Before the scientific era, people often made up imaginative stories to explain what they saw in the world. The scientific method changed that by requiring rigorous experimentation to test hypotheses and determine what is real. With the Theory of Evolution, people are back to making up imaginative stories. The primary advantage of complete metamorphosis is eliminating competition between the young and old. Larval insects and adult insects occupy very different ecological niches. Whereas caterpillars are busy gorging themselves on leaves, completely disinterested in reproduction, butterflies are flitting from flower to flower in search of nectar and mates.
How does young earth creationism handle the evidence for millions of years in the fossil record
Fossils – What is a Fossil? A Fossils are the remains and traces of ancient organisms. A cluster of fossil ammonites, an extinct cephalopod. The convention is that a fossil must predate recorded human history.
Scientists use a technique called radiometric dating to estimate the ages of rocks, fossils, and the earth. Many people have been led to believe that radiometric dating methods have proved the earth to be billions of years old.
Many people are under the false impression that carbon dating proves that dinosaurs and other extinct animals lived millions of years ago. What many do not realize is that carbon dating is not used to date dinosaurs. Carbon dating is only accurate back a few thousand years. So if scientists believe that a creature lived millions of years ago, then they would need to date it another way. But there is the problem. They assume dinosaurs lived millions of years ago instead of thousands of years ago like the bible says.
They ignore evidence that does not fit their preconceived notion. What would happen if a dinosaur bone were carbon dated? The age they came back with was only a few thousand years old.
Carbon dating + fossil fuels
Love-hungry teenagers and archaeologists agree: But while the difficulties of single life may be intractable, the challenge of determining the age of prehistoric artifacts and fossils is greatly aided by measuring certain radioactive isotopes. Until this century, relative dating was the only technique for identifying the age of a truly ancient object. By examining the object’s relation to layers of deposits in the area, and by comparing the object to others found at the site, archaeologists can estimate when the object arrived at the site.
C14 dating is very accurate for wood used up to about 4, years ago. This is only because it is well calibrated with objects of known age. Example: wood found in a grave of known age by historically reliable documents is the standard for that time for the C14 content.
This belief in long ages for the earth and the existence of life is derived largely from radiometric dating. These long time periods are computed by measuring the ratio of daughter to parent substance in a rock and inferring an age based on this ratio. This age is computed under the assumption that the parent substance say, uranium gradually decays to the daughter substance say, lead , so the higher the ratio of lead to uranium, the older the rock must be.
Of course, there are many problems with such dating methods, such as parent or daughter substances entering or leaving the rock, as well as daughter product being present at the beginning. Here I want to concentrate on another source of error, namely, processes that take place within magma chambers. To me it has been a real eye opener to see all the processes that are taking place and their potential influence on radiometric dating.
5 Major Reasons Why Creationists are Dead Wrong
The ratio of carbon to carbon at the moment of death is the same as every other living thing, but the carbon decays and is not replaced. The carbon decays with its half-life of 5, years, while the amount of carbon remains constant in the sample. By looking at the ratio of carbon to carbon in the sample and comparing it to the ratio in a living organism, it is possible to determine the age of a formerly living thing fairly precisely.
A formula to calculate how old a sample is by carbon dating is: So, if you had a fossil that had 10 percent carbon compared to a living sample, then that fossil would be:
If the fossils, or the dating of the fossils, could be shown to be inaccurate, all such information would have to be rejected as unsafe. Geologists and paleontologists are highly self-critical, and they have worried for decades about these issues.
Several Christian ministries promote the idea that the earth is less than 10, years old, which they say comes from the Bible. In reality, the Bible makes no claim as to the age of the earth, although it does establish a minimum age. This page examines some of the history of the controversy—what the Bible actually says and does not say—and the scientific evidence surrounding the age of the earth.
Age of the earth according to the Bible The following is a summary of the biblical evidence presented on this website regarding the age of the earth. For more detailed explanations of each topic, please click on the associated link. History of the age of the earth As indicated earlier, the Bible does not fix the age of the earth, contrary to the claims of Answers in Genesis. Archbishop Ussher took the genealogies of Genesis, assuming they were complete, and calculated all the years to arrive at a date for the creation of the earth on Sunday, October 23, B.
There are a number of other assumptions implicit in the calculation. The first, and foremost, assumption is that the genealogies of Genesis are complete, from father to son throughout the entire course of human existence. The second assumption is that the Genesis creation “days” were exactly hours in length.
Reliability of Geologic Dating
Dinosaurs supposedly died out 65 million years ago. Several tests were done by the University of Georgia using accelerator mass spectrometry. The age for all these fossils was found to be less than 50, years 1. This is not predicted by conventional evolutionary theory; and other discoveries have been made concerning dinosaurs which also are not predicted by evolutionary theory such as the discovery of soft tissue in bones that are not or are only partially fossilized. However, the abstract of the Miller presentation was removed from the website for the conference.
If the accepted ages of millions of years for dinosaurs were to be found to be in error, this would be a problem to evolution.
reasons why you cant trust carbon dating creationist creationism evolution dinosaurs. Since carbon dating measures the amount of carbon still in a fossil, then the date given is not accurate. This is just one of many inaccurate dates given by Carbon dating. Mollusks.
My friends call me Ape Jaw Evan. Click here to read about me and other media myths, frauds, and lies. The Theory of Evolution is not a scientific law or a law of biology. Failure to meet only one challenge proves the law is wrong. This web page will prove that the Theory of Evolution fails many challenges, not simply one. The Theory of Evolution will never become a law of science because it is wrought with errors.
More Bad News for Radiometric Dating
Consider also the most popular explanation offered for the photo right , that a concretion formed around an s-era hammer as minerals precipitated out of the surrounding limestone. From Adam until Real Science Radio , in only generations! Another paper, in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology Eugenie Scott ‘s own field on High mitochondrial mutation rates , shows that one mitochondrial DNA mutation occurs every other generation, which, as creationists point out , indicates that mtEve would have lived about generations ago.
That’s not so old! As our List of Not So Old Things this web page reveals, by a kneejerk reaction evolutionary scientists assign ages of tens or hundreds of thousands of years or at least just long enough to contradict Moses’ chronology in Genesis.
The fact that dating techniques most often agree with each other is why scientists tend to trust them in the first place. Nearly every college and university library in the country has periodicals such as Science, Nature, and specific geology journals that give the results of dating studies.
Maybe you define answer as somethng apprehensible, acceptable and palatable. Vinny This answers my question; why are atheists always consumed with everything God? You know who spends a lot of energy on conversion efforts? Do you understand this concept at all??? Anthony Zarrella Why should we? If you think you have some truth about the way people ought to behave, you share it and try to convince others. They are not reasonable, but they are obviously shareable.
Since religious ideas are irrational, there is a grave limitation on the ability to share them. But you certainly should be free to talk about them to anyone willing to listen.
Radiometric Dating and the Geological Time Scale
Outlook Other Abstract U-Pb radioisotope dating is now the absolute dating method of first choice among geochronologists, especially using the mineral zircon. A variety of analytical instruments have also now been developed using different micro-sampling techniques coupled with mass spectrometers, thus enabling wide usage of U-Pb radioisotope dating. However, problems remain in the interpretation of the measured Pb isotopic ratios to transform them into ages. Among them is the presence of non-radiogenic Pb of unknown composition, often referred to as common or initial Pb.
There is also primordial Pb that the earth acquired when it formed, its isotopic composition determined as that of troilite in the Canyon Diablo iron meteorite.
Radiometric dating is a much misunderstood phenomenon. Evolutionists often misunderstand the method, assuming it gives a definite age for tested samples. Creationists also often misunderstand it, claiming that the process is inaccurate.
This technique is widely used on recent artifacts, but teachers should note that this technique will not work on older fossils like those of the dinosaurs which are over 65 million years old. This technique is not restricted to bones; it can also be used on cloth, wood and plant fibers. Carbon dating has been used successfully on the Dead Sea Scrolls, Minoan ruins and tombs of the pharohs among other things. Carbon is a radioactive isotope of carbon. Its has a half-life of about 5, years.
The short half-life of carbon means its cannot be used to date extremely old fossils. How is Carbon formed? Carbon is created from nitrogen in the upper atmosphere of the earth. Radiation from the sun collides with atoms in the atmosphere. These collisions create secondary cosmic rays in the form of energentic neutrons.
When these neutrons collide with nitrogen in the atmosphere carbon can be created. Nitrogen normally occurs in a seven proton, seven nuetron, nitrogen state. When it collides with an energetic neutron it becomes carbon , with six protons and eight neutrons and gives off a hydrogen atom with one proton and zero neutrons. How is Carbon used to date artifacts?
Importance of Fossils
Relationships with emotionally immature people June 4, by hsm Comments Emotional maturity is defined by the ability to control your emotions and take full responsibility for your life along with its opportunities and dramas. A large part of being emotionally mature is having the ability to handle anger, disappointment, guilt, resentment, fear, jealousy, disappointment, grief, insecurity, and a myriad of other feelings appropriately. Emotional maturity is defined when you have the ability to experience these emotions and then quickly let them go.
People who are immature seem to remain stuck in these negative emotions, unable to get past them.
The main point of the debate seems to be the following: Over the past decades, several research groups of self-proclaimed creationist scientists have claimed discoveries of dinosaur bones that they have managed to date, using radiocarbon dating methods , at some age which is a lot below the ‘usual’ i. The age that these groups claim to find is usually on the order of thousands or tens of thousands of years old. The particular example you bring up is one of the most famous such cases.
The claims are really quite spectacular, when taken at face value, and therefore should be examined thoroughly. In this answer, I will try to go through this story in great detail, hopefully exposing the reasons why this work is not taken seriously by scientists. The research by Miller et al.