Basic
Worldview:
103
Science, the Bible,
and Creation
Origins
- Section Four:
Remaining Methods and Decay Rates
Origins - Section One: Introduction
and the Basics
Origins - Section Two: Premature
Dismissals
Origins - Section Two: Application
of the Basics
Origins - Section Three: Creation
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Origin of Life
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Environment for Life 1
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Environment for Life 2
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Another Planet
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Origin of Species
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Speciation Factors
Origins - Section Three: Evolution,
Speciation Rates
Origins - Section Four: Time and
Age, Redshift
Origins - Section Four: Philosophical
Preference
Origins - Section Four: Cosmological
Model 1
Origins - Section Four: Cosmological
Model 2
Origins - Section Four: Dating Methods,
Perceptions, Basics
Origins - Section Four: Global Flood
Evidence
Origins - Section Four: Relative
Dating
Origins - Section Four: Dating and
Circular Reasoning
Origins - Section Four: The Geologic
Column
Origins - Section Four: Radiometric
Dating Basics
Origins - Section Four: General
Radiometric Problems
Origins - Section Four: Carbon-14
Problems
Origins - Section Four: Remaining
Methods and Decay Rates
Origins - Section Four: Radiometric
Conclusions, Other Methods
Origins - Section Five: Overall
Conclusions, Closing Editorial
Origins - Section Five: List
of Evidences Table
Origins Debate Figures and
Illustrations
Focus
on Critical Evidence:
The Remaining Minor Radiometric Methods
Our
first four segments on radiometric dating have now been completed.
We have covered the basics of radiometric dating, the general
obstacles to igneous and metamorphic dating, the particular
obstacles facing the prominent potassium-argon method, the
obstacles facing the carbon-14 method, as well as the problems
a global flood imposes on all these dating methods. At this
point, we are nearly finished with our examination of radiometric
dating. Only 2 segments remain: the minor remaining radiometric
dating methods and the problems with the decay rate factor,
which must be known to perform radiometric age calculations.
Our
coverage of radiometric dating so far has largely focused
on 2 categories of methods: methods that date igneous and
metamorphic rocks, which provide the timescale from 100,000
to 4.5 billion years ago and carbon-14 dating, which dates
once-living items and sedimentary rock and provides the timescale
from the present back to 50,000 years ago. However, there
are a few radiometric dating methods that do not fit into
either of these categories for reasons that will become apparent
below. For the most part, these are minor methods with very
limited application. And it is these methods that we will
address in this segment. Specifically, there are 3 remaining
methods fission-track dating, uranium-series dating including
radon, and rhenium-osmium dating. For the sake of simplicity,
we will discuss rhenium-osmium first, since its status is
the easiest to establish and can be addressed quite briefly.
The
rhenium-osmium dating method is simply not used. As indicated
by the quote below, at best it has only limited potential
for isotopic dating.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Rhenium–osmium
method – The decay scheme in which rhenium-187 is
transformed to osmium-187 shows promise as a means of studying
mantle–crust evolution but has displayed
only limited potential for isotopic dating. Technical difficulties
have yet to be overcome. Osmium is strongly concentrated in
the mantle and extremely depleted in the crust, so that crustal
osmium must have exceedingly high radiogenic-to-stable ratios
while the mantle values are low. In fact, crustal levels are
so low that they are extremely difficult to measure with current
technology.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004
Deluxe Edition
The
fundamental problem preventing rhenium-osmium dating from
being used is the fact that the daughter isotope, osmium,
is “extremely depleted in the crust.” The result
is that the parent-to-daughter ratios of rhenium to osmium
are “so low” in crustal rock that current technology
cannot measure them. And this makes radiometric dating with
the rhenium-osmium pair impossible at the present time.
The
next method to be discussed is fission-track dating. Fission-track
dating is important because it covers the intervening gap
that is not covered by either carbon-14 or potassium-argon,
the 2 most prominent methods for constructing the evolutionary
timescale.
“Prehistoric
People, Placing prehistoric people in time – By
measuring the amount of each isotope in a fossil, scientists
can determine how long the decay has been going on and therefore
how old the fossil is. The most commonly used dating methods of
this type are radiocarbon dating and potassium-argon dating.”
– Worldbook, Contributor: Alan E. Mann, Ph.D., Professor
of Anthropology, Princeton
University.
“Geologic
Time, III DATING METHODS – The
two radioactive decay sequences most useful to geologists
are the decay of carbon-14 into nitrogen-14 and the decay
of potassium-40 into argon-40. Carbon-14, or radiocarbon,
dating works for organic materials less than about 50,000 years old…Geologists
can use potassium-argon dating to determine ages of rocks
from about 100,000 years old to as old as the earth itself.”
– "Geologic Time," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E7 Fission-Track Dating – The method works best
for micas, tektites, and meteorites. It has been used to help date the period from about 40,000 to 1 million years ago,
an interval not covered by carbon-14 or potassium-argon methods.”
– "Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Fission-track
dating is primarily used to date micas and tektites, which
are igneous and metamorphic rocks.
“Mica,
Origin and occurrence – Micas
may originate as the result of diverse processes under several
different conditions. Their occurrences, listed below, include
crystallization from consolidating magmas, deposition by fluids
derived from or directly associated with magmatic activities,
deposition by fluids circulating during both contact and regional
metamorphism, and formation as the result of alteration
processes—perhaps even those caused by weathering—that
involve minerals such as feldspars…The
common rock-forming micas are distributed widely. The more important occurrences follow: Biotite occurs in many igneous rocks (e.g., granites and granodiorites),
is common in many pegmatite masses, and constitutes one of the chief components of many metamorphic rocks
(e.g., gneisses, schists, and hornfelses). It alters rather
easily during chemical weathering and thus is
rare in sediments and sedimentary rocks.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Tektite
– any of a class of small, natural
glassy objects that are found only in certain areas of
the Earth's surface. The term is derived fromthe Greek word
tēktos, meaning “melted,” or “molten.”
Tektites have been the subject of intense scientific scrutiny
throughout much of the 20th century owing to their unknown
and possibly extraterrestrial origins, but they
are now recognized as having formed from the melting and rapid
cooling of terrestrial rocks that have been vaporized by the
high-energy impacts of large meteorites, comets, or asteroids
upon the surface of the Earth. The extremely high temperatures
and enormous pressures generated by such impacts melted the
rocks at the site, producing clouds of molten silicate droplets
that quickly cooled to a glassy form before falling back
to Earth.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe
Edition
“Metamorphic
rock – any
of a class of rocks that result from the alteration of preexisting
rocks in response to changing environmental conditions, such
as variations in temperature, pressure, and mechanical stress, and
the addition or subtraction of chemical components. The preexisting
rocks may be igneous, sedimentary, or othermetamorphic rocks.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Consequently,
because micas and tektites are igneous and metamorphic rocks,
fission-track dating suffers from the same debilitating reheating
and migration problems that inhibit all forms of igneous and
metamorphic rock dating, as we discussed in detailed earlier.
In fact, fission-track dating is “highly sensitive to
temperatures.”
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Fission-track
dating –
The
preservation of crystal damage (i.e., the retention of fission
tracks) is highly sensitive to temperature and varies
from mineral to mineral. The technique can be used to determine
mild thermal events as low as 100° C. Alternately, primary ages can be calculated if the rock was formed at
the surface and cooled quickly.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Since
heating events are deemed to cause falsely “young”
ages in fission-track dating, unexpected “young”
dates can be “corrected” and adjusted to get an
“older” date by removing problematic portions
of the sample.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Fission-track
dating –
A
special feature of fission-track dating lies in its ability
to map the uranium distribution within mineral grains. In a uranium map for single zircon grains,
the outer zones that grew during a major melting event contained
much more uranium than the grains originally present. The
uranium–lead age was highly biased toward the younger
event and the primary age could be determined only after the
outer zones were removed.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Thus,
fission-track dating is not based upon fixed, observable evidence
but upon assumed and adjustable numeric values that can change
dates that are too young into dates that fit the older, expected
evolutionary ages. However, since fission-track dating suffers
from some additional problems beyond the assumptions and adjustments
caused by reheating and migration, we will take the time to
focus on fission-track dating itself. Not only is fission-track
dating nullified if the rocks have been subjected to high
temperatures, but fission-track dating is also nullified if
the rocks have been exposed to cosmic-ray bombardment.
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E7 Fission-Track Dating – Rocks
subjected to high temperatures or exposed to cosmic-ray bombardment
at the earth's surface, however, may yield erroneous ages.”
– "Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Further
problems with fission-track dating stem from the process of
fission-track dating itself. Unlike other radiometric dating
methods, fission-track dating does not utilize measurements
or comparisons of parent-to-daughter ratios. Instead, fission-track
dating focuses on “tracks” or “trails”
left in crystals by the “spontaneous” breakdown
of uranium 238 “into two fragments of similar mass.”
This breakdown cracks the crystal and after being enlarged
by “an etching solution” or “strong acid,”
these cracks can be seen by powerful microscopes. Most importantly,
the uranium quantity is measured by bombarding the sample
with neutrons in a nuclear reactor. As stated in the quotes
below, a nuclear reactor is used to “induce” the
creation of new “fission-tracks.” And finally,
the age is calculated by comparing the number of cracks produced
artificially in the reactor by uranium-235 with the number
of cracks produced naturally by uranium-238.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Fission-track
dating – This is a
special type of dating method that makes use of a microscope
rather than a mass spectrometer, and capitalizes on damaged
zones, or tracks, created in crystals during the spontaneous
fission of uranium-238. In this unique type of radioactive
decay, the nucleus of a single parent uranium atom splits
into two fragments of similar mass with such force that a
trail of crystal damage is left in the mineral. Immersing
the sample in an etching solution of strong acid or base enlarges
the fission tracks into tube-shaped holes large enough to be seen under a high-powered microscope. The number
of tracks present can be used to calculate the age of the
sample if the uranium content is known. Fortunately the
uranium content of precisely the spot under scrutiny can be
obtained by a similar process when working with a polished
crystal surface. The
sample is bombarded with slow (thermal) neutrons in a nuclear
reactor, resulting in induced fission of uranium-235 (as opposed
to spontaneous fission of uranium-238). The
fission tracks produced by this process are recorded by
a thin plastic film placed against the surface of the sample.
The uranium content of the material can then be calculated so long as
the neutron dose is known. The age of the sample is obtained
using the equation, age = N × D s/D i × 6 × [10 to the power
of 8], in which N is the total neutron dose expressed as neutrons
per square centimetre and D s is the observed track density
for spontaneous fission while D i is that for induced fission.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E7 Fission-Track Dating – The
fission-track method, also known as spontaneous fission-track
dating, involves the paths, or tracks, of radiation damage
made by nuclear particles in a mineral or glass by the spontaneous
fission of uranium-238 impurities. Age
in years is calculated by determining the ratio of spontaneous
fission-track density to that of induced fission tracks.”
– "Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
The
most significant problem with this process surrounds the subjection
of the sample to a nuclear reactor in order to induce fission.
As mentioned earlier in our focus on potassium-argon dating,
Encyclopedia Britannica states that we can be confident that
decay rates are known, reliable, and constant because decay
processes take place “within the atomic nucleus.”
In short, decay rates are constant because they are governed
by processes that occur in a location that is isolated from
the influence of an “external forces.” Consequently,
it is the fact that decay processes are isolated from change
that guarantees decay rates remain constant.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating, Potassium–argon
methods – The
results show that there is no known process that can alter
the rate of radioactive decay. By way of explanation it
can be noted that since
the cause of the process lies deep within the atomic nucleus,
external forces such as extreme heat and pressure have no
effect. The same is true regarding gravitational, magnetic,
and electric fields, as well as the chemical state in which
the atom resides. In short, the
process of radioactive decay is immutable under all known
conditions. Although it is impossible to predict when
a particular atom will change, given a sufficient number of
atoms, the rate of
their decay is found to be constant. The situation is
analogous to the death rate among human populations insured
by an insurance company. Even though it is impossible to predict
when a given policyholder will die, the company can count
on paying off a certain number of beneficiaries every month.
The recognition that the
rate of decay of any radioactive parent atom is proportional
to the number of atoms (N) of the parent remaining at any
time gives rise to the following expression.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
However,
a nuclear reactor is clearly able to affect the processes
occurring in the atomic nucleus. In fact, as we have seen
concerning fission-track dating, the nuclear reacter is precisely
being used to affect the atomic nucleus and induce fission.
Furthermore, as we have also already seen, carbon-14 is created
by the interaction of neutrons with normal carbon in earth’s
atmosphere. Likewise, fission-track dating is using the nuclear
reactor to “bombard” the sample “with slow
(thermal) neutrons.” Clearly the measurement process
used in fission-track dating actually involves elements that
are capable of affecting and creating the very phenomena that
the process is designed to detect.
Moreover,
fission-track dating is also susceptible to errors resulting
from: uneven distributions of uranium (which affects the ability
to count the uranium content), statistical errors in counting
cracks, and “inaccurate estimates” regarding the
dose of neutron bombardment (which is also necessary to count
the uranium content and to use the number of cracks for dating
purposes).
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Fission-track
dating –
It
might also be noted that uncertainties in results may arise from an uneven distribution of uranium,
statistical errors in counting, and inaccurate estimates of
neutron flux (dose of neutrons).” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Effectively,
every critical step of this method is prone to problems that
result in erroneous ages. Due to all of these problems, fission-track
dating has largely been abandoned as a means of actually calculating
the age of a rock. Instead, it is used only for dating heating
and cooling events.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Fission-track
dating – In practice, fission-track dates are regarded
as cooling ages unless proved otherwise.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
In
conclusion, potassium-argon and carbon-14 dating methods fail
to work, resulting in the loss of the evolutionary timescale
from the present to 50,000 years ago and from 100,000 years
ago to the foundation of the earth. And, since fission-track
dating is nullified by reheating and migration events, by
cosmic-ray bombardment, by assumed and adjustable numeric
values that can change young ages into old ages, and by a
measuring process that can actually create the very decay
activity it is trying to measure, the evolutionary timescale
also loses the intervening period of 40,000 to 1 million years
provided by fission-track dating. As the radiometric dating
methods continue to crumble, not just from circular reasoning,
but from problems inherent to the individual methods themselves,
we arrive at one last isotope series used in radiometric dating,
the uranium-series.
Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating is the only radiometric dating method
that we have not covered. We will begin by examining the basic
concepts of uranium-series dating.
First,
due to the short half-lives of some of the isotopes involved,
this method is used to date relatively young items.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating – The isotopic dating methods
discussed so far are all based on long-lived radioactive isotopes
that have survived since the elements were created or on short-lived
isotopes that were recently produced by cosmic-ray bombardment.
The long-lived isotopes are difficult to use on young rocks
because the extremely small amounts of daughter isotopes present
are difficult to measure. A
third source of radioactive isotopes is provided by the uranium-
and thorium-decay chains. As noted in Table 3, these uranium–thorium series radioisotopes, like the cosmogenic
isotopes, have short half-lives and are thus suitable for
dating geologically young materials.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
This
dating method is known as “uranium-series” dating
instead of being known by the parent and daughter elements
because uranium breaks down to lead in a series of steps becoming
several different elements along the way. Thus, because numerous
daughter elements are produced along the decay chain, these
dating procedures are named according to their decay relationship
to the parent isotope uranium.
"Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E1 Basic Theory – Radioactive
elements such as uranium (U) and thorium (Th) decay
naturally to form different elements or isotopes of the same
element…A number of isotopes decay to a stable product,
a so-called daughter isotope, in a single step (for example,
carbon-14), whereas other series involve many steps before a stable isotope is formed.
Multistep radioactive
decay series include, for example, the uranium-235, uranium-238,
and thorium-232 families. If a daughter isotope is stable,
it accumulates until the parent isotope has completely decayed. If a daughter isotope is also radioactive, however, equilibrium is
reached when the daughter decays as fast as it is formed.”
– "Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating – The decay of uranium to lead
is not achieved by a single step but rather involves a whole
series of different elements, each with its own unique
set of chemical properties.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
As
indicated by the first quote above, the duration of time that
decay has been occurring is measued by the quantity of each
element in the decay chain. The ratio of the parent isotope
and all the daughter isotopes indicates how long decay has
been occurring and, therefore, the age of the item.
In
addition, there are 2 general decay chains used for dating
purposes, the radon to lead decay chain and the uranium to
thorium decay chain. As such, uranium-series dating is really
a grouping of 2 dating methods involving closely-related isotopes.
Because the issues involved are simpler and can be described
more briefly, first we will discuss the dating method involving
the decay of radon to lead. This dating method is specifically
known as “Lead-210 dating.”
Radon
is “a member” of the uranium to lead decay chain.
However, radon is a gas. Consequently, in nature radon-222
“escapes” from the ground into the atmosphere
where it decays to lead-210. Lead-210 then “falls”
back to the ground and becomes a part of “glacial ice”
and “sedimentary materials.”
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating, Lead-210 dating – The presence
of radon gas as a member of the uranium-decay
scheme provides a unique method for creating disequilibrium.
The gas radon-222 (222Rn)
escapes from the ground and decays rapidly in the atmosphere
to lead-210 (210Pb), which falls quickly to the surface where
it is incorporated in glacial ice and sedimentary materials.
By assuming that the present deposition rate also prevailed
in the past, the age of a given sample at depth can be estimated
by the residual amount of lead-210.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
problem with lead-210 dating method is that it is based upon
standard assumptions, which at this point have been shown
to be quite unreliable. In short, this dating method requires
that the rate of radon escape and the subsequent deposit of
lead into surface contents has remained constant throughout
the past. If these rates were not constant, then greater or
lesser amounts of lead would not reflect the amount of time
decay has occurred or, therefore, the age of the sample.
The
only basis for these calculations is this assumption of unaltered
uniformitarianism. Any degree of catastrophism would affect
this enough to prevent accurate dating. And, any major catastrophic
events, particularly those instrumental in glacier and sediment
formation, such as a global flood, would entirely nullify
this dating method. As we have already established in previous
segments, catastrophism is accepted even with uniformitarianism.
Therefore, the assumption that lead deposition has remained
uniform over time without any interference from occasional
or major catastrophic events is simply invalid. Furthermore,
the substantial historic and geological evidence for a global
flood also demonstrates that lead deposition, sediment formation,
and even glacial ice formation are not the result of uniform
processes but a rapid, cataclysmic natural event. Since the
foundational assumptions for lead-210 dating are not warranted
or valid, the method and the ages it renders cannot be considered
objective, empirical fact.
This
brings us to the uranium-thorium dating methods. Uranium-thorium
is itself divided into 2 versions: thorium-excess dating and
thorium-deficiency dating. In both versions, thorium is the
intervening daughter element that is focus of the procedure.
And the term “disequilibrium” dating is often
used to describe these methods because the “excess”
or “deficiency” of thorium is central to the calculation
of age.
In
thorium-excess dating, age measurements are based upon the
fact that samples contain more thorium than they should. As
indicated by the second quote below, this version of uranium-thorium
dating is used to date ocean-floor sediments. And, as also
indicated by the quotes below, “ionium” is simply
another name for the isotope thorium-230.
“Boltwood,
Bertram Borden – American
chemist and physicist whose work on the radioactive decay
of uranium and thorium was important in the development
of the theory of isotopes…He discovered ionium, now called thorium-230.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating – The
insoluble nature of thorium provides for an additional disequilibrium
situation that allows sedimentation
rates in the modern oceans to be determined. In this case,
thorium-230 in seawater, produced principally
by the decay of uranium-234, is deposited preferentially in
the sediment without the uranium-234 parent. This is defined as excess thorium-230 because its abundance exceeds
the equilibrium amount that should be present.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS, E Radiometric Dating,
E5 Methods Involving Thorium-230 – Thorium
ratio methods are used to date older oceanic sediments
beyond the range of radiocarbon techniques. Uranium
in seawater eventually decays to the thorium isotope, thorium-230
(also called ionium), which is precipitated into ocean-floor
sediments. Because it has been undergoing decay longer,
scientists can detect a decrease in quantity in higher levels,
and a time scale can
be developed in this way…The ionium-thorium age method,
applied to deep-sea sediments formed during the last 300,000
years, is based on the assumption that the initial ionium
content of accumulating sediments has remained constant for
the total section under study and is not derived from uranium
decay; the age of the sample depends on this ionium excess,
which decreases with time.” – "Dating
Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
As
indicated by the quotes above the basis for dating items using
thorium-excess can be described as follows. As indicated by
the second quote above, thorium is produced as uranium slowly
decays into insoluble thorium, which because it is not soluble
then accumulates slowly in sedimentary layers. The process
of sedimentation is slow because thorium is produced by the
slow process of uranium decay. And, because the quantity of
thorium in sedimentation is linked to uranium decay, the amount
of decay and therefore the age of the sediment are also indicated
by the quantity of thorium in the sediment.
Two
additional items are worth noting from the last quote above.
First, notice that the timeframe for uranium-thorium dating
is limited to the last 300,000 or sooner. And second, notice
the uranium-thorium dating is “based on the assumption
that the initial ionium content of accumulating sediments
has remained constant for the total section under study.”
This statement is important because it assert the requirement
for uranium deposition to be uniform. Conversely, non-uniform
deposits will nullify dating.
Moreover,
the thorium-excess method relies on comparing the quantities
of 3 different isotopes: uranium-234, thorium-230 (ionium),
and thorium-232.
“Absolute
dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series disequilibrium
dating, Thorium-230 dating – The
insoluble nature of thorium provides for an additional disequilibrium
situation that allows sedimentation rates in the modern oceans
to be determined. In this case, thorium-230
in seawater, produced principally by the decay of uranium-234,
is deposited preferentially in the sediment without the uranium-234
parent. This is defined as excess thorium-230 because its
abundance exceeds the equilibrium amount that should be present.
With time, the excess decays away and the age of any horizon in a core sample
can be estimated from the observed thorium-230-to-thorium-232
ratio in the seawater-derived component of the core. Sedimentation
rates between 1 and 20 millimetres per 1,000 years are commonly
found with slight variations between the major ocean basins.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Ionium-thorium
dating – method
of establishing the time of origin of marine sediments according
to the amount of ionium and thorium they contain. Because
uranium compounds are soluble in seawater, while thorium compounds
are quite insoluble, the thorium isotopes produced by the
decay of uranium in seawater are readily precipitated and
incorporated in sediments. One of these thorium isotopes,
thorium-230 (also known as ionium), has a half-life of about
80,000 years, which makes it suitable for dating sediments as old as 400,000 years. Thus, the amount
of ionium in sediments can be used as a rough measure of the
age of sediment. Accurate dating by measurement of ionium
alone requires that the rate of sedimentation of ionium be
constant with time, an assumption that does not hold for many
sediments; any thorium-232
present in seawater will also precipitate, and the decay of
the ratio of ionium to thorium-232 can be used as a measure
of time. This method does not require a constant rate of sedimentation
of ionium but simply that the two isotopes are precipitated
in a constant proportion.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Before
we move on to cover the basics of thorium-deficiency dating,
it is important to notice that the last quote above limits
this method to 400,000 years or less. Since a previous quote
denoted a limit of 300,000, it would appear that the limit
is somewhere between 300,000 and 400,000 years ago.
In
thorium-deficiency dating, age measurements are based upon
the fact that samples contain less thorium than they should.
This process is used to date fossil shells or coral.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating – For
example, an isotope of thorium is normally in equilibrium
with uranium-234 but is found to be virtually absent in modern
corals even though uranium-234 is present. Over a long
period of time uranium-234, however, decays to thorium-230, which results in a build-up
of the latter in old corals and thereby provides a precise measure of time.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS, E Radiometric Dating,
E5 Methods Involving Thorium-230 – In
the ionium-deficiency method, the age of fossil shell or coral
from 10,000 to 250,000 years old is based
on the growth of ionium toward equilibrium with uranium-238
and uranium-224, which entered the carbonate shortly after
its formation or burial.” – "Dating Methods,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
Modern
coral and fossil shells lack thorium but have uranium. The
basic concept is that modern samples don’t have thorium
because enough time has not elapsed for the uranium that is
present to decay into thorium. In contrast, older coral and
fossil shells have both thorium and uranium. Consequently,
based upon an assumed constant decay rate and the ratio of
uranium to thorium, an age can be determined for the samples
with thorium.
Lastly,
concerning the relationship between the thorium-excess and
the thorium-deficiency methods, it should be noted that both
methods are restricted to measuring the age of items on the
ocean floor. Thorium-excess is based upon the presence of
thorium in ocean floor sediments while thorium-deficiency
is based upon how much less thorium there is than uranium
in older shells and coral. Thus, one method measures the sediments
the other method measures the fossils.
Having
identified the basic concepts of both thorium-excess and thorium-deficiency
dating, we are ready to discuss some of the reasons why these
methods are not reliable for providing dates and ages. As
indicated in the quotes above, the underlying premise of both
thorium-excess and thorium-deficiency dating surrounds the
question of how different sediments and different fossils
came to have different amounts of thorium and uranium. The
evolutionary dating method assumes that these different quantities
are a result of the slow process of radioactive decay so that
the age of the items is reflected in the amount of uranium
or thorium decay that has occurred. Consequently, the question
is whether or not this assumption is true. Is the slow process
of radioactive decay directly responsible for the thorium
content of the sediments and fossils? Or, is the thorium content
just as likely to be the result of other factors, which themselves
do not provide a measure of time? Effectivley, the uranium
to thorium decay occurs but it occurs prior to its incorporation
into the sediments and fossils. Thus, the amount in the sediments
and fossils does not reflect the amount of decay or time.
To
answer these questions, we turn to the source of the key isotopes.
Uranium is the source from which the isotopes of thorium are
formed through the processes of decay.
“Boltwood,
Bertram Borden – American
chemist and physicist whose work on the radioactive decay
of uranium and thorium was important in the development
of the theory of isotopes.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating – In this case, thorium-230 in seawater, produced principally by the decay of uranium-234,
is deposited preferentially in the sediment without the
uranium-234 parent.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
Uranium
itself dissolves in seawater. However, thorium does not dissolve
in seawater.
“Ionium-thorium
dating – Because uranium
compounds are soluble in seawater, while thorium compounds are quite insoluble, the thorium isotopes produced
by the decay of uranium in seawater are readily precipitated
and incorporated in sediments.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating – The
insoluble nature of thorium provides for an additional disequilibrium
situation that allows sedimentation
rates in the modern oceans to be determined.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
fact that modern corals are only “virtually absent”
of thorium rather than completely absent of thorium indicates
that some small amount of thorium is present even in modern
corals.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating – For
example, an isotope of thorium is normally in equilibrium
with uranium-234 but
is found to be virtually absent in modern corals even
though uranium-234 is present.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
fact that thorium is only “virtually absent” and
therefore still present in modern corals is significant because
the amount of thorium even in “old” corals is
so small that detecting it requires highly sensitive equipment.
So, while “virtually absent” may seem like there
is relatively little or no thorium in modern corals, once
we realize that “old” corals have so little thorium
that they require special technology to detect their small
quantities of thorium, “virtually absent” is shown
to still be a comparable amount.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating – Most
of the studies using the intermediate daughter elements were
for years carried out by means of radioactive counting techniques—i.e.,
the number of atoms present was estimated by the radioactivity
of the sample. The
introduction of highly sensitive mass spectrometers that allow
the total number of atoms to be measured rather than the
much smaller number that decay has resulted in a revolutionary
change in the family of methods based on uranium and thorium
disequilibrium.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004
Deluxe Edition
Since
there has not been enough time for the thorium in modern corals
to have been produced by decay, that thorium must have gotten
into the corals from the surrounding environment. In this
case, the corals took in some thorium but they took in much
more uranium since it is water-soluble while thorium is not.
This indicates that the quantity of thorium in corals, whether
old or modern corals, is a result of taking in thorium from
the surrounding environment. And this leaves open the possibility
that thorium intake might have been greater in the past than
in the present, in which case the amount of thorium in old
corals would no longer be a result of long durations of decay
but simply of the amount of thorium originally taken in by
the coral. Further support stems from the process by which
fossils are formed, including the “fossil shell or coral”
used in thorium-deficiency dating. As indicated by the quote
below, the hard parts of organisms become fossilized when
they are buried in sediments and then their original molecular
composition is replaced by minerals or particles from the
surrounding sediment.
“Fossil
– The hard parts
of organisms that become buried in sediment may be subject
to a variety of other changes during their conversion to solid
rock, however. Solutions may fill the interstices, or pores, of the shell or bone
with calcium carbonate or other mineral salts and thus fossilize
the remains, in a process known as permineralization. In
other cases there may be a total replacement of the original
skeletal material by other mineral matter, a process known
as mineralization, or replacement.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Thus,
if the sediment or even the surrounding water were more rich
with thorium at a certain point in the past than the present,
then older, fossilized shells and corals would most likely
contain more thorium than modern corals, strictly as a function
of the increased presence of thorium in their environment,
not as a function of radioactive decay. This possibility becomes
even more relevant when we consider the fact that oceans have
currents to them.
“Ocean
current – horizontal
and vertical circulation system of ocean waters produced by
gravity, wind friction, and water density variation in different
parts of the ocean. The direction and form of oceanic
currents is governed by a number of natural forces, including
principally horizontal
pressure gradient forces; forces generated by variable density of seawater, which is a product of temperature and salinity variables;
the Coriolis forces, exerted by the rotating
Earth on all moving objects at or near the Earth's surface;
and friction, caused by winds blowing over
the ocean's surface as
well as the friction between different layers of water.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
These
currents are constantly churning and mixing ocean water. As
stated in the quotes below, the result of this churning and
mixing is that ocean waters tend to be homogeneous (of uniform
composition) as a whole while locally, from place to place,
there is “water of varying characteristics” such
as “salinity” or salt-content and generally “a
substantial variety of chemical distributions” in the
oceans. For reference, the word “particulate”
in the second quote below is defined by Merriam-Webster’s
Collegiate Dictionary as “minute separate particles,”
such as the particles of undissolved thorium in contrast to
dissolved uranium.
“Ocean,
Circulation of the ocean waters, General observations –
The general circulation of the oceans defines
the average movement of seawater, which, like the atmosphere,
follows a specific pattern. Superimposed on this pattern are
oscillations of tides and waves, which are not considered
part of the general circulation. There also are meanders and eddies
that represent temporal variations of the general circulation.
The ocean circulation pattern exchanges
water of varying characteristics, such as temperature and
salinity, within the interconnected network of oceans
and is an important part of the heat and freshwater fluxes
of the global climate.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Ocean,
Chemical and physical properties of seawater, Composition
of seawater – The
chemical composition of seawater is influenced by a wide variety
of chemical transport mechanisms. Rivers add dissolved
and particulate chemicals to the oceanic margins…Particulates in transit to the seafloor, as well as materials both on and within the seafloor, undergo chemical
exchange with surrounding solutions. Through these local
and regional chemical input and removal mechanisms, each element in the oceans tends to exhibit spatial and temporal concentration
variations. Physical mixing in the oceans (thermohaline
and wind-driven circulation; see below Circulation of the
ocean waters) tends to homogenize the chemical composition
of seawater. The opposing influences of physical mixing and of biogeochemical input
and removal mechanisms result in a substantial variety of
chemical distributions in the oceans.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Consequently,
the amount of thorium and uranium in any given region of seawater
can differ from place to place and from time to time as ocean
current mix and move various chemicals. In turn, the chemical
composition of seawater at any given time and place effects
the marine life of that area and time.
“Undersea
exploration, Methodology and instrumentation, Water sampling
for chemical constituents – Nutrient concentration
(e.g., phosphate, nitrate, silicate), the pH (acidity), and
the proportion of dissolved gases are used by the
ocean chemist to determine the age, origin, and movement
of water masses and their effect on marine life.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
As
a result, different amounts of thorium in either fossils or
sediments might indeed reflect only that the amount of uranium
and thorium in a particular area was significantly greater
in the past than in the present. Therefore, the differing
amounts of thorium and uranium would not be the result of
radioactive decay nor indicators of age, but merely the result
of larger concentrations of thorium and uranium carried in
ocean waters in the past. The presence of thorium in sedimentation
as a result of deposit from the surrounding environment rather
than from decay is implicit in the thorium-excess method,
as indicated by the quote below.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating – The
insoluble nature of thorium provides for an additional disequilibrium
situation that allows sedimentation
rates in the modern oceans to be determined. In this case,
thorium-230 in seawater, produced principally
by the decay of uranium-234, is deposited preferentially in
the sediment without the uranium-234 parent. This is defined as excess thorium-230 because its abundance exceeds
the equilibrium amount that should be present.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Next,
we will discuss what event could possibly have contributed
to a dramatically different intake of thorium by sea-floor
sediments, corals, and other now-fossilized sea-floor organisms
in the past. However, for now, this at least demonstrates
the potential for how the thorium quantity in modern corals
and fossils in contrast to old corals and fossils might not
be an indication of decay time or age. Thus, the thorium-deficiency
would not be an indicator of age at all.
As
to what could have caused thorium intake to be dramatically
different in the past than in the present, the answer is the
well-attested to global flood. Both uranium and thorium are
contents of volcanic activity and are contained in rock formations
along ocean ridges and on the ocean floor. This means that
these 2 elements are part of volcanic magma eruptions. There
are 2 major divisions of volcanic rock, the subalkaline and
the alkaline. The subalkaline group also has 2 divisions,
the tholeiitic series and the calc-alkalic series.
“Igneous
rock, Classification of igneous rocks, Classification of volcanic
and hypabyssal rocks – The
first major division is based on the alkali (soda + potash)
and silica contents, which yield
two groups, the subalkaline and alkaline rocks. The subalkaline
rocks have two divisions based mainly on the iron content
with the iron-rich group called the tholeiitic series and the iron-poor
group called calc-alkalic.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Rocks
from both the tholeiitic series and the calc-alkalic series
contain thorium and uranium, although the tholeiitic has less
of these elements than the calc-alkalic.
“Igneous
rock, Forms of occurrence, Distribution of igneous rocks on
the Earth's surface – Two
different series of rocks are found in some volcanic chains.
In Japan a tholeiitic
series and a calc-alkalic series sometimes erupt from the
same volcano. The former is characterized by lower magnesium,
potassium, nickel, chromium, uranium, and thorium and a higher
iron: magnesium ratio.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
These
subalkaline groups populate volcanic activity in the northwestern
U.S.
“Igneous
rock, Forms of occurrence, Distribution of igneous rocks on
the Earth's surface – Most
of the composite volcanoes of the Cascades
Range in Oregon and
Washington in the northwestern
United States
are characteristically calc-alkalic.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
But
more important to this dating method, these subalkaline groups
populate volcanic regions along oceanic ridges, ocean floors,
and island chains. This fact places them in the exact location
to function as the source of uranium and thorium in ocean-flood
sediments and fossils.
“Igneous
rock, Classification of igneous rocks, Classification of volcanic
and hypabyssal rocks – The
first major division is based on the alkali (soda + potash)
and silica contents, which yield two
groups, the subalkaline and alkaline rocks. The subalkaline
rocks have two divisions based mainly on the iron content
with the iron-rich group called the tholeiitic series and the iron-poor
group called calc-alkalic.
The former group is most commonly found
along the oceanic ridges and on the ocean floor; the latter group is characteristic of the volcanic regions of the continental
margins (convergent, or destructive, plate boundaries;
see below Forms of occurrence: Distribution of igneous rocks
on the Earth's surface). In
some magmatic arcs (groups of islands arranged in a curved
pattern), notably Japan, both the tholeiitic and calc-alkalic
series occur.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
In
addition, these volcanoes expel material from the mantle.
“Earth,
The structure and composition of the solid Earth –
Large-scale deformation of the mantle results in plate tectonics
at the surface and the related phenomena of earthquakes and
volcanoes.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Geologic
sciences, Study of the structure of the Earth, Volcanology
– A few volcanoes occur within oceanic plates
(e.g., along the Hawaiian chain); these
are interpretedas the tracks of plumes (ascending jets of
partially molten mantle material) that formed when such
a plate moved overhot spots fixed in the mantle.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Volcanism
– The majority of active terrestrial volcanoes (roughly
80 percent) and related phenomena occur where two lithospheric
plates converge and one overrides the other, forcing it down
into the mantle to be reabsorbed…A second major site of active volcanism
is along the axis of the mid-ocean ridge system, where
the plates move apart on both sides of the ridge, and
magma wells up from the mantle, creating new ocean floor
along the trailing edges ofboth plates. Virtually
all of this volcanic activity occurs under water.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
As
indicated specifically by the first 2 quotes below, oceanic
magma comes from the asthenosphere, which is part of the mantle.
“Igneous
rock, Origin and distribution, Origin of magmas –
Basaltic magmas that form the oceanic crust
of the Earth are generated in the asthenosphere at a depth
of about 70 kilometres. The mantle rocks located at depths
from about 70 to 200 kilometres are believed to exist at temperatures
slightly above their melting point, and possibly 1 or 2 percentof
the rocks occur in the molten state.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Continental
drift – By the late 1960s several American investigators,
among them Jack E. Oliver and Bryan L. Isacks, had integrated
this notion of seafloor spreading with that of drifting continents
and formulated the basis of plate tectonic theory. According
to the latter hypothesis, the Earth's surface, or lithosphere,
is composed of a number of large, rigid plates that float
on a soft (presumably
partially molten) layer of the mantle known as the asthenosphere.
The midocean ridges occur along some of the plate margins.
Where this is the case, the lithospheric plates separate and
the upwelling mantle material forms new ocean floor along
the trailing edges.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
Furthermore,
it is a known fact that volcanic activity contributes to the
content of seawater.
“Marine
ecosystem, The marine environment, Physical and chemical properties
of seawater – The
physical and chemical properties of seawater vary according
to latitude, depth, nearness to land, and input of fresh water.
Approximately 3.5 percent of seawater is composed of dissolved
compounds, while the other 96.5 percent is pure water. The chemical composition of seawater reflects
such processes as erosion of rock and sediments, volcanic activity, gas exchange with
the atmosphere, the metabolic and breakdownproducts of organisms,
and rain.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe
Edition
Three
facts plainly demonstrate that the mantle itself is the source
of the oceans’ uranium and thorium content. Rock from
these volcanoes is comprised of uranium and thorium. These
volcanoes are emitting material from the mantle. And volcanic
activity contributes to the contents of seawater.
In
addition, the following facts also corroborate the presence
of uranium and thorium in the mantle and in the magma that
erupts during oceanic volcanic activity. First, both uranium
and thorium are extremely heavy elements.
“Uranium
– Uranium constitutes about two parts per million of
the Earth's crust. Uranium is a dense, hard metallic
element that is silvery-white in colour.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Chemical
elements, Geochemical distribution of the elements, The geochemical
cycle, Early history of the Earth –
Uranium and thorium, for example, are very heavy elements…”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
fact that uranium and thorium are heavy means that they should
sink down toward the core.
“Chemical
elements, Geochemical distribution of the elements, The geochemical
cycle, Early history of the Earth – Much
of the iron was reduced to the metallic state and sank to
the centre to form the core, carrying with it the major
part of the siderophile elements…As
indicated above, the metal sank to form the core, carrying
with it the major part of the siderophile elements.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
However,
these elements are also lithophiles or “oxygen-loving”
and, as indicated in the quote below, “oxygen-loving”
elements “provided material for the mantle and crust.”
Uranium and thorium are even explicitly placed in this category
of “oxygen-loving” heavy elements that do not
sink toward the core. Specifically, the fact that uranium
and thorium do not sink is contrasted to iron, another heavy
element which does sink.
“Chemical
elements, Geochemical distribution of the elements, The geochemical
cycle, Early history of the Earth – Much of the
iron was reduced to the metallic state and sank to the centre
to form the core, carrying with it the major part of the siderophile
elements. Lithophile
elements, those with a greater affinity for oxygen than iron,
combined as oxide compounds, mostly silicates, and provided
material for the mantle and crust…Uranium
and thorium, for example, are very heavy elements; nevertheless,
they are concentrated in the crust, not in the core,
because of their lithophile character (affinity for oxygen).”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
combined qualities of heaviness and oxygen affinity would
expectedly cause uranium and thorium to sink but not go as
deep as iron. This would expectedly place them in the molten
mantle, but instead, the crust seems far more enriched with
these elements than the mantle. As the quotes below indicate,
crustal rocks contain about 50 times as much uranium than
the rest of the earth and thorium is about “three times
more abundant” in the crust than uranium.
“Earth,
The interior – The
Earth is geochemically differentiated to a great extent.
Crustal rocks contain about twice as much of the rock-forming element
aluminum as does the rest of the solid Earth and nearly 50 times as much uranium.
“Uranium
– Uranium constitutes about two parts per million of
the Earth's crust. Uranium is a dense, hard metallic
element that is silvery-white in colour.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Thorium
– (Th), radioactive chemical element of the actinide
series, in Group IIIb of the periodic table, atomic number
90; it is a useful nuclear-reactor fuel… It
is about half as abundant as lead and is three times more
abundant than uranium in the Earth's crust.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Chemical
element, Terrestrial distribution, The earth’s mantle
– It is thus probable that the mantle is relatively
depleted, and the crust relatively enriched, in minor
and trace elements. This is certainly true for uranium and thorium, because the amount of these elements in the crust
is almost sufficient to account for the total amount of heat
flowing out of the Earth.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
relevance of these facts can be summarized as follows. A massive,
literally “earth-shattering” catastrophe, such
as the Flood, involves the cracking of the crust accompanied
by unprecedented volcanic activity, particularly along the
ocean floor. This unprecedented volume of volcanic activity
expels uranium and thorium that was previously concentrated
in the upper mantle into the oceans in large enough quantity
to supply the crust with much of its current uranium and thorium.
Thus, the thorium along the ocean floor is not strictly the
product of uranium decay but already existed in the upper
mantle. Once expelled, the uranium dissolves in the seawater
but the thorium does not dissolve. So, the thorium settles
out as part of the sedimentation. The presence of undissolved
thorium would account for the burial of thorium in excessive
amounts in ocean floor sediment. However, this process would
indicate a massive amount of thorium was buried layer after
layer in a very short time rather than being built up slowly
as uranium decayed to thorium, which then gradually accumulated
into sedimentary layers. Since fossils are formed as elements
from the environment replace molecules in the body of the
dead organism, with the large-scale inflow of thorium, we
would expect to find larger amounts of thorium in corals and
shells fossilized in the flood. Conversely, the removal of
thorium due to the relatively quick sedimentation would further
explain why modern corals and fossils since this catastrophe
do not contain the same saturation of thorium as their buried
ancestors who experienced this disaster.
In
conclusion, neither the thorium-excess in ocean-floor sediments
nor the thorium-deficiency in ocean fossils, such as shells
and corals, necessarily reflects the length of time radioactive
decay has been occurring or the age of ocean-floor sediments
or fossils. Like the other dating methods we have examined,
it is only the assumptions and not the evidence itself, which
produces the long ages in these dating methods. Concerning
the uranium series dating methods, we can see that there still
remains no observed, empirical evidence for suggesting the
earth is older than 6 to 10 thousand years. As this point,
there are only 2 aspects of absolute dating that have not
been discussed, radioactive decay rates and non-radiometric
forms of absolute dating. We will cover each of these topics
in our next 2 segments.
Focus
on Critical Evidence: The Reliability of Decay Rates
Our
first five segments on radiometric dating have now been completed.
We have covered the basics of radiometric dating, the general
obstacles to igneous and metamorphic dating, the particular
obstacles facing the prominent potassium-argon method, the
obstacles facing the carbon-14 method as well as the problems
a global flood imposes on all these dating methods, and the
minor remaining radiometric dating methods. Only one topic
of radiometric dating remains: a direct examination of the
radioactive decay rates. Although we have already demonstrated
the incompetence of all the radiometric dating methods in
detailed fashion throughout the preceding segments, we have
saved a discussion of the decay rates until last because the
problems with the decay rates affect almost all radiometric
dating methods, with the possible exception of carbon-14 since
it has a much shorter half-life. Thus, covering decay rates
after sufficient proofs have already been provided against
all radiometric dating methods functions as a final sweep
or final nail in the coffin for radiometric dating.
First,
it is important to restate the fact that radioactive decay
rates must be known in order to calculate radiometric ages.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating –
3. The decay constant must be known.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating –
The age calculated is only as good as the
existing knowledge of the decay rate and is valid only if
this rate is constant over the time that elapsed.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
In
addition, as indicated by the last quote above, the decay
rate must not only be accurate, but it must be a constant
rate. In other words, the decay rate cannot change or fluctuate
over time. If an incorrect rate is used in calculations or
if the rate is non-constant but can change over time, then
the age calculations will simply be incorrect and will either
be too high or too low depending upon exactly how the actual
decay rate differs from the rate used in the age calculation.
As
established very early on in our discussion of radiometric
dating, half-lives and decay rates are directly related.
“Geologic
Time, III DATING METHODS – Radioactive
elements decay to form elements or isotopes (atoms of
an element that differ in mass but share the same general
chemical properties) of an element. An element's half-life is the time required
for half the number of its atoms to decay. Different elements can have dramatically different half-lives.”
– "Geologic Time," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating –
Half-life is defined as the time period
that must elapse in order to halve the initial number of radioactive
atoms. The half-life
and the decay constant are inversely proportional because
rapidly decaying radioisotopes have a high decay constant
but a short half-life.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E1 Basic Theory – Scientists
describe the radioactivity of an element in terms of half-life,
the time the element takes to lose 50 percent of its activity
by decay. This covers an extraordinary range
of time, from billions of years to a few microseconds.
At the end of the period
constituting one half-life, half of the original quantity
of radioactive element has decayed; after another half-life,
half of what was left is halved again, leaving one-fourth
of the original quantity, and so on. Every
radioactive element has its own half-life; for example,
that of carbon-14 is
5730 years and that of uranium-238
is 4.5 billion years.” – "Dating Methods,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
As
indicated by the quotes above, half-lives are measurements
in years of how long it will take for half the quantity of
a particular radioactive isotope to decay into its daughter
isotope. If a radioactive isotope decays quickly, it will
take less time for half of that isotope to decay or change
into another isotope. And conversely, radioactive isotopes
with slower decay rates require more time in order for half
of their quantity to decay into the daughter isotope.
And,
as we also stated during our discussion of the basic concepts
of radiometric dating, all radiometric dating methods are
sorted into 2 categories based upon whether they have short
half-lives or long half-lives. Furthermore, the quotes below
assert that only carbon-14 dating and uranium-thorium fall
into the category of isotopes with short half-lives. All other
dating methods use isotopes with half-lives that are deemed
to be long term.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating –
Of course, one must select geologic materials
that contain elements with long half-lives—i.e., those
for which some parent atoms would remain.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium-series
disequilibrium dating – The isotopic dating methods
discussed so far are all based on long-lived
radioactive isotopes that have survived since the elements
were created or on short-lived isotopes that were recently
produced by cosmic-ray bombardment. The long-lived isotopes
are difficult to use on young rocks because the extremely
small amounts of daughter isotopes present are difficult to
measure. A third
source of radioactive isotopes is provided by the uranium-
and thorium-decay chains. As noted in Table 3, these
uranium–thorium series radioisotopes, like the cosmogenic
isotopes, have short half-lives and are thus suitable for
dating geologically young materials.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Evaluation and presentation schemes in dating,
Origin of radioactive elements used – When the elements
in the Earth were first created, many radioactive isotopes
were present. Of these, only the radioisotopes with extremely
long half-lives remain…Natural elements that are still radioactive
today produce daughter products at a very slow rate; hence,
it is easy to date very old minerals but difficult to obtain
the age of those formed in the recent geologic past. This
follows from the fact that the amount of daughter isotopes present
is so small that it is difficult to measure…Geologic events of the not-too-distant past are more easily dated by
using recently formed radioisotopes with short half-lives
that produce more daughter products per unit time. Two
sources of such isotopes exist. In one case, intermediate
isotopes in the uranium
or thorium decay chain can become isolated in certain
minerals due to differences in chemical properties and, once
fixed, can decay to new isotopes, providing a measure of the
time elapsed since they were isolated…Another
special type of dating employs recently formed radioisotopes
produced by cosmic-ray bombardment of target atoms at the
Earth's surface or in the atmosphere. The amounts produced,
although small, provide insight into many near-surface processes
in the geologic past. This aspect of geology is becoming increasingly
important as researchers try to read the global changes that
took place during the Earth's recent past in an effort to
understand or predict the future. The
most widely used radioactive cosmogenic isotope is carbon
of mass 14 (14C), which provides a method of dating events
that have occurred over roughly the past 50,000 years.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Of
course, it should also be stated that while carbon-14 has
a short half-life of 5,730 years, the 2 different forms of
the isotope thorium have half-lives of 10 billion and 80,000
years respectively.
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E1 Basic Theory – At the end of the period constituting
one half-life, half of the original quantity of radioactive element has
decayed; after another half-life, half of what was left
is halved again, leaving one-fourth of the original quantity,
and so on. Every radioactive element has its own half-life; for example, that of
carbon-14 is 5730 years and that of uranium-238 is 4.5 billion
years.” – "Dating Methods," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
“Radiocarbon
– The radiocarbon
already in the tissues continues to decrease at a constant
rate. This steady decay at a known rate-a half-life of approximately
5,730 years-enables scientists to determine an object's
age.” – Worldbook, Contributor: Rainer Berger,
Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology, Geography, and Geophysics,
University of California,
Los Angeles.
“Thorium
– Natural thorium
is a mixture of radioactive isotopes, predominantly the very
long-lived thorium-232 (1.41 × [10 to the 10th power or 10 billion]
year half-life), the parent of the thorium radioactive-decay
series.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe
Edition
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS, E Radiometric Dating,
E5 Methods Involving Thorium-230 – Thorium-230,
part of the uranium-238 decay series, has a half-life of 80,000 years.” – "Dating Methods,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
Consequently,
since the lowest thorium half-life is 80,000 years, thorium
still falls under the category of dating methods that suffer
from the primary issue surrounding radioactive isotopes with
long half-lives. In short, for isotopes with short half-lives,
such as carbon-14, their decay occurs within a short enough
timeframe that a sufficient portion of it can be observed.
As such, it can be confirmed that isotopes that decay quickly
do so at exponential or constant rates. However, for isotopes
with long half-lives, their decay occurs over such a long
time that no human has or can observe it. In fact, their decay
takes so long, that the fraction we can observe is not sufficient
to consider it representative of the whole process. As such,
it cannot be confirmed whether or not isotopes that decay
over long periods are exponential and constant or instead
vary and fluctuate over time. Consequently, constant and exponential
rates have to be assumed for long half-life isotopes. And
the sheer length of time decay requires in these isotopes
is significant grounds for questioning whether or not the
decay rate could or does remain constant over such exceedingly
long spans.
The
basis for assuming that radioactive decay rates remain constant
and do not change even in isotopes with extremely long half-lives
is expressed in the following quotes.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating –
The results show that there is no known
process that can alter the rate of radioactive decay. By
way of explanation it can be noted that since
the cause of the process lies deep within the atomic nucleus,
external forces such as extreme heat and pressure have no
effect. The same is true regarding gravitational, magnetic,
and electric fields, as well as the chemical state in which
the atom resides. In short, the
process of radioactive decay is immutable under all known
conditions. Although it is impossible to predict when
a particular atom will change, given a sufficient number of
atoms, the rate of
their decay is found to be constant.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“…there
is no reason to doubt that the decay constants of the naturally
occurring long-lived radioactive isotopes used for dating
are invariant and independent of the physical and chemical
conditions to which they have been subjected…”
– Faure, G., Principles
of Isotope Geology, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New
York, p. 41, 1986 (Cited in “Radioactive Decay Update:
Breaking Down the Old Age Paradigm,” Dr. Keith Wanser,
AnswersInGenesis.org, Copyright 2003 Answers in Genesis, 4
minutes, 50 seconds)
According
to Encyclopedia Britannica, we can be confident that decay
rates are known, reliable, and constant because decay processes
take place “within the atomic nucleus.” In short,
decay rates are constant because they are governed by processes
that occur in a location that is isolated from the influence
of an “external forces.” Consequently, it is the
concept that decay processes are isolated from forces outside
the nucleus, which serves as the basis for assuming that decay
rates remain constant. As such, the entire reliability of
decay rates and the subsequent accuracy of radiometric ages
comes down to whether or not radioactive decay really is isolated
from any factors that would alter its rate of occurrence.
And what we find is that there are 3 specific “external”
factors that are known to altar decay rates, and in fact,
decay rates in general are admitted to be alterable and non-constant.
The
first external factor, which can alter decay rates, is cosmic
ray bombardment. Cosmic rays are electrons and neutrons that
travel throughout the galaxy unattached to atoms.
“Cosmic
ray – a high-speed
particle—either an atomic nucleus or an electron—that travels throughout the Milky Way Galaxy,
including the solar system.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Below
is an image depicting the affect that cosmic ray bombardment
can have on an atom.
“[PHOTO
CAPTION] Cosmic Rays – Cosmic
rays are extremely energetic subatomic particles that travel
through outer space at nearly the speed of light…A cosmic-ray particle produced the track that starts at the top left
corner of the photograph; this particle collided with a nucleus
in the center of the photograph to create a spray of subatomic
particles. Powell-Fowler-Perkins/Photo Researchers, Inc.”
– "Cosmic Rays," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Additional
insight into the ability of cosmic rays to trigger change
in atomic structure can be seen in the fact that cosmic rays
are the phenomenon that causes the nuclear changes, which
create the radioactive isotope carbon-14.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Evaluation and presentation schemes in dating,
Origin of radioactive elements used – Another special
type of dating employs recently formed radioisotopes produced
by cosmic-ray bombardment of target atoms at the Earth's surface
or in the atmosphere…The most widely used radioactive
cosmogenic isotope is carbon of mass 14 (14C), which provides
a method of dating events that have occurred over roughly
the past 50,000 years.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Carbon-14
dating – also called radiocarbon dating, method
of age determination that depends upon the decay to nitrogen
of radiocarbon (carbon-14). Carbon-14
is continually formed in nature by the interaction of neutrons
with nitrogen-14 in the Earth's atmosphere; the neutrons required
for this reaction are produced by cosmic rays interacting
with the atmosphere.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS, B Absolute Dating, B3 Radiocarbon
Dating – Radiation
from space produces neutrons that enter the earth's atmosphere
and react with nitrogen to produce the carbon isotope C-14
(carbon 14).” – "Archaeology," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
“Radiocarbon
– In nature,
radiocarbon forms when high-energy atomic particles called
cosmic rays smash into Earth's atmosphere. Cosmic rays cause
atoms in the atmosphere to break down into electrons, neutrons,
protons, and other particles. Some neutrons strike the nuclei
of nitrogen atoms in the atmosphere. Each of these nuclei
absorbs a neutron and then loses a proton. In this way, a
nitrogen atom becomes a radiocarbon atom.” –
Worldbook, Contributor: Rainer Berger, Ph.D., Professor of
Anthropology, Geography, and Geophysics, University of California,
Los Angeles.
From
their general interaction with atomic nuclei to their specific
production of the radioactive isotope carbon-14, we know that
cosmic rays can certain penetrate into the nuclear structure
of an atom and affect the changes that transform one isotope
into another. Consequently, cosmic rays meet the criteria
necessary to impact decay rates. But does the neutron bombardment
in cosmic rays actually trigger, not just isotope building,
but isotope breakdown or decay?
The
answer is “yes.” The fact that neutron bombardment
can trigger decay is so well-known that inducing decay by
neutron bombardment is actually a part of the fission-track
absolute dating method, as indicated by the following quotes
from Britannica Encyclopedia and Microsoft Encarta.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Fission-track
dating – This is a
special type of dating method that makes use of a microscope
rather than a mass spectrometer, and capitalizes on damaged
zones, or tracks, created in crystals during the spontaneous
fission of uranium-238. In this unique type of radioactive
decay, the nucleus of a single parent uranium atom splits
into two fragments of similar mass with such force that a
trail of crystal damage is left in the mineral…The sample
is bombarded with slow (thermal) neutrons in a nuclear reactor,
resulting in induced fission of uranium-235 (as opposed to
spontaneous fission of uranium-238). The fission tracks
produced by this process are recorded by a thin plastic film
placed against the surface of the sample. The
uranium content of the material can then be calculated so
long as the neutron dose is known. The age of the sample
is obtained using the equation, age = N × D s/D i × 6 × [10
to the power of 8], in which N is the total neutron dose expressed
as neutrons per square centimetre and D s is the observed
track density for spontaneous fission while D i is that for
induced fission.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E7 Fission-Track Dating – The
fission-track method, also known as spontaneous fission-track
dating, involves the paths, or tracks, of radiation damage
made by nuclear particles in a mineral or glass by the spontaneous
fission of uranium-238 impurities. Age
in years is calculated by determining the ratio of spontaneous
fission-track density to that of induced fission tracks.”
– "Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
The
next question to arise is this. Do cosmic rays come into contact
with the wide variety of radioactive isotopes on earth that
are used in radioactive dating? Or do cosmic rays remain solely
in the upper atmosphere where they create only carbon-14?
Once again, the answer is “yes,” cosmic rays do
penetrate to the surface of the earth.
“Cosmic
ray – Cosmic-ray
studies have been carried out from far below the Earth's surface
to outer space.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004
Deluxe Edition
“Cosmic
rays – There
are two kinds of cosmic rays: (1)
primary cosmic rays, or primaries, which originate in
outer space; and (2) secondary cosmic rays, or secondaries, which originate in the
earth's atmosphere. Secondaries form when primaries collide
with atoms at the top of the atmosphere. The collision changes
the primary and the atom into a shower of secondaries. Many
secondaries then collide with other atoms, making more secondaries.
Some secondaries reach the surface and even penetrate deep
into the ground. No measurable amount of primaries reaches
the earth's surface…Secondary cosmic rays –
Secondaries slow down in the atmosphere. Only a small fraction
of them reach the earth. Every
minute, about six secondaries strike each square inch of the
earth. Because of the earth's magnetic field, the concentration
is lower near the equator than near the poles…Since
the 1960's, scientists have used balloons and spacecraft to
study low- and medium-energy primaries. They have used large instruments on the
ground to study secondaries.” – Worldbook,
Contributor: R. B. McKibben, Ph.D., Senior Scientist, Enrico
Fermi Institute, University of Chicago.
This
is a fundamental problem that geochronologists have to deal
with when performing absolute dating. Please note that the
quotes attesting to this fact come from Microsoft Encarta.
“Geology,
V Fields of Geology, B Historical Geology, B3 Geochronology
– The determination of the age of rocks is
called geochronology. The fundamental tool of geochronology
is radiometric dating (the use of radioactive decay processes
as recorded in earth materials to determine the numerical
age of rocks)…Geologists also have ways to determine
the ages of surfaces that have been exposed to the sun and
to cosmic rays.” – "Geology," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS. E Radiometric Dating,
E7 Fission-Track Dating – Rocks
subjected to high temperatures or
exposed to cosmic-ray bombardment at the earth's surface,
however, may yield erroneous ages.” – "Dating
Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
In
conclusion regarding cosmic rays, given that cosmic rays are
admittedly able to penetrate to the surface of the earth and
affect the decay rates in sample materials, it simply is not
accurate to assert that decay rates are “immutable under
all known conditions” and therefore can be assumed to
be “constant” over long periods of time. Decay
rates are quite alterable and this fact is so well known that
scientists have to try to identify it in samples and some
radioactive dating methods (particulalry fission-track dating)
actually take advantage of the ability to affect decay rates
by neutron bombardment.
The
second external factor, which can alter decay rates, is the
chemical environment surrounding the isotopes. As can be seen
in the quotes below, the potential impact of the chemical
environment is commonly denied in by secular and evolutionist
sources.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating –
The results show that there is no known
process that can alter the rate of radioactive decay. By
way of explanation it can be noted that since
the cause of the process lies deep within the atomic nucleus,
external forces such as extreme heat and pressure have no
effect. The same is true regarding gravitational, magnetic,
and electric fields, as
well as the chemical state in which the atom resides.
In short, the process of radioactive decay is immutable
under all known conditions. Although it is impossible
to predict when a particular atom will change, given a sufficient
number of atoms, the
rate of their decay is found to be constant.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“…there
is no reason to doubt that the decay constants of the naturally
occurring long-lived radioactive isotopes used for dating
are invariant and independent of the physical and chemical
conditions to which they have been subjected…”
– Faure, G., Principles
of Isotope Geology, 2nd ed., John Wiley & Sons, New
York, p. 41, 1986 (Cited in “Radioactive Decay Update:
Breaking Down the Old Age Paradigm,” Dr. Keith Wanser,
AnswersInGenesis.org, Copyright 2003 Answers in Genesis, 4
minutes, 50 seconds)
However,
mainstream science publications probe the issue further and
state that experimental evidence confirms the opposite conclusion,
that the surrounding chemical environment does affect decay
rates.
“A
couple years back, there was this article published in
Earth & Planetary Science Letters in 1999…indeed they
found a fairly large dependence on radioactive decay rates
for Beryllium 7 on the chemical species. In other words,
the chemistry outside the nucleus is not supposed to have much of an
effect on the nuclear decay rates. It’s supposed to
be independent of the outside world, the nuclear decay
rates. And here they found as much as a one and a half percent variation…That
was a big deal at that time because before that time things
were less than a tenth of a percent variation. So, we got
one and a half percent variation with the chemical coordination
that was around it. For instance, they had Beryllium, H20 with
a four, so there are different hydroxides around it, different
number of hydrogens and oxygens around the Beryllium nucleus,
changes the electron density, how much electron clouds there
are around the charged entity around the nucleus. And that
affects the decay rates…But that’s not stunning.
One and a half percent is not going to change things much.”
– “Radioactive Decay Update: Breaking Down the
Old Age Paradigm,” Dr. Keith Wanser, AnswersInGenesis.org,
Copyright 2003 Answers in Genesis, 5 minutes, 15 seconds
While
the percentage of change is in the case of Beryllium was not
a large number, it’s occurrence does disprove the essential
assumption that decay rates are not affected by chemical environment.
The
third external factor, which can alter decay rates, can really
be subdivided into 2 phenomena known as the Quantum Xeno Effect
and the Quantum Anti-Xeno Effect. The Quantum Xeno Effect
is a documented phenomenon in which decay rates are actually
slowed down by repeated observation.
“In
the secular literature, lots of folks are getting interested
in acceleration of quantum decay processes
and studying in a more fundamental way quantum decay processes
because all of the stuff that was done early on was very crude
and a lot of approximations. And
there’s something called the Xeno Effect…What
happens when you lift the pot and its boiling? If you lift
the lid too often what happens? Does it ever finish cooking?
A watched kettle doesn’t boil, if you keep watching
it, too frequent observations. And that’s what they
find in quantum mechanics. It’s called the Xeno Effect.
The thing will never decay if you keep watching it, if
you measure it too often to see if has decayed or not. It’s
called the Quantum Xeno Effect.” – “Radioactive
Decay Update: Breaking Down the Old Age Paradigm,” Dr.
Keith Wanser, AnswersInGenesis.org, Copyright 2003 Answers
in Genesis, 9 minutes and 20 seconds
Conversely,
the Quantum Anti-Xeno Effect is also a documented phenomenon
in which decay rates actually speed up by repeated observation.
“Well…there’s
a Quantum Anti-Xeno Effect and that’s more interesting.
Now, the Quantum Anti-Xeno Effect says if you start looking
at something, you can actually perturb it and make it decay
faster.” – “Radioactive Decay Update:
Breaking Down the Old Age Paradigm,” Dr. Keith Wanser,
AnswersInGenesis.org, Copyright 2003 Answers in Genesis, 10
minutes and 20 seconds
Once
again, the Quantum Xeno and Anti-Xeno Effects demonstrates
that the decay rates are not unaffected by external factors
but instead, decay rates are indeed alterable.
Lastly,
it is known that decay rates are generally alterable and non-constant.
Creationist Dr. Keith Wanser sums up the current status in
the following quote.
“In
the secular literature, lots of folks are getting interested
in acceleration of quantum decay processes
and studying in a more fundamental way quantum decay processes
because all of the stuff that was done early on was very crude
and a lot of approximations.” –
“Radioactive Decay Update: Breaking Down the Old
Age Paradigm,” Dr. Keith Wanser, AnswersInGenesis.org,
Copyright 2003 Answers in Genesis, 9 minutes, 20 seconds
Once
again, the idea that decay rates are alterable and non-constant
is denied in by secular and evolutionist sources. However,
mainstream science publications probe the issue further and
state that experimental evidence confirms the opposite conclusion,
that decay rates are alterable and non-constant. Here Dr.
Wanser cites an article in the journal Nature titled, ““Acceleration
of quantum decay processes by frequent observations,”
by A.G. Kofman & G. Kurtzki of the Department of Chemical
Physics at The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovet
76100, Israel.
(This bibliographic information was provided by Dr. Wanser
during his presentation.)
“This
is a fairly recent article in Nature,
June 2000, where they are sorting this out…There’s people out there
who are studying these
things and they find out there’s non-exponential decay
all over the place…They’re finding out there really is
non-exponential decay in a lot of systems, in a variety of
systems…Before people inferred, they assumed they
had exponential decay over unobservable times. They would
take short-lived isotopes and…they could measure these
exponential decays very accurately. But in the longer-lived
ones you can’t measure whether it’s an exponential
or not. And the question remains, is it an exponential? They
have to assume an exponential decay law to get these long
ages.” –
“Radioactive Decay Update: Breaking Down the Old
Age Paradigm,” Dr. Keith Wanser, AnswersInGenesis.org,
Copyright 2003 Answers in Genesis, 10 minutes, 35 seconds
Dr.
Wanser also cites other secular, evolutionary scientists who
affirm that decay is not exponential and constant.
“A
very famous guy, J. J. Sakurai, he’s a particle theorist.
And in his textbook he has a whole section on how you get
non-exponential decays (J. J. Sakurai, Modern
Quantum Mechanics Revised Edition, 1994).”
– “Radioactive Decay Update: Breaking Down the
Old Age Paradigm,” Dr. Keith Wanser, AnswersInGenesis.org,
Copyright 2003 Answers in Genesis, 11 minutes, 55 seconds
“Here’s
another very recent paper, just came out in 2002, simulating some of the simplest things because it turns out that calculations
in this business are very hard. They require lots of computing power and that’s one of the reasons
why there hasn’t been a lot of progress. But, now people are starting to get enough computing
power to be able to examine these things in detail. So,
here it is again, some
people in a secular situation, just examining the decay rate
as a function of time. What happens? And here’s what
they find…highly non-exponential decay. And this is
just out of a very simple system…Nobody’s carefully
investigated this for long-lived isotopes…it’s
a little bit tricky of a problem. There are some complications…When
things are really long-lived, you have to let the system go
back and forth for about 10 to the fiftieth oscillations and that’s
pretty hard for computers to go that many steps…Here they’re showing the difference
between what you would get if it was constant decay…and
you see this decay constant isn’t so constant.”
– “Radioactive Decay Update: Breaking Down the
Old Age Paradigm,” Dr. Keith Wanser, AnswersInGenesis.org,
Copyright 2003 Answers in Genesis, 16 minutes, 40 seconds
In
the quote above, notice the reference to the complexity of
the equations and the enormous computing power required to
perform such calculations. Britannica Encyclopedia affirms
this also, specifically denoting the small number of laboratories
capable of doing the computations for radiometric dating.
“Dating,
General considerations, Determination of sequence –
Relative geologic ages can be deduced in
rock sequences consisting of sedimentary, metamorphic,
or igneous rock units. In fact, they constitute an essential
part in any precise isotopic, or absolute, dating program.
Such is the case because most rocks simply cannot be isotopically
dated. Therefore, a geologist must first determine relative
ages and then locate the most favourable units for absolute
dating. It is also important to note that relative
ages are inherently more precise, since two or more units
deposited minutes or years apart would have identical absolute
ages but precisely defined relative ages. While
absolute ages require expensive, complex analytical equipment,
relative ages can be deduced from simple visual observations…
The principles for relative age dating described
above require no special equipment and can be applied by anyone
on a local or regional scale. They
are based on visual observations and simple
logical deductions and rely on a correlation and integration
of data that occurs in fragmentary form at many outcrop locations…Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic
dating – The
importance of internal checks as well as interlaboratory comparisons
becomes all the more apparent when one realizes that geochronology
laboratories are limited in number. Because of the expensive
equipment necessary and the combination of geologic, chemical,
and laboratory skills required, geochronology is usually carried
out by teams of experts.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Furthermore,
notice that in the following quote, the journal Nature
is once again the source of the assertions about non-constant
decay.
“Here’s
another experimental evidence for non-exponential decay in
quantum tunneling, another Nature
paper, a mainstream journal. Nature
is one of the most prestigious science journals
there is…Here some people made an artificial quantum
mechanical system…but they found out they had non-exponential
decay at short times. They had faster decay at short times
when they first set the system going.” – “Radioactive
Decay Update: Breaking Down the Old Age Paradigm,” Dr.
Keith Wanser, AnswersInGenesis.org, Copyright 2003 Answers
in Genesis, 16 minutes, 10 seconds
According
to Nature, decay
rates are non-exponential and much faster when the system
is first started. This is extremely relevant because it would
relate to the conditions of the entire universe at creation.
Decay rates would be much faster right after the entire universe
started while rates today would be much slower. Consequently,
assuming today’s rates yields erroneously large ages,
when in reality, the present isotope ratios are completely
compatible with a young earth in light of the realization
that the decay rates were much faster when the universe first
began.
The
next quote discusses that high ionization has an impact in
the magnitude of a billion-fold impact on decay rates.
“One
of the things that really blew open the gates was when…John
Woodmorappe…pointed out something in the physics literature
that everybody seemed to have missed back in about 1996…This
billion-fold acceleration of decay rates under certain specialized
circumstances. Again, it can only
happen in certain specialized circumstances…But,
it shows us something very, very important…Here when
they highly ionized some Rhenium atoms and they stripped
off essentially all the electrons, like 80-some electrons
or so, the decay rates
would change by factors of 10 to the ninth. That’s a
billion-fold change. What
that meant is things that had a-billion-year half-lives went
over into things that were half-lives of a day…Where
are you going to have this process happen? Well,
in a star environment, in a plasma environment, you strip
off lots of electrons because it’s so hot. All the atoms
are colliding with each other and they’re knocking off
electrons. And people formerly were dating some kinds of stars
with this Rhenium-Osmium chronometry and they found out their
star dates were off by
factors of 10 to the sixth, 10 to the seventh, and so
on. And now, they’re taking this factor into account.
But this is something
that people didn’t really know about until 1996.”–
“Radioactive Decay Update: Breaking Down the Old Age
Paradigm,” Dr. Keith Wanser, AnswersInGenesis.org, Copyright
2003 Answers in Genesis, 18 minutes, 20 seconds
While
this level of ionization only happens in environments like
stars, it does show that high ionization impacts decay rates.
This is important because, as we’ve already seen, mass
spectrometers operate by highly ionizing the samples, which
they are measuring for radioisotope decay.
“Mass
spectrometry – Many
investigations have been conducted with the help of mass spectrometry.
These include the identification of the isotopes of the chemical
elements and determination of their precise masses and relative
abundances, the dating of geologic samples…” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Mass
spectrometry – Mass
spectroscopes consist of five basic parts: [1] a
high vacuum system; [2] a
sample handling system, through which the sample to be
investigated can be introduced; [3] an
ion source, in which a beam of charged particles characteristic
of the sample can be produced; [4] an
analyzer, in which the beam can be separated into its
components; and [5] a detector or receiver by means of which the separated ion beams can be observed
or collected.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
Analysis,
Instrumental methods, Separatory methods, Mass spectrometry
– Most mass spectrometers have four major
components: [1]
an inlet system, [2] an ion source, [3] a mass analyzer, and [4] a detector. The inlet system is used
to introduce the analyte
and to convert it to a gas at reduced pressure. The gaseous
analyte flows from the inlet system into the ionic source
of the instrument where
the analyte is converted to ions or ionic fragments.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Mass
Spectrometer, I INTRODUCTION
– All mass spectrometers have four
features in common: (1) a system for introducing the substance
to be analyzed into the instrument; (2)
a system for ionizing the substance; (3) an accelerator that
directs the ions into the measuring apparatus; and (4)
a system for separating the constituent ions and recording
the mass spectrum of the substance.” – "Mass
Spectrometer," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. ©
1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“[PHOTO
CAPTION] Mass Spectrometer – In a mass spectrometer,
a sample of gas is ionized by an electron
beam, and the ions are accelerated toward a magnet, which
separates the ions according to their mass (upper right).
Ions of a certain mass strike the detector; the detector is usually
connected to a computer or other electronic device to process
the data (bottom). © Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved.”
– "Mass Spectrometer," Microsoft® Encarta®
Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights
reserved.
While
the ionization is magnitudes less than on stars, the influence
of ionization on decay rates might still be present to a lower
degree. It might not reduce decay rates from billions of years
down to a day, but it might alter the decay rate enough to
render radiometric dating calculations significantly inaccurate.
In
conclusion to our examination of radioactive decay rates,
we find that nearly all of the essential requirements for
performing absolute dating calculations are unknown. The original
parent-to-daughter isotopes remain unknown. Migration due
to reheating events causes the amount of parent-to-daughter
isotopes produced by decay to be unknowable. And decay rates
for long half-life isotopes are not necessarily constant and
exponential but may vary as a result of cosmic rays, the surrounding
chemical environment, observation, how far we are from the
start of the decay system, ionization, and simply as a general
phenomenon. Consequently, the essentials needed in order to
perform absolute dating (ratios and decay rates) are simply
not available, which renders absolute dating unreliable and
impossible. Furthermore, all of the discoveries in non-constant,
non-exponential decay are fairly recent, ranging from 1994,
1996, 2000, 2002. This means that all of the radiometric dating
used to calibrate the relative evolutionary timescale throughout
the twentieth century was performed without taking into account
that decay rates might be non-constant and non-exponential
for long-lived half lives. Consequently, the support that
absolute dating brought to the relative geologic timescale
are shown to be premature and based upon inaccurate and unreliable
assumptions.
(For an illustration of the missing factors that must
be assumed in order to radiometrically calculate age see Dating
Procedures Figure 8.)
Ultimately,
the evolutionary timescale is without any empirical support.
From start to finish it is merely the product of speculation,
assumption, and philosophical preference. There remains no
empirical evidence negating the creationist history of the
earth 6 to 10 thousand years ago, a history that is demonstrated
by physical geologic data and the historic record.
Having
finished our investigations into the specific issues and problems
of radiometric dating, the next segment will conclude our
focus on radiometric dating by taking a look at the general
status of radiometric dating in the words of secular and evolutionary
sources.