Radiometric dating vs carbon dating Gambar sex nekad

he generally accepted age for the Earth and the rest of the solar system is about 4.55 billion years (plus or minus about 1%).

This value is derived from several different lines of evidence.

radiometric dating vs carbon dating-48

While these values do not compute an age for the Earth, they do establish a lower limit (the Earth must be at least as old as any formation on it).

This lower limit is at least concordant with the independently derived figure of 4.55 billion years for the Earth's actual age.

A young-Earther would object to all of the "assumptions" listed above.

However, the test for these assumptions is the plot of the data itself.

Further, the processes of erosion and crustal recycling have apparently destroyed all of the earliest surface.

The oldest rocks which have been found so far (on the Earth) date to about 3.8 to 3.9 billion years ago (by several radiometric dating methods).Those which appear the most frequently in talk.origins are reproduced below: Note that these aren't necessarily the "best" or most difficult to refute of young-Earth arguments.However, they are quite popular in modern creation-"science" literature (even though they should not be!) and they are historically the ones posted to talk.origins more than any others.The young-Earth argument goes something like this: helium-4 is created by radioactive decay (alpha particles are helium nuclei) and is constantly added to the atmosphere.Over time, the amounts of Pb-206 and Pb-207 will change in some samples, as these isotopes are decay end-products of uranium decay (U-238 decays to Pb-206, and U-235 decays to Pb-207).

Tags: , ,