Datingearth com

Yet here we have it condoned by the top scientific journal in the world. I selected it because it was identified by the journal editors as a significant advance in knowledge. Isotope dating is therefore not the objective, absolute dating method it is often claimed to be.

Second, it is impossible to tell, from the isotope information alone, when the dates are right and when they are wrong.

magazine has been continuously published since 1978, we are publishing some of the articles from the archives for historical interest, such as this.

The critics don't appear to have done so yet by a long shot, and unless or until they do (it appears unlikely to happen), the helium diffusion dating method must be considered not only as valid science, but as a clearly superior dating method over radiometric dating of igneous rock.

I would like to see the famous zircons from west Australia and other locations around the world be subjected to the clearly superior helium diffusion dating method. I have great respect for your work in creation science and have learned much from it. I am aware of the assumptions that go into radiometric dating methods, and how those assumptions invalidate radio-dating as valid science, inasmuch as it claims to accurately date rocks when it clearly does not, given it is based on those unproved assumptions.

But these authors reached their conclusion by ignoring the contradictory data! First, the dates are readily discarded if they do not fit the preconceived notions of the experimenter.

If a scientist in any other field did this he would never be allowed to publish it. Such a practice is not acceptable in any other field of science because it destroys the objectivity upon which science has built its reputation.

Search for datingearth com:

datingearth com-26

A further problem is that the 4.3 billion-year-old zircon, dated according to the U/U method, was identified by the U/Th method to be undatable. But the earth is supposed to be only 4.5 billion years old. They admitted, however, that if the date had not been contradicted by the ‘known’ age of the earth, they would have accepted it as valid.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One thought on “datingearth com”