Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 0/34 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Uranium Dating
Fiver
Junior Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 26
From: Provo, UT
Joined: 04-17-2010


Message 18 of 153 (562835)
06-02-2010 4:26 AM
Reply to: Message 17 by Son
05-14-2010 10:10 AM


Radiometric dating is like any other form of dating: it's not perfect. No dating method is.
In fact, radiometric dating can be compared to the 'dating' method of keeping a watch. Now, anybody can tell you that a watch is not a reliable way of keeping time, because there are myriad stories of watches running too fast or too slow, or stopping altogether.
And yet we can use watches to be very certain of the time by comparing our watch with the watches of others, and with clocks in the area. Even though each of these 'dating' methods require assumptions, we can be very certain of the correct time by correlating them together.
Similarly, radiometric dates can be trusted when they are correlated with other dates. Thus, in the Creationist model, not only must every single pre-historic dating method known to man universally and constantly give false dates, often off by orders of magnitude, but they must all also coincide with each other in such a way as to make it appear that the earth is billions of years old.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Son, posted 05-14-2010 10:10 AM Son has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Percy, posted 06-02-2010 8:01 AM Fiver has not replied
 Message 20 by RAZD, posted 06-02-2010 7:44 PM Fiver has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024