Announcement

Collapse

Message to all users:

https://carm.org/forum-rules

Super Member Subscription
https://carm.org/carm-super-members-banner-ad-signup

As most of you are aware, we had a crash to forums and were down for over two days a while back. We did have to do an upgrade to the vbulletin software to fix the forums and that has created changes, VB no longer provide the hybrid or threaded forums. There are some issues/changes to the forums we are not able to fix or change. Also note the link address change, please let friends and posters know of the changed link to the forums. For now this is the only link available, https://forums.carm.org/vb5/ but if clicking on forum on carm.org homepage it will now send you to this link. (edited to add https: now working.

Again, we are working through some of the posting and viewing issues to learn how to post with the changes, you will have to check and test the different features, icons that have changed. You may also want to go to profile settings,since many of the notifications, information in profile, also to update/edit your avatar by clicking on avatar space, pull down arrow next to login for user settings.

Edit to add "How to read forums, to make it easier."
Pull down arrow next to login name upper right select profile, or user settings when page opens to profile,select link in tab that says Account. Then select/choose options, go down to Conversation Detail Options, Select Display mode Posts, NOT Activity, that selection of Posts will make the pages of discussions go to last post on last page rather than out of order that happens if you choose activity threads. Then be sure to go to bottom and select SAVE Changes in your profile options. You can then follow discussions by going through the pages, to the last page having latest responses. Then click on the other links Privacy, Notifications, to select viewing options,the forums get easier if you open all the tabs or links in your profile, user settings and select options. To join Super Member, pull down arrow next to login name, select User Settings and then click on tab/link at top that says Subscriptions.

Thank you for your patience and God Bless.

Diane S
https://carm.org/forum-rules
See more
See less

Absolute dating of rocks

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Absolute dating of rocks

    Relative dating was developed by early geologists in the 18th century.
    Although they had no way to measure the exact age of a rock, they were able to figure out by simple observation that some rocks were higher or lower on the geological column that others.
    From this they were able to deduce that the lower rocks were generally older than the higher rocks.
    They also observed that certain fossils were found in certain layers, and were not found in other layers. These fossils were useful for determining the relative age of sedimentary rocks, so they came to be called "index fossils".
    Although these index fossils were useful for determining if a layer was formed in the mid jurasic, or the early permian, they could not tell anyone the actual age of the layers in question.
    Nobody knew whether the cretaceous era was five million years ago, or ten million years ago.


    In the late 19th century Lord Kelvin devised an experiment to try to calculate the age of the earth.
    Kelvin's experiment set the age of the earth at between 100 million years old, and 105 million years old.
    His results were astonishing. Until then, geologists had placed the age of the earth at about 50 to 60 million years old.
    Of course Kelvin's experiment rested on one assumption... that there was no new heat being produced inside the earth.
    The discovery of radioactivity changed all that. And pushed the Earth's age back into the billions of years.

    The discovery of radioactivity by physicists in the very late 19th century, allowed geologists to discover the absolute age of a particular rock. Thus was born absolute dating.
    The only assumption made with absolute dating by radioactive decay... is that American capitalist physicists, and Soviet communist physicists, are not collaborating in a bizzare international conspiracy.
    It is by absolute dating by radioactive decay that we are able to know how old the index fossils, and the rock they are in, are.


    When paleontologists claim that a fossil is XYZ years old, they are not taking a wild guess. they are basing the age on index fossils in the same layer as their fossil. Index fossils of KNOWN age. Of course this is not perfect. It only gives a ballpark figure. For more precise dates paleontologists still send samples to physicists to be tested.
    When evil is powerful, good men are silenced.

  • #2
    Exactly! I copied the following from the September 2001 issue of National Geographic.




    Isotopic techniques:

    a Uranium to Lead (minerals), 1 million to 4.5 billion years.

    b Rubidium to Strontium (minerals), 60 Million to 4.5 billion years.

    c Potassium to Argon (minerals), 10000 to 3 billion years.

    d Uranium series disequilibrium (minerals, shell, bone, teeth, coral), 0 to 400,000 years.

    e Carbon 14 (minerals, shell, bone, teeth, water), 0 to 40,000 years.




    Radiation Exposure techniques:

    a Fission Track (Minerals, natural glass), 500,000 to 1 billion years

    b Thermoluminescence (Minerals, natural glass), 0 to 500,000 years

    c Electron Spin Resonance (Minerals, tooth enamel, shell coral), 1,000 to 1 million years.




    Other techniques:

    a Geomagnetic polarity timescale (minerals), 780,000 to 200 million years.

    b Amino Acid racemization (shells, other bicarbonates), 500 to 300,000 years.

    c Obsidian hydration (natural glass), 500 to 200,000 years.

    d Dendrochronology (tree rings), 0 to 12,000 years.

    e Lichenometry (lichens), 100 to 9,000 years.

    "Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away"

    Comment


    • #3
      The silence of the creationists
      When evil is powerful, good men are silenced.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by D Laurier View Post
        The silence of the creationists
        I'd bet half of them though carbon 14 was our be-all and end-all.
        To suddenly learn science is not a guessing game can bring quietus to the sheeple.
        With all the conflicting religious beliefs in the world, they can’t all be right. But they can all be wrong.
        Herb Silverman.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by aussiedave View Post
          I'd bet half of them though carbon 14 was our be-all and end-all.
          To suddenly learn science is not a guessing game can bring quietus to the sheeple.
          maybe
          When evil is powerful, good men are silenced.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by D Laurier View Post
            Relative dating was developed by early geologists in the 18th century.
            Although they had no way to measure the exact age of a rock, they were able to figure out by simple observation that some rocks were higher or lower on the geological column that others.
            From this they were able to deduce that the lower rocks were generally older than the higher rocks.
            They also observed that certain fossils were found in certain layers, and were not found in other layers. These fossils were useful for determining the relative age of sedimentary rocks, so they came to be called "index fossils".
            Although these index fossils were useful for determining if a layer was formed in the mid jurasic, or the early permian, they could not tell anyone the actual age of the layers in question.
            Nobody knew whether the cretaceous era was five million years ago, or ten million years ago.


            In the late 19th century Lord Kelvin devised an experiment to try to calculate the age of the earth.
            Kelvin's experiment set the age of the earth at between 100 million years old, and 105 million years old.
            His results were astonishing. Until then, geologists had placed the age of the earth at about 50 to 60 million years old.
            Of course Kelvin's experiment rested on one assumption... that there was no new heat being produced inside the earth.
            The discovery of radioactivity changed all that. And pushed the Earth's age back into the billions of years.

            The discovery of radioactivity by physicists in the very late 19th century, allowed geologists to discover the absolute age of a particular rock. Thus was born absolute dating.
            The only assumption made with absolute dating by radioactive decay... is that American capitalist physicists, and Soviet communist physicists, are not collaborating in a bizzare international conspiracy.
            It is by absolute dating by radioactive decay that we are able to know how old the index fossils, and the rock they are in, are.


            When paleontologists claim that a fossil is XYZ years old, they are not taking a wild guess. they are basing the age on index fossils in the same layer as their fossil. Index fossils of KNOWN age. Of course this is not perfect. It only gives a ballpark figure. For more precise dates paleontologists still send samples to physicists to be tested.
            They are assuming and believing that today's physics applied at all times, and doing so with no proof whatsoever. Therefore there are no dates, just conceptualized time periods based on the belief nature was the same.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by dad View Post
              They are assuming and believing that today's physics applied at all times, and doing so with no proof whatsoever.
              Your use of the word "proof" here shows that you lack understanding of the way science works. Science has evidence that, for instance, the Fine Structure Constant has been constant for the last 10 billion years, and probably for 2 billion more years before that.

              Where is your evidence that modern texts and translations of the Bible are accurate? We already have evidence that the majority of interpretations of the Bible are inaccurate -- just count up how many different Christian denominations there are. At most one of those denominations can be completely correct.

              Therefore there are no dates, just conceptualized time periods based on the belief nature was the same.
              So, the entire world was created last Thursday, all apparent events before they are created to appear that way; the events never happened, your memories of them were created last Thursday.
              The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by dad View Post

                They are assuming and believing that today's physics applied at all times, and doing so with no proof whatsoever. Therefore there are no dates, just conceptualized time periods based on the belief nature was the same.
                Please show evidence that nature was not the same at another time.
                When evil is powerful, good men are silenced.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by D Laurier View Post
                  Relative dating was developed by early geologists in the 18th century.
                  Although they had no way to measure the exact age of a rock, they were able to figure out by simple observation that some rocks were higher or lower on the geological column that others.
                  I don't care if the rock is ten quintillion years old.

                  The $64.00 question is:

                  How long has that rock been in existence?
                  THE BIBLE SAYS IT, THAT SETTLES IT.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by AV1611VET View Post
                    I don't care if the rock is ten quintillion years old.
                    Heh, heh ...

                    You should have stopped at "I don't care." That would reflect your attitude toward knowledge and science.

                    The $64.00 question is:
                    I seriously doubt that it's worth that much.

                    How long has that rock been in existence?
                    Maybe we could find out by dropping a rock on your head before it exists.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by AV1611VET View Post

                      I don't care if the rock is ten quintillion years old.

                      The $64.00 question is:

                      How long has that rock been in existence?
                      So you think god created the rocks to look and test to huge ages?
                      Wouldn't you think that is somewhat deceptive?
                      With all the conflicting religious beliefs in the world, they can’t all be right. But they can all be wrong.
                      Herb Silverman.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by aussiedave View Post
                        So you think god created the rocks to look and test to huge ages?
                        Not just to look old; to be old.

                        Originally posted by aussiedave
                        Wouldn't you think that is somewhat deceptive?
                        Negative.

                        I'll let Adam Clarke explain it:

                        Originally posted by Adam Clarke's Commentary
                        It appears that God created every thing, not only perfect as it respects its nature, but also in a state of maturity, so that every vegetable production appeared at once in full growth; and this was necessary that man, when he came into being, might find every thing ready for his use.
                        THE BIBLE SAYS IT, THAT SETTLES IT.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by AV1611VET View Post
                          Not just to look old; to be old.
                          Theodosius Dobzhansky, a Russian Orthodox Christian, said this much better than I can:
                          One of the early antievolutionists, P. H. Gosse, published a book entitled Omphalos ("the Navel"). The gist of this amazing book is that Adam, though he had no mother, was created with a navel, and that fossils were placed by the Creator where we find them now - a deliberate act on His part, to give the appearance of great antiquity and geologic upheaveals. It is easy to see the fatal flaw in all such notions. They are blasphemies, accusing God of absurd deceitfulness. This is as revolting as it is uncalled for.
                          Your argument is not new. Gosse published it in 1857.
                          The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by AV1611VET View Post

                            I don't care if the rock is ten quintillion years old.
                            You just dont care.
                            You are perfectly happy to be lied to, as long as you are appeasing the bully in your mind.
                            As long as you keep metaphorically kissing that bully's arse, you imagine that he will reward your fawning display of self degradation.



                            The $64.00 question is:
                            ... yes?

                            How long has that rock been in existence?
                            As long as it took to become as old as it is.

                            If a rock is 7 million years old, it has been in existence as a rock for 7 million years.
                            If a rock is 35 million years old, it has been in existence as a rock for 35 million years.

                            When evil is powerful, good men are silenced.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by aussiedave:
                              So you think god created the rocks to look and test to huge ages?
                              Wouldn't you think that is somewhat deceptive?
                              Originally posted by AV1611VET View Post
                              Negative.

                              I'll let Adam Clarke explain it:
                              Originally posted by Adam Clarke's Commentary
                              It appears that God created every thing, not only perfect as it respects its nature, but also in a state of maturity, so that every vegetable production appeared at once in full growth; and this was necessary that man, when he came into being, might find every thing ready for his use.
                              Why would Adam need to have old rocks?

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X