This age is computed under the assumption that the parent substance say, uranium gradually decays to the daughter substance say, lead , so the higher the ratio of lead to uranium, the older the rock must be. While there are many problems with such dating methods, such as parent or daughter substances entering or leaving the rock, e. Geologists assert that generally speaking, older dates are found deeper down in the geologic column, which they take as evidence that radiometric dating is giving true ages, since it is apparent that rocks that are deeper must be older.
But even if it is true that older radiometric dates are found lower down in the geologic column which is open to question , this can potentially be explained by processes occurring in magma chambers which cause the lava erupting earlier to appear older than the lava erupting later. Lava erupting earlier would come from the top of the magma chamber, and lava erupting later would come from lower down.
A number of processes could cause the parent substance to be depleted at the top of the magma chamber, or the daughter product to be enriched, both of which would cause the lava erupting earlier to appear very old according to radiometric dating, and lava erupting later to appear younger. Other possible confounding variables are the mechanisms that can alter daughter-to-parent ratios.
We can see that many varieties of minerals are produced from the same magma by the different processes of crystallization, and these different minerals may have very different compositions. It is possible that the ratio of daughter to parent substances for radiometric dating could differ in the different minerals.
Clearly, it is important to have a good understanding of these processes in order to evaluate the reliability of radiometric dating. Other confounding factors such as contamination and fractionation issues are frankly acknowledged by the geologic community, but are not taken into consideration when the accuracy and validity of these dating methods are examined.
The following quotation from Elaine G. Kennedy addresses this problem. Contamination and fractionation issues are frankly acknowledged by the geologic community. For example, if a magma chamber does not have homogeneously mixed isotopes, lighter daughter products could accumulate in the upper portion of the chamber.
If this occurs, initial volcanic eruptions would have a preponderance of daughter products relative to the parent isotopes.
- How do we use radioactive dating to determine the ages of rocks.
- boa dating 2014?
- free dating website philippines.
Such a distribution would give the appearance of age. As the magma chamber is depleted in daughter products, subsequent lava flows and ash beds would have younger dates. Such a scenario does not answer all of the questions or solve all of the problems that radiometric dating poses for those who believe the Genesis account of Creation and the Flood. It does suggest at least one aspect of the problem that could be researched more thoroughly. The problems inherent in radiometric dating often cause them to be so unreliable that they contradict one another rather than validating each other.
It would really be nice if geologists would just do a double blind study sometime to find out what the distributions of the ages are.
Explain how "carbon dating" is used to establish the age of nonliving things?
In practice, geologists carefully select what rocks they will date, and have many explanations for discordant dates, so it's not clear how such a study could be done, but it might be a good project for creationists. There is also evidence that many anomalies are never reported.
There are so many complicated phenomena to consider like this that it calls the whole radiometric dating scheme into question.
Only then can you gauge the accuracy and validity of that race. We need to observe when the race begins, how the race is run are there variations from the course, is the runner staying within the course, are they taking performance enhancing drugs, etc. All bases must be covered if we are going to accurately time the race. This is the major flaw in radiometric dating, e. Explain how "carbon dating" is used to establish the age of nonliving things?
Q: How can carbon dating work on things that were never alive?
Are you sure you want to delete this answer? The ratios of carbon isotopes in the atmosphere has stayed relatively constant over the ages. So if anything drew on that carbon at a certain time, the C14 will exponentially decay ever since that time. You can look at the ratio present in that thing and calculate the age based on that. Note that non-living things may not be likely to have a whole lot of carbon.
Explain how "carbon dating" is used to establish the age of nonliving things? | Yahoo Answers
Also note that when it comes to geological timescales, carbon has a pretty short half life. So you'll probably want to use longer-lived isotopes to date really old things. Vineet Menon Vineet Menon 2, 1 16 AdamRedwine AdamRedwine 3, 1 16 What you said is true for a tree with heartwood and sapwood, since its only sapwood which is living. But the vegetation in question is a shrub. It doesn't have those features.. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I expect that the shrub to which everyone is refering is the King Clone creosote bush. The Wikipedia article on that organism says that dating was performed by a comparison of ring count with carbon dating from "chunks of wood" from the central rings. Whatever you call it, the fact that the woody plant has been alive for over years pretty well implies that it will contain some non-living heartwood even if the deposition per year is minute as it would have to be. Sign up or log in Sign up using Google.