-
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
How reliable are dating methods?
- Thread starter Micaiah
- Start date
- Status
So the main problem in the article is that there are big differences in results for different dating methods. The more I read about dating rocks and fossils using the radioactive decay rate of materials, the more I got the impression that these methods were inherently unreliable.
I've seen at least one example where the variation in dates given for a fossil varied by a factor of about 100 x using various radioactive dating methods. In that case the date was clearly influenced by what scientists wanted or expected the date to be. In the case discussed here the variations in dates in well outside the suggested acccuracy given by Notto above.
I've seen at least one example where the variation in dates given for a fossil varied by a factor of about 100 x using various radioactive dating methods. In that case the date was clearly influenced by what scientists wanted or expected the date to be. In the case discussed here the variations in dates in well outside the suggested acccuracy given by Notto above.
Upvote
0
Micaiah said:
Any specifics? Again, what methods? Were they appropriate for the sample? Was contamination and background radiation a factor?
What have you been reading? Creationist sources or actual work from geologists? Where are the numbers?
Upvote
0
- Status
Similar threads
