Uranium lead dating accuracy

posted by | Leave a comment

With the release of key peer-reviewed papers at the 2003 ICC (International Conference on Creationism), it is clear that RATE has made some fantastic progress, with real breakthroughs in this area.

When physicist Dr Russell Humphreys was still at Sandia National Laboratories (he now works full-time for ICR), he and Dr John Baumgardner (still with Los Alamos National Laboratory) were both convinced that they knew the direction in which to look for a definitive answer to the puzzle of why radiometric dating consistently gives ages of millions and billions of years.

(These include the variety of elements used in ‘standard’ radioisotope dating, mature uranium radiohalos and fission track dating.) It would be hard to imagine that geologic processes alone could explain all these.

Rather, there was likely to be an answer that concerned the nuclear decay processes themselves.

uranium lead dating accuracy-43uranium lead dating accuracy-73

the pattern was caused by the way the magma was emplaced or how it crystallized. But Drs Humphreys and Baumgardner realized that in other cases there were many independent lines of evidence that suggested that huge amounts of radioactive decay had indeed taken place.

By the 1830's Adam Sedgwick and Roderick Murchison established a correlation between the various types of fossils and the rock formations in the British Isles.

It was found that certain fossils, now referred to as index fossils, were restricted to a narrow zone of strata.

By 1830 Lyell's famous textbook, Principles of Geology, came out. Such was the age of the great creationist geologists!

The principle of faunal succession in the geologic record was established by direct observation as early as 1799 by William Smith.

Leave a Reply

christopher egan dating