Start Radiometric dating questions and answers

Radiometric dating questions and answers

This statement – that radiometric dates are “corrected” by reference to evolution-based index fossils – is hotly contested, but examination of the technical literature shows that it is true, in spite of what elementary textbooks say. Documented Discrepancies The general public believes that radiometric results are consistent and thus demonstrably reliable. John Woodmorappe did an extensive literature search, looking at 445 technical articles from 54 reputable geochronology and geology journals.1 These reports listed over 350 dates, measured by radiometric methods, that conflicted badly with the ages assigned to fossils found in these same strata.

Relative age only tells us the order in which events occurred, from the earliest to the most recent.

Of course, the fossil dates depend on the assumption of evolution.

And, of course, the public doesn’t usually hear of these wrong answers.

Errors are particularly bad with the K-Ar (potassium-argon) method. Joan Engels wrote: It is now well known that K-Ar ages obtained from different minerals in a single rock may be strikingly discordant.3 Skull 1470 In 1972 Richard Leakey found a skull, near Lake Rudolf in Kenya, that he said was “virtually indistinguishable” from that of a modern human.