How Old Is the Earth : Christian Courier
View images by clicking on link or reduced image: Each image opens into a new window. These primitive, medium sized apes lived in rain forests between 18 and 22 million years ago. This species and others such as Dryopithecus existed before the hominid line diverged on the path to humans. This lineage ancestral gibbons is believed to have diverged from the great ape and human lineages between 17 and 25 Mya Avers, Oreopithecus ‘s hand closely matches the pattern of early hominids, with a grasping capability including firm pad-to-pad precision gripping that apes are unable to perform presumably as a response to similar functional demands to hominids Moya-Sola et al, Bipedal activities made up a significant part of the positional behavior of this primate Kohler and Moya-Sola, Gorilla and human DNA only differs by 2. Our DNA differs by only 1. The two species of Pan, the chimpanzee, P.
The way it really is: Even the way dates are reported e. However, although we can measure many things about a rock, we cannot directly measure its age.
The age of the Earth is estimated at a little over billion years. Working this out was a difficult problem to solve. For most of human history, the basic facts about the planet were unknown.
Rating Newest Oldest Best Answer: I don’t know anything about that line about sample contamination rendering all analyses invalid. Doesn’t work for me. Scientists did not set out to “prove” the earth is 4. That is just the answer that keeps coming up from hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of analyses on innumerable samples. Basically, the evidence is what it is. You can choose to disbelieve. The biblical literalists act as though science is flawed or is purposefully faulty when it comes to evaluating the history of the earth, which says more about their failure to accept reality than it does about the validity of the results apparently the literalists are perfectly happy accepting all other aspects of science.
No true honest and ethical scientist purposefully uses invalid thinking or sets out to prove something that the evidence hasn’t already suggested to them as being the likely answer. They are human, and do makes errors, this is true. When things seem out of whack, the entire scientific community attacks the issue to see if it is true or not.
How reliable are radiometric dating methods for deciding the age of the Earth
Sorry, something has gone wrong. I don’t know anything about that line about sample contamination rendering all analyses invalid. Doesn’t work for me.
Earth Science – Post Module 3 Middle School Page 6 S ome elements have forms (called isotopes) with unstable atomic nuclei that have a tendency to change, or decay. For example, U is an unstable isotope of uranium that has 92 protons and neutrons in the nucleus of each.
Reference to a case where the given method did not work This is perhaps the most common objection of all. Creationists point to instances where a given method produced a result that is clearly wrong, and then argue that therefore all such dates may be ignored. Such an argument fails on two counts: First, an instance where a method fails to work does not imply that it does not ever work.
The question is not whether there are “undatable” objects, but rather whether or not all objects cannot be dated by a given method. The fact that one wristwatch has failed to keep time properly cannot be used as a justification for discarding all watches. How many creationists would see the same time on five different clocks and then feel free to ignore it?
The Radiometric Dating Game
Until recent years, scientists who believe in creation haven’t had the necessary resources to explore radiometric dating in detail. A 10 gram sample of U Now that has changed, and some important discoveries are being made. When granite rock hardens, it freezes radioactive elements in place. The most common radioactive element in granite is Uranium This element is locked in tiny zircons within the granite.
As part of the decay process, helium is produced.
Radiometric dating–the process of determining the age of rocks from the decay of their radioactive elements–has been in widespread use for over half a century.
How Does Carbon Dating Work Carbon is a weakly radioactive isotope of Carbon; also known as radiocarbon, it is an isotopic chronometer. C dating is only applicable to organic and some inorganic materials not applicable to metals. Gas proportional counting, liquid scintillation counting and accelerator mass spectrometry are the three principal radiocarbon dating methods.
What is Radiocarbon Dating? Radiocarbon dating is a method that provides objective age estimates for carbon-based materials that originated from living organisms. The impact of the radiocarbon dating technique on modern man has made it one of the most significant discoveries of the 20th century. Archaeology and other human sciences use radiocarbon dating to prove or disprove theories.
Over the years, carbon 14 dating has also found applications in geology, hydrology, geophysics, atmospheric science, oceanography, paleoclimatology and even biomedicine. Basic Principles of Carbon Dating Radiocarbon, or carbon 14, is an isotope of the element carbon that is unstable and weakly radioactive.
The Age of the Earth
Shop Now 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. With our focus on one particular form of radiometric dating—carbon dating—we will see that carbon dating strongly supports a young earth.
Note that, contrary to a popular misconception, carbon dating is not used to date rocks at millions of years old. Basics Before we get into the details of how radiometric dating methods are used, we need to review some preliminary concepts from chemistry.
Dating techniques are procedures used by scientists to determine the age of an object or a series of events. The two main types of dating methods are relative and absolute. Relative dating methods are used to determine only if one sample is older or younger than another.
Roman poet Lucretius, intellectual heir to the Greek atomists, believed its formation must have been relatively recent, given that there were no records going back beyond the Trojan War. The Talmudic rabbis, Martin Luther and others used the biblical account to extrapolate back from known history and came up with rather similar estimates for when the earth came into being.
Within decades observation began overtaking such thinking. In the s Nicolas Steno formulated our modern concepts of deposition of horizontal strata. He inferred that where the layers are not horizontal, they must have been tilted since their deposition and noted that different strata contain different kinds of fossil. This position came to be known as uniformitarianism, but within it we must distinguish between uniformity of natural law which nearly all of us would accept and the increasingly questionable assumptions of uniformity of process, uniformity of rate and uniformity of outcome.
That is the background to the intellectual drama being played out in this series of papers. It is a drama consisting of a prologue and three acts, complex characters, and no clear heroes or villains.
While there are numerous natural processes that can serve as clocks, there are also many natural processes that can reset or scramble these time-dependent processes and introduce uncertainties. To try to set a reasonable bound on the age, we could presume that the Earth formed at the same time as the rest of the solar system. If the small masses that become meteorites are part of that system, then a measurement of the solidification time of those meteorites gives an estimate of the age of the Earth.
The following illustration points to a scenario for developing such an age estimate. Some of the progress in finding very old samples of rock on the Earth are summarized in the following comments. It is a compound of zirconium, silicon and oxygen which in its colorless form is used to make brilliant gems.
Common Creationist Criticism’s of Mainstream Dating Methods By Chris Stassen Part of Stassen’s FAQ file The Age of the Earth, which also deals with many other young-Earth assertions besides radiometric dating. Radiometric Dating and the Geological Time Scale – Circular Reasoning or Reliable Tools.
At the time that Darwin’s On the Origin of Species was published, the earth was “scientifically” determined to be million years old. By , it was found to be 1. In , science firmly established that the earth was 3. Finally in , it was discovered that the earth is “really” 4. In these early studies the order of sedimentary rocks and structures were used to date geologic time periods and events in a relative way. At first, the use of “key” diagnostic fossils was used to compare different areas of the geologic column.
Although there were attempts to make relative age estimates, no direct dating method was available until the twentieth century. However, before this time some very popular indirect methods were available. For example, Lord Kelvin had estimated the ages of both the Earth and the Sun based on cooling rates. The answer of 25 million years deduced by Kelvin was not received favorably by geologists.