26, 2009 at 8:35 am
RE: Radiometric Dating - by Darwinian - November 20, 2009 at 10:00 am
RE: Radiometric Dating - by rjh4 - November 20, 2009 at 10:56 am
RE: Radiometric Dating - by Darwinian - November 20, 2009 at 2:13 pm
RE: Radiometric Dating - by rjh4 - November 20, 2009 at 2:57 pm
RE: Radiometric Dating - by Tiberius - November 20, 2009 at 11:48 am
RE: Radiometric Dating - by rjh4 - November 20, 2009 at 12:27 pm
RE: Radiometric Dating - by Minimalist - November 20, 2009 at 11:53 am
RE: Radiometric Dating - by Tiberius - November 20, 2009 at 2:48 pm
RE: Radiometric Dating - by rjh4 - November 20, 2009 at 4:53 pm
RE: Radiometric Dating - by Tiberius - November 20, 2009 at 10:43 pm
RE: Radiometric Dating - by Minimalist - November 26, 2009 at 12:32 pm
RE: Radiometric Dating - by littlegrimlin1 - November 21, 2009 at 11:18 am
RE: Radiometric Dating - by downbeatplumb - November 21, 2009 at 1:52 pm
RE: Radiometric Dating - by littlegrimlin1 - November 27, 2009 at 12:41 pm
RE: Radiometric Dating - by Minimalist - November 27, 2009 at 2:45 pm
RE: Radiometric Dating - by littlegrimlin1 - November 28, 2009 at 2:20 am

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Scientific Dating Blondie 22 4615 October 21, 2015 at 7:30 am
Last Post: Cyberman
  [split] Radiometric Dating Creatard 92 19346 November 26, 2014 at 8:40 am
Last Post: Cyberman
  Research shows radiometric dating still reliable (again) orogenicman 7 3348 November 16, 2010 at 6:14 pm
Last Post: orogenicman



Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)