Basic
Worldview:
103
Science, the Bible,
and Creation
Origins
- Section Four:
Radiometric Conclusions, Non-radiometric Methods
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: Radiometric Dating Conclusions
Our
six 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, the minor
remaining radiometric dating methods, and the problematic
assumptions surrounding decay rates. Throughout these segments,
we have established the specific problems that incapacitate
radiometric dating. And, since we have used secular and evolutionary
sources when establishing these problems, it should be no
surprise that evolutionists know and admit to the problematic
and unreliable nature of radiometric dating. However, when
such admissions are made, they are articulated in language
that hides the nature and the impact of the admission.
In
order to recognize evolutionist admissions about radiometric
dating, we first need to do some vocabularly. The word “precise”
is defined below by Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary.
“Precise
– 1: exactly or sharply defined or stated 2: minutely exact 3: strictly conforming to a pattern,
standard, or convention 4:
distinguished from every other (at just that precise moment)
– synonyms see correct.” –
Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary
Below
is the definition of “precise” according to the
American Heritage Dictionary.
“Precise
– 1. Clearly expressed or delineated; definite. 2. Exactly corresponding to what is indicated; correct.” – American Heritage
Dictionary
From
both of these definitions, we note that “precise”
has essentially 2 meanings. First, it can convey a degree
of exactness or specificity. Second, it can convey a degree
of correctness or accuracy. And, of course, in reality these
2 meanings are nearly synonymous. Both meanings converge around
the concept of “accuracy.” An age that is defined
with greater exactness or specificity is more accurate than
an age, which is is vaguely defined. Likewise, an age that
is more accurate is in a sense also more “correct”
than an age, which is less accurate. As we can see, just like
the definition of “precise,” the definition of
“accurate” conveys both the concept of being correct
or free from error as well as the concept of exactness, conveys.
“Accurate
– 1: free from error especially as the result of care 2: conforming exactly to truth or to
a standard: exact.”
– Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary
In
fact, when we look up “accurate” in a thesaurus,
we find that “precise” is listed as a synonym
and so are “correct” and “exact.”
“Accurate
– Synonyms CORRECT
2, exact, nice, precise,
proper, right, rigorous.” – Merriam-Webster’s
Collegiate Thesaurus
And
the same is true concerning the word “precise.”
Precise is considered a synonym for accurate, correct, and
exact.
“Precise
– 1 Synonyms DEFINITE 1, circumscribed, determinate,
fixed, limited, narrow, restricted 2
Synonyms CORRECT 2, accurate, exact, nice, proper, right,
rigorous.” – Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate
Thesaurus
Consequently,
we can understand that the terms “precise” and
“precision” generally denote the degree of accuracy.
Understanding that “precise” is a synonym for
“accurate” we can better grasp what Britannica
means when it describes various dating methods in terms of
their “precision.” It should be noted that all
of the quotes below come from the same Britannica article,
the article on “Dating.” Thus, the quotes below
reflect how Britannica uses the term “precise”
throughout its entire commentary on various dating techniques.
(In the quotes below we have highlighted words and
phrases associated with precision by having them appear in
all capitalized letters. These phrases were not capitalized
originally in the quote.)
The
quote from Britannica below uses the word “precise”
with regard to radiometric dating in the phrase “precise
isotopic ages.”
“Dating,
General considerations, Distinctions between relative-age
and absolute-age measurements – The need to correlate
over the rest of geologic time, to correlate nonfossiliferous
units, and to calibrate the fossil time scale has led to the development of a specialized
field that makes use of natural radioactive isotopes in order
to calculate absolute ages. The precise measure of geologic
time has proven to be the essential tool for correlating the
global tectonic processes (see below) that have taken place
in the past. PRECISE
ISOTOPIC AGES are called absolute ages, since they date the
timing of events not relative to each other but as the time
elapsed between a rock-forming event and the present. Absolute
dating by means of uranium and lead isotopes has been improved to the point that for
rocks 3 billion years old geologically meaningful errors of
[plus or minus] 1 or 2 million years can be obtained.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Similarly,
the next quote uses the term “precision” to refer
to the level of error in radiometric dating.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium–lead
method – It is now clear that with recent advances
the uranium–lead method is superior in providing precise age information
with the least number of assumptions…Double uranium-lead
chronometers – Thus the ratio of lead-207 to lead-206
changes by about 0.1 percent every two million years.
Since this ratio is easily calibrated and reproduced at such
A LEVEL OF PRECISION, errors as low as [plus or minus] 2 million
years at a confidence level of 95 percent are routinely
obtained on lead-207–lead-206 ages. By
contrast, errors as high as [plus or minus] 30 to 50 million
years are usually quoted for the rubidium–strontium
and samarium–neodymium isochron methods (see below).”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
However,
when we read the word “precise” in these quotes,
the meaning of the statements doesn’t exactly come across.
So, let’s reread the quotes once again replacing “precise”
with the synonym “accurate.” As a result, Britannica’s
meaning becomes quite clear.
“Dating,
General considerations, Distinctions between relative-age
and absolute-age measurements – The need to correlate
over the rest of geologic time, to correlate nonfossiliferous
units, and to calibrate the fossil time scale has led to the development of a specialized
field that makes use of natural radioactive isotopes in order
to calculate absolute ages. The precise measure of geologic
time has proven to be the essential tool for correlating the
global tectonic processes (see below) that have taken place
in the past. ACCURATE
ISOTOPIC AGES are called absolute ages, since they date the
timing of events not relative to each other but as the time
elapsed between a rock-forming event and the present. Absolute
dating by means of uranium and lead isotopes has
been improved to the point that for rocks 3 billion years
old geologically meaningful errors of [plus or minus] 1 or
2 million years can be obtained.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating, Uranium–lead
method – It is now clear that with recent advances
the uranium–lead method is superior in providing precise age information
with the least number of assumptions…Double uranium-lead
chronometers – Thus the ratio of lead-207 to lead-206
changes by about 0.1 percent every two million years.
Since this ratio is easily calibrated and reproduced at such
A LEVEL OF ACCURACY, errors as low as [plus or minus] 2 million
years at a confidence level of 95 percent are routinely
obtained on lead-207–lead-206 ages. By
contrast, errors as high as [plus or minus] 30 to 50 million
years are usually quoted for the rubidium–strontium
and samarium–neodymium isochron methods (see below).”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Oddly
enough, in the very same paragraphs that refer to radiometric
ages as “accurate,” Britannica explicitly clarifies
that the level of accuracy can be wrong by plus or minus “1
or 2 million years” or even plus or minus “30
to 50 million years.” Consequently, as we can see, Britannica’s
own comments are revealing that radiometric dating is not
really very accurate at all.
And
not only are the ages inaccurate by millions of years, but
in reality the accuracy of the entire radiometric dating process
is admitted to be very delicate and difficult to attain. This
is demonstrated in the next quote where the words “precise”
and “precision” appear 3 times. In the first instance,
the phrase “the precision once only possible with fossiliferous
units” compares the precision of radiometric dating
to the high degree of precision attributed to relative dating.
The second instance builds on previously mentioned “precision”
of radiometric dating and refers to some radiometric methods
as being “inherently more precise” than others.
And finally, the third instance states that a geochronologist
must be skilled enough to be able to have “precision”
when it comes to performing the age analysis.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating –
Isotopic dating relative to fossil dating
requires a great deal of effort and depends on the integrated
specialized skills of geologists, chemists, and physicists.
It is, nevertheless, a valuable resource that allows
correlations to be made over virtually all
of Earth history with A PRECISION once only possible with fossiliferous units that are restricted
to the most recent 12 percent or so of geologic time. Although any method may be attempted on any unit, the best use of this
resource requires that every effort be made to tackle each
problem with the most efficient technique. Because
of the long half-life of some isotopic systems or the high
background or restricted range of parent abundances, some
methods are INHERENTLY MORE PRECISE. The skill of a geochronologist
is demonstrated by the ability to attain the knowledge required
and THE PRECISION necessary with the least number of analyses.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
However,
once again when we read the word “precise,” the
meaning of the statements doesn’t exactly come across.
So, let’s reread the quote replacing “precise”
and “precision” with the synonyms “accurate”
and “accuracy.”
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Major methods of isotopic dating –
Isotopic dating relative to fossil dating
requires a great deal of effort and depends on the integrated
specialized skills of geologists, chemists, and physicists.
It is, nevertheless, a valuable resource that allows
correlations to be made over virtually all of Earth history
with AN ACCURACY once only possible with fossiliferous units
that are restricted to the most recent 12 percent or so of
geologic time. Although any method may be attempted on any
unit, the best use of this resource requires that every effort
be made to tackle each problem with the most efficient technique.
Because of the long half-life of some isotopic systems or
the high background or restricted range of parent abundances,
some methods are INHERENTLY MORE ACCURATE. The skill of a
geochronologist is demonstrated by the ability to attain
the knowledge required and THE ACCURACY necessary with the least
number of analyses.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
context of these statements is clearly a commentary on how
difficult it is to obtain accurate results from radiometric
dating. As the first line of the quote indicates, accurate
results “require a great deal of effort” and “depend
on the integrated specialized skills” of the scientist
involved. By simply replacing the word “precise”
with its synonym “accurate,” Britannica’s
meaning becomes clear. The ages produced from radiometric
dating were once considered less
accurate than the ages produced by relative dating techniques,
such as stratigraphy and faunal succession. Some radiometric
dating methods are less accurate than others. And the skill
of the geochronologist is demonstrated by his or her ability
to attain an accurate
result. Already we are starting to see the true picture emerge,
that radiometric dating methods neither simply nor easily
produce accurate ages.
The
next quote from Britannica uses the word “precise”
two times in the midst of a discussion about “refining
isotopic measurements,” the dangers of “contamination,”
and “the analytic and geologic problems that have to
be overcome” in radiometric dating.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating –
In the process of refining isotopic measurements, methods
for low-contamination
chemistry had to be developed, and it is significant that
many such methods now in worldwide use resulted directly from
work in geochronology. It has already been explained how different
Earth processes create different rocks as part of what can
be considered a giant rock-forming and -reforming cycle. Attention has been called wherever possible
to those rocks that contain minerals suitable for PRECISE
ISOTOPIC DATING. The
following discussion will show why this is so, treating in
some detail the analytic and geologic problems that have to
be overcome IF PRECISE AGES ARE TO BE DETERMINED…Principles of isotopic dating –
Such checks include
dating a series of ancient units with closely spaced but known
relative ages and replicate analysis of different parts
of the same rock body with samples collected at widelyspaced
localities. 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
Here
again, in order to allow Britannica’s meaning to become
more apparent, we have replaced the word “precise”
with the synonym “accurate.”
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating –
In the process of refining isotopic measurements, methods
for low-contamination
chemistry had to be developed, and it is significant that
many such methods now in worldwide use resulted directly from
work in geochronology. It has already been explained how different
Earth processes create different rocks as part of what can
be considered a giant rock-forming and -reforming cycle. Attention has been called wherever possible
to those rocks that contain minerals suitable for ACCURATE
ISOTOPIC DATING. The
following discussion will show why this is so, treating in
some detail the analytic and geologic problems that have to
be overcome IF ACCURATE AGES ARE TO BE DETERMINED…Principles of isotopic dating –
Such checks include
dating a series of ancient units with closely spaced but known
relative ages and replicate analysis of different parts
of the same rock body with samples collected at widelyspaced
localities. 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
Consequently,
we can see that Britannica is discussing what is necessary
for radiometric ages to “refined” enough for the
ages to be accurate, correct, and reliable. For accurate,
correct, and reliable ages to be produced “analytic
and geologic problems” have to be “overcome.”
This means that there are barriers to accuracy in both the
mathematic calculations themselves and barriers in terms of
the actual physical geology.
Notice
also that midway through the quote “relative ages”
are said to be a “check” that is necessary to
ensure the radiometric ages are accurate. In other words,
resolving the “analytic and geologic problems”
in radiometric dating requires basing radiometric ages on
relative ages. Once again, the circular reasoning of evolutionary
dating methods is revealed as is the primacy of relative dating
over radiometric in the creation of the evolutionary timescale.
Relative dating, which is strictly based upon speculation
and assumption, actually dictates the ages produced by radiometric
dating. Radiometric dating simply cannot overcome its analytic
and geologic problems without deferring to the ages produced
by relative dating. The primacy of relative dating over radiometric
dating, the fact that radiometric ages are determined by relative
ages, will be further corroborated as we move ahead.
Lastly,
we notice from the tail end of the quote above that “correctness”
is ultimately the kind of accuracy that Britannica has in
view. To ensure the correctness and reliability of radiometric
ages, “internal checks” are required and this
severity of this concern regarding “correctness”
is only properly understood “when one realizes that
geochronology laboratories are limited in number,” and
the magnitude of complexity of “the necessary equipment”
and the “required skills.” The process is highly
complex and as a result, Britannica is expressing the inherent
concerns this extreme difficulty and complexity brings to
the question of accuracy.
This
brings us to 2 final quotes admitting to key points we have
established during the detailed analysis of the preceding
segments.
First,
although relative dating is based upon speculation and assumption
and lacks any evidence for actual ages, it is relative dating
that is the determining factor in developing the evolutionary
timescale. Radiometric dating is actually determined by the
relative ages, which are considered more reliable and more
“accurate.”
This
is seen in the quote below, which uses the term “precise”
to contrast the superiority of relative ages over radiometric
ages.
“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.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
Once
again, Britannica’s meaning becomes more apparent when
we replace “precise” with the synonym “accurate.”
“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 ACCURATE, 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
Consequently,
as we can see, according to Britannica relative dating is
“inherently more accurate” than radiometric dating.
This accuracy involves both components of the definition of
“precise.” Relative dating is more “exact”
since two samples might have the same, vaguer absolute age
but distinct, more sharply defined relative ages. And relative
dating is more reliably correct than radiometric dating because
relative ages are based upon simple logic, deduction, and
observation whereas radiometric ages require expensive, special
equipment to provide the necessary computing power that still
requires highly complex skills to perform. This vastly greater
simplicity and straightforwardness in relative dating is what
makes its ages are more reliable than radiometric ages. This
is reflected in the quote below as well, which plainly states
that earth’s history is “most accurately dated”
by the relative dating of the sedimentary rock layers than
by the dating of igneous and metamorphic rock, which of course
utilizes radiometric dating.
“Sedimentary
rock – Despite the relatively insignificant volume
of the sedimentary rock shell, not only are most rocks exposed
at the terrestrial surface of the sedimentary variety,
but many of the significant events in Earth history are most
accurately dated and documented by analyzing and interpreting
the sedimentary rock record instead of the more voluminous igneous and metamorphic
rock record.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004
Deluxe Edition
Second,
the factors that need to be known in order for radiometric
dating to be performed and produce accurate dates are not
known. The next quote below uses the term “precise”
as it comments briefly on “the conditions that must
be met” in order for radiometric age calculations to
be made. Those conditions are the original parent and daughter
ratio, the amount of migration, the present parent and daughter
ratio, and the decay constant.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating –
Likewise, the conditions that must be met to make
the calculated AGE PRECISE and meaningful are in themselves
simple. 1. The rock or mineral must have remained
closed to the addition
or escape of parent and daughter atoms since the time that
the rock or mineral (system) formed. 2. It must be possible
to correct for other atoms identical to daughter atoms already present
when the rock or mineral formed. 3. The decay constant must
be known. 4.
The measurement of the daughter-to-parent
ratio must be accurate because uncertainty in this ratio
contributes directly to uncertainty in the age. Different
schemes have been developed to deal with the critical assumptions
stated above.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
Once
again, by simply replacing the word “precise”
with its synonym “accurate,” Britannica’s
meaning becomes clear. Furthermore, the fact that Britannica
has “accuracy” in mind here is demonstrated by
the fact that the fourth condition listed in the quote actually
uses the word “accurate” when describing the required
criteria.
“Dating,
Absolute dating, Principles of isotopic dating –
Likewise, the conditions that must be met to make
the calculated AGE ACCURATE and meaningful are in themselves
simple. 1. The rock or mineral must have remained
closed to the addition
or escape of parent and daughter atoms since the time that
the rock or mineral (system) formed. 2. It must be possible
to correct for other atoms identical to daughter atoms already present
when the rock or mineral formed. 3. The decay constant must
be known. 4.
The measurement of the daughter-to-parent
ratio must be accurate because uncertainty in this ratio
contributes directly to uncertainty in the age. Different
schemes have been developed to deal with the critical assumptions
stated above.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
In
order for the “calculated age” to be “accurate”
these four factors must be known. As we have already shown
in detail in the previous segments, except for the present
parent and daughter ratios, none of these factors are known,
particularly the original parent and daughter ratios and the
amount of migration. Consequently, the conditions required
for “accurate” radiometric ages are not met and
what remains are simply inaccurate ages based upon what the
closing line of the quote calls “assumptions.”
So, once again, as we understand what Britannica is saying,
the picture continues to emerge that it is a well-known fact
among evolutionists that radiometric dating methods neither
simply nor easily produce accurate ages. In fact, since these
required conditions are not met, radiometric dating cannot
produce accurate ages at all.
(For an illustration of how missing factors must be
assumed in order to radiometrically calculate age see Dating
Procedures Figures 8, 11-13.)
Finally,
we can see that radiometric dating is considered far from
a simple, straightforward, observable fact in the admission
presented in the following 2 quotes.
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS, B Absolute Dating –
Absolute dating, sometimes called chronometric
dating, refers to the assignment of calendar year dates
to artifacts, fossils, and other remains.
Obtaining such dates is one of archaeology's greatest challenges.”
– "Archaeology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS – Accurately dating
an archaeological site requires the application of two distinct
methods of dating: relative and absolute. Relative
dating establishes the date of archaeological finds in relation
to one another. Absolute dating is the often more difficult
task of determining the year in which an artifact, remain,
or geological layer was deposited.” – "Archaeology,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
As
stated in the quotes above, to this day, radiometric dating
is regarded as “more difficult task” than relative
dating and radiometric dating remains “one of the greatest
challenges” in determining earth’s history. Radiometric
dating simply is not a simple, concrete observable fact. Rather,
radiometric dating is an incompentent, problem-filled, unresolved,
assumption-based, circular-reasoned process that is actually
dictated by the entirely speculative ages produced by relative
dating, which itself is based upon the presupposition of evolutionary
theory.
With
our analysis of radiometric dating now complete, we are ready
to move on to the non-radiometric absolute dating methods,
which is our final category of dating procedures.
Focus
on Critical Evidence: Non-radiometric Absolute Dating
Having
examined both relative dating and the radiometric methods
for obtaining absolute ages, we will now turn our attention
to the handful of methods used to obtain absolute ages, which
are not based upon radioactive isotopes. Although radiometric
dating methods were the first methods to generate absolute
dates, other methods were also developed afterwards. These
methods include dendrochonology (also known as tree-ring dating),
varve analysis, hydration dating, TL dating, ice cores, and
paleomagnetism.
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS – Although development of radiometric methods led to the first and principal breakthroughs in
establishing an
absolute time scale, other absolute methods
were devised that have
limited applications. Chief
among these are dendrochronology, varve
analysis, hydration dating, and TL dating.” –
"Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Geology,
V Fields of Geology, B Historical Geology, B3 Geochronology
– Geologists can count the annual layers recorded
in tree rings, ice cores, and certain sediments such as those
found in lakes, for very precise geochronology.”
– "Geology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
As
we can see from the first quote above, each of these methods
has “limited application.” We will explore these
limitations and the reasons for them as we discuss each of
these methods below. However, we should also note that in
the second quote above, the mention of counting “sediments…
found in lakes” refers to varve analysis. This is stated
plainly in the quote immediately below.
“Geologic
Time, III DATING METHODS – A
few non-radiometric techniques, such as varve analysis, dendrochronology,
and paleomagnetism, also provide absolute ages. Varves are layers of sediment deposited yearly in glacial lakes.”
– "Geologic Time," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
As
a further introductory note, we should point out that more
than one of these methods is based upon assuming that certain
markings are “annual” or “yearly”
and therefore, the number of those markings indicates the
number of years. However, as the next quote plainly states,
with regard to the “many other processes” used
“in addition to radioactive decay” to develop
“absolute dating,” the rates of these processes
“lack universal consistency” and “human
observation” cannot be “maintained long enough
to measure present rates of change.” Consequently, as
the quote concludes, “it is not at all certain on a
priori grounds whether” the rates observable at present
“are representative of the past.” As such, we
have to realize that like relative dating and radiometric
dating, many of these processes are going to be based upon
assumptions that simply are not valid.
“Geochronology,
Nonradiometric dating – In
addition to radioactive decay, many other processes have been
investigated for their potential usefulness in absolute dating.
Unfortunately, they all occur at rates that lack the universal
consistency of radioactive decay. Sometimes human observation
can be maintained long enough to measure present rates of
change, but it is not at all certain on a priori grounds whether
such rates are representative of the past.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
As
indicated above, there are six prominent non-radioactive dating
methods. The first method that we will discuss is paleomagnetism.
The term “paleomagnetism” is a compound word formed
from the word “magnetism” and the prefix “paleo,”
meaning “ancient” or “early.” According
to Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, paleomagnetism
refers to “a science that deals with the intensity and
direction of residual magnetization in ancient rocks.”
The use of paleomagnetism to provide absolute dates surrounds
the idea that switches in the orientation of earth’s
magnetic poles (called magnetic reversals) have been recorded
in the magnetic rocks produced along the mid-ocean ridge where
new seafloor is being created. The new seafloor along these
mid-ocean ridges is formed as molten rock emerges from beneath
the seafloor, creating a mountain range and pushing the continents
apart.
“Paleomagnetism
– Paleomagnetism,
in geology, the study of the changing orientations of the
earth's magnetic field (see Earth; Magnetism). Such study
aids in determining the course of other geological processes
such as plate tectonics. The reasons for the occasional polar
reversal of the earth's magnetic field are not well understood,
but currently the reversals themselves are recorded
at sites of seafloor spreading by the alignment of magnetic
grains in igneous rock.” – "Paleomagnetism,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Plate
Tectonics, VI HISTORY OF TECTONIC THEORY, C Seafloor Spreading
– During the 1950s, as people began creating
detailed maps of the world's ocean floor, they discovered
a mid-ocean ridge system of mountains nearly 60,000 km
(nearly 40,000 mi) long. This
ridge goes all the way around the globe. American geologist
Harry H. Hess proposed that this mountain chain was the place where
new ocean floor was created and that the continents moved
as a result of the expansion of the ocean floors…These
studies also found marine magnetic anomalies, or differences,
on the sea floor. The anomalies are changes, or switches,
in the north and south polarity of the magnetic rock of the
seafloor. Scientists discovered that the switches make
a striped pattern of the positive and negative magnetic anomalies:
one segment, or stripe,
is positive, and the segment next to it is negative. The stripes are parallel to the mid-ocean ridge crest, and the pattern
is the same on both sides of that crest. Scientists could
not explain the cause of these anomalies until they discovered
that the earth's magnetic field periodically reverses direction.”
– "Plate Tectonics," Microsoft® Encarta®
Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights
reserved.
“Plate
Tectonics, VI HISTORY OF TECTONIC THEORY, D Magnetic Field
Reversals – In 1963, British scientists Fred J.
Vine and Drummond H. Matthews combined their observations of the marine
magnetic anomalies with the concept of reversals of the earth's
magnetic field. They proposed that the marine magnetic anomalies
were a "tape recording" of the spreading of the
ocean floor as the earth's magnetic field reversed its direction.
At the same time, other geophysicists were studying lava flows from many parts
of the world to see
how these flows revealed the record of reversals of the direction
of the earth's magnetic field. These studies showed that
nearly four reversals
have occurred over the past 5 million years. The concept of
magnetic field reversals was a breakthrough that explained the magnetic polarity switches seen in seafloor spreading
as well as the concept of similar magnetic patterns in
the rocks used to demonstrate continental drift.” –
"Plate Tectonics," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
These
newly-forming rocks emerge as lava at the mid-ocean ridge.
The magnetic particles of the rock become oriented to the
force of the earth’s magnetic field. Of particular interest
to paleomagnetism is the idea that rocks along either side
of the ridge exhibit a pattern of alternating north-south
poles. The alternation between north and south polarity is
further taken to indicate that the earth’s north and
south magnetic poles have switched locations at different
points in the past and each subsequent “switch”
was recorded in the rocks forming at that time along the ridge.
Thus, the magnetic pattern along the ridge is understood to
be a record of the switches in earth’s poles. As a consequence,
the specific orientation of the magnetic rocks correlates
to a time when the earth’s magnetic field had that same
orientation.
“Earth
exploration, Conclusions about the deep Earth –
A rock tends to retain its magnetic orientation,
so that measuring it provides information about the Earth's
magnetic field at the time of the rock's formation and
how the rock has moved since then. The field of study specifically
concerned with this subject is called paleomagnetism.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Earth,
The major geologic features of the Earth's exterior, The surface
of the Earth as a mosaic of plates, Evidence for polar wandering,
continental drift, and seafloor spreading, Paleomagnetism
– The direction and inclination of the magnetic field of rocks of different ages have been measured
from rock samples collected from all over the world, and
this information can be used to ascertain
the location of the Earth's magnetic pole at the time when
those rocks were formed.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Geologic
Time, III DATING METHODS – Paleomagnetism
involves measuring the angle of magnetic molecules in rocks.
When lava is hot, magnetic minerals in the
molten rock orient themselves to the earth's magnetic field.
As the temperature of cooling lava drops to a certain point,
these tiny magnets lock into place. Because the earth's magnetic
field has switched orientations several times during the history
of the earth, the magnetic orientation of the rocks that cooled
during different times may be different. Scientists know the dates of the magnetic
reversals, so the magnetic orientation of a rock sample can
provide an estimate of its age.” – "Geologic
Time," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
There
are several problems with using this concept to produce absolute
dates. The first problem, which is clear from the 3 quotes
above, is that circular reasoning is occurring here with regard
to the dating. Notice from the first 2 quotes that it is timing
of the rocks formation that indicates when a “magnetic
reversal” took place in the earth’s magnetic field.
Thus, the rocks are the record of the timing of the earth’s
magnetic reversals. Yet, notice from the third quote that
the rocks are dated by the “known” dates of the
reversals. Consequently, here we arrive at a textbook case
of circular reasoning. The rocks date the reversals and the
reversals date the rocks. As a result, even if such magnetic
reversals did occur, this makes dating them impossible.
The
second problem is that there seems to be some uncertainty
as to when the rocks actually oriented to the earth’s
magnetic field. A quote above from Microsoft Encarta clearly
states that such rocks orient to the earth’s magnetic
field when they are hot and molten and then simply “lock
into” or become fixed in that orientation as the rock
cools.
“Geologic
Time, III DATING METHODS – When lava is hot, magnetic
minerals in the molten rock orient themselves to the earth's
magnetic field. As the temperature of cooling lava drops to
a certain point, these tiny magnets lock into place.”
– "Geologic Time," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Similarly,
the next quote explains that at low temperatures, the particles
of the rocks are “rigidly maintained” in their
existing positions and the only time that the “external
field” (the earth’s own magnetic field) is exerted
on the magnetic particles is when the rocks are molten at
high temperatures.
“Antiferromagnetism
– At very low
temperatures, the solid exhibits no response to the external
field, because the antiparallel ordering of atomic magnets
is rigidly maintained. At higher temperatures, some atoms break free of the orderly arrangement
and align with the external field.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
As
we can see, the reason that the rocks orient themselves to
the earth’s field during the time when they are molten
is because only when the rock is liquid are the magnetic particles
freed from their fixed positions in the rock and enabled to
reorient according to the earth’s magnetic field. However,
Worldbook states the exact opposite. Worldbook states that
when the rocks are hot and molten they cannot “be influenced
by the Earth’s magnetic field” and only once they
cool can their magnetic particles “align with Earth’s
magnetic field.”
“Plate
Techtonics, Plate movement, Evidence of plate movement
– When such a rock was hot and liquid, the
magnetic particles moved too rapidly to be influenced by Earth's
magnetic field. But as the rock cooled and solidified, the
particles aligned themselves with Earth's magnetic field,
like tiny compass needles. Thus, the particles continue to
point in the direction of the magnetic field that was present
during the time that the rock cooled.” – Worldbook,
Contributor: Mark Cloos, Ph.D., Professor of Geological Sciences,
University of Texas, Austin.
Notice
that the contributor of Worldbook’s article has a PhD
in Geological Sciences and works as a professor at the University of Texas,
Austin.
Consequently, it is difficult to simply dismiss this contradictory
statement. In addition, this analysis by Worldbook is confirmed
by what is known as the “Curie Point.” The Curie
Point is a temperature level above which magnetic materials
lose their magnetic properties.
“Curie,
Pierre – He showed that magnetic
materials made of iron compounds lose their magnetic properties
if heated beyond a certain temperature. This temperature,
different for every material, is now called the Curie point.”
– "Curie, Pierre," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
As
indicated by the next quote below, the Curie Point has a counterpart
called the Neel temperature. At temperatures above the Curie
and Neel temperatures, the magnetic properties of formerly
magnetic materials are “entirely disrupted” and
only a weak form of magnetism called “paramagnetism”
remains. Furthermore, the amount of paramagnetism itself decreases
with the increase of temperature. This is indicated by both
of the quotes below.
“Curie
point – Raising
the temperature to the Curie point for any of the materials
in these three classes entirely disrupts the various spontaneous
arrangements, and only a weak kind of more general magnetic
behaviour, called paramagnetism, remains. Temperature increases above the Curie point produce roughly similar
patterns of decreasing paramagnetism in all three classes
of materials…The antiferromagnetic Curie point is called
the Néel temperature in honour of the French physicist
Louis Néel, who in 1936 successfully explained antiferromagnetism.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Antiferromagnetism
– At higher temperatures,
some atoms break free of the orderly arrangement and align with the external field. This alignment and the weak magnetism it produces in the solid reach
their peak at the Néel temperature. Above
this temperature, thermal agitation progressively prevents
alignment of the atoms with the magnetic field, so that the
weak magnetism produced in the solid by the alignment of its
atoms continuously decreases as temperature is increased.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
first quote above mentions a particular type of magnetism
known as “antiferromagnetism” it also mentions
“three classes” of magnetic materials. These 3
classes are ferromagnetic, antiferromagnetic, and ferromagnetic,
which will be discussed more below. But more importantly,
we should also point out that the phrase “spontaneous
arrangements” refers to the normal way that these substances
orient themselves due to their own internal magnetism. Thus,
according to the quote the normal way that these substances
magnetically orient themselves is “entirely disrupted”
by high temperatures. Consequently, as the second quote indicates,
any alignment to the earth’s magnetic field, which occurs
at high temperatures when the rock is still “solid,”
disappears as the rock becomes molten. As the temperature
continues to increase enough to cause the rock becomes molten,
it loses its magnetic properties and is not even influenced
by the earth’s magnetic field, just as previously stated
by Worldbook.
So
as we can see, there are 2 debilitating problems with this
this dating method. First, there appears to be no working
articulation of exactly when and how the “reorientation”
of the magnetic particles in the rock occurs. And second,
the dating of both the rocks and the magnetic field switches
are entirely based upon circular reasoning. Consequently,
according to Britannica’s article on “Applied
Logic,” like all circular reasoning this dating method
is “an ineptitude of argumentation,” is “not
deductively valid,” and “lacks any power of conviction.”
We
can take this analysis of paleomagnetism a step further and
ask the question, “What’s really going on with
these magnetic patterns in mid-ocean rocks?” The answer
is that the altered magnetic orientations in rocks at the
mid-ocean ridge are not really switching direction. Instead
of being neat and uniform stripes, they are actually more
of a marbled, confusing mish-mash. Creationist Dr. Kent Hovind
establishes this fact in a quote from the journal Science.
“It
is clear that the simple model of uniformly magnetized crustal
blocks of alternating polarity does not represent reality.”
– Hall, J. M., and P. T. Robinson, “Deep Crustal
Drilling in the North Atlantic Ocean,”
Science, vol. 204
(May 11, 1979), pp 578 (Cited by Dr. Kent E. Hovind, “Creation
Seminar Part 6: The Hovind Theory”)
Consequently,
this magnetic phenomenon along the mid-ocean floor does not
occur because magnetic particles in the rocks are reorienting
according to switches in orientation of earth’s magnetic
field. To further establish this fact, we need to understand
a little about the basics of magnetism. Normally, different
magnetic atoms orient themselves locally in accordance with
the magnetic atoms around them. As mentioned earlier, there
are 3 types of magnetism. Ferromagnetic materials reinforce
each other’s magnetic orientation so that magnetic north
lines up with magnetic north in the other atoms, creating
an overall magnetic field. Antiferromagnetic materials align
opposite to one another so that magnetic south lines up next
to magnetic north in other particles, nullifying the overall
field. And finally, there are ferrimagnetic materials, which
have some ferromagnetic material and some antiferromagnetic
material, creating “only a partial” overall field.
“Curie
point – In
ferromagnetic materials, such as pure iron, the
atomic magnets are oriented within each microscopic region
(domain) in the same direction, so that their magnetic fields
reinforce each other. In antiferromagnetic materials, atomic
magnets alternate in opposite directions, so that their magnetic
fields cancel each other. In ferrimagnetic materials, the spontaneous arrangement is a combination of both patterns, usually
involving two different magnetic atoms, so that only partial reinforcement of magnetic fields occurs.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
At
high temperatures, these normal magnetic orientations within
magnetic rocks are disrupted from these uniform states. As
stated earlier, the temperature point when magnetism is disrupted
is known as the Curie Point or Curie Temperature.
“Curie
point – also called Curie Temperature, temperature at
which certain magnetic materials undergo a sharp change in
their magnetic properties…Below the Curie point—for example,
770° C (1,418 [degrees] F) for iron—atoms that behave as tiny magnets spontaneously align themselves in
certain magnetic materials…Raising
the temperature to the Curie point for any of the materials
in these three classes entirely disrupts the various spontaneous
arrangements, and only a weak kind of more general magnetic
behaviour, called paramagnetism, remains.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Curie,
Pierre – He showed that magnetic
materials made of iron compounds lose their magnetic properties
if heated beyond a certain temperature. This temperature,
different for every material, is now called the Curie point.”
– "Curie, Pierre," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
“Curie,
Pierre – His early work involved research on the magnetic properties of metals. The temperature at which such properties
suddenly change became known as the Curie point.”
– Worldbook, Contributor: Romualdas Sviedrys, Ph.D.,
Associate Professor of History of Science, Polytechnic
University.
The
term “Neel temperature” refers specifically to
this temperature point concerning antiferromagnetic materials.
“Curie
point – The
antiferromagnetic Curie point is called the Néel temperature
in honour of the French physicist Louis Néel, who in 1936
successfully explained antiferromagnetism.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
“Magnetism,
VI OTHER MAGNETIC ORDERINGS – There is a temperature
analogous to the Curie temperature called
the Neel temperature, above which antiferromagnetic order
disappears.” – "Magnetism," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
Consequently,
the alterations at the mid-ocean ridge are caused because
the rocks were hot and liquid, which disrupted their magnetic
orientation. As they cooled (possibly quite rapidly during
the flood), this disruption became set or fixed, creating
the mish-mash of oddly oriented, non-uniform striations in
the rock bed on either side of the eruption line of new molten
rock along the ridge. As such, the disrupted, mish-mash of
magnetism along the ridge indicates neither a switch in the
earth’s magnetic poles, nor the age of the rock’s
formation at some particular polar orientation.
As
Dr. Hovind explains in the quote below, magnetic rocks are
aligned in different directions as a result of being subjected
to massive amounts of liquefying heat. This disrupts their
magnetism after which they cooled at a rate that preserved
an odd, mixed up orientation of their magnetic particles.
Ultimately, the patterns on the ocean floor are not reversals
but areas of weak and strong magnetism, caused by the heating
and subsequent cooling of rock by ocean water. The mixed up
patterns along mid-ocean ridges are just the alternating between
greater and weaker intensity of magnetism. The magnetism never
crosses over and points south, which would be the case in
a reversal. North still points north. And the magnetism never
actually reverses.
“There
are no magnetic reversals in the ocean floor. There are only
areas of weak magnetism…When rock is hot it does not retain its
magnetic strength…The
lines are caused by the bulging of the earth. And the rock
rips or cracks and the water rushes into the crack and cools
it down. The water rushing in cooling off this rock changes
the magnetic structure of the rock…Hot basalt loses
its magnetism…areas of weak magnetism and strong magnetism
but none of them are actual reversals. There
is no place on the ocean floor where a north-pointing compass
will point south.” – “Creation Seminar
Part 6: The Hovind Theory,” Dr. Kent E. Hovind, www.drdino.com,
Pensacola,
FL, RealPlayer Video, 9 minutes, 5 seconds
And
ultimately, this leaves the concept that earth’s magnetic
poles switch locations with very little proof. Ultimately,
even in evolutionary science, reversals in earth’s magnetic
field and their causes are not well-understood.
“Paleomagnetism
– The reasons
for the occasional polar reversal of the earth's magnetic
field are not well understood, but currently the reversals
themselves are recorded at sites of seafloor spreading by
the alignment of magnetic grains in igneous rock.” –
"Paleomagnetism," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
In
light of the fact that neither the suggested evidence nor
the cause of magnetic reversals is understood, we must ask
the following question. Why propose such a strange concept
as the idea that the earth’s magnetic poles have drifted
or swapped positions, a concept for which we have no explanation,
when a much more plausible explanation is already available?
The answer is simple. Evolutionists are trying to desperately
trying to find some empirical evidence to support their merely
speculative assumptions that the earth is extremely old. In
their efforts, they propose a variety of precariously constructed
assumptions, which simply don’t work.
The
second method that we will discuss involves ice cores. The
first item to note about ice cores is that they simply cannot
support the evolutionary timescale of millions or billions
of years. Ice cores have a limited potential and even theoretically
they can only date back tens of thousands of years.
“Geology,
V Fields of Geology, B Historical Geology, B3Geochronology
– Geologists can count
the annual layers recorded in tree rings, ice
cores, and certain sediments such as those found in lakes,
for very precise geochronology. However, this
method is only useful for time periods up to tens of thousands
of years.” – "Geology," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
The
second item to understand is exactly how ice cores are used
in the effort to derive absolute ages. Effectively, the process
surrounds the concept of counting “annual layers”
in ice. As indicated by the quotes below, the basic idea is
that if one layer forms a year, then the number of layers
equals the number of years.
“Geology,
V Fields of Geology, B Historical Geology, B3 Geochronology
– Geologists can count the annual layers recorded
in tree rings,
ice cores, and certain sediments such as those found in
lakes, for very precise geochronology.” – "Geology,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Core
sampling – In an additional application of core sampling, polar ice sheets have been penetrated to secure information
about the age and rate of accumulation of the ice.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe
Edition
“Glacier,
The great ice sheets, Flow of the ice sheets, Information
from deep cores – Continuous
cores, taken in some cases to the bedrock below, allow the
sampling of an ice sheet through its entire history of accumulation.
Near the surface it is possible to pick out annual layers by visual inspection.
In some locations, such as the Greenland Ice core Project/Greenland
Ice Sheet Project 2 (GRIP/GISP2) sites at the summit of Greenland,
these annual layers
can be traced back more than 40,000 years, much like counting
tree rings.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004
Deluxe Edition
The
third item to note is exactly how the ice layers themselves
form. As indicated by the quotes below, ice layers are thought
to be formed as snows melt in summer, re-freeze, and then
are compacted by winter snow summer and winter snow.
“Climate,
Determining past climates – Glaciers
are composed of layers of ice created by the compression of
winter snows. Each layer corresponds to one winter's snowfall.”
– Contributor: Joseph M. Moran, Ph.D., Professor Emeritus,
Department of Earth Science, University of Wisconsin, Green
Bay; Associate Director, Education Program, American Meteorological
Society.
“In
summer the top layer of snow melts and refreezes as clear
ice which shows up dark…In winter the snow packs and
shows up as a white layer.” – “The Age
of the Earth,” Dr. Kent E. Hovind, Creation Science
Evangelism, Pensacola, FL, www.drdino.com, Windows Media Video,
1 hour 29 minutes
Now
that we understand the basic premise for using ice cores to
provide absolute dates, we can also understand why this method
does not work. The problem is that this method assumes the
alternating ice layers are caused strictly by the annual cycle
of seasons, particularly winter and spring. Thus, since the
layers are thought to be caused by the annual cycle of seasons,
each layer is presumed to represent one “year.”
However, in reality, all such layers really denote is the
number of times that the temperature was warm enough for the
ice to thaw and then became cold enough to refreeze. In other
words, instead of being caused by alternating cycles of summer-winter,
summer-winter, the layers are actually caused by alternation
between warm-cold, warm-cold combined with the compression
caused by additional snowfall, both of which happen more often
than just once every spring and winter. Consequently, ice
layers cannot provide absolute ages at all because each layer
does not designate a year at all, but merely the interval
of time between relatively warm and cold temperatures and
additional snowfall.
Furthermore,
it is also thought that ice sheet can indicate absolute ages
simply by sheer depth alone, without counting layers
“Glacier,
The great ice sheets, Flow of the ice sheets, Information
from deep cores – If
the vertical profile of ice flow is known, and if it can be
assumed that the rate of accumulation has been approximately
constant through time, then an expression for the age of the
ice as a function of depth can be developed.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
However,
this is also problematic because it requires that the ice
has accumulated at a constant rate through time. This is an
assumption and it cannot be known, particularly if there were
climate changes. The climate shifts after a global Flood would
undermine this severely. Consequently, ice cores, ice layers,
and ice sheets imply provide no objective, empirical evidence
for the producing absolute ages.
The
third method that we will discuss is varve analysis. As stated
plainly in the quote below, a “varve is a sedimentary
bed” deposited in a body of still water.
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS, B Varve Analysis
– One of the oldest methods employed for absolute
age determination, varve analysis, was developed by Swedish
scientists in the early 20th century. A
varve is a sedimentary bed, or sequence of beds, deposited in a body of still water within a year's time. Counting
and correlation of varves have been used to measure the ages
of Pleistocene glacial deposits. By
dividing the rate of sedimentation in terms of units per year
by the number of units deposited following a geologic event,
geologists can establish the age of the event in years.” – "Dating Methods,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
There
are 2 primary problems with varve analysis. First, as indicated
by the last quote above, varve analysis involves calculations
based upon sedimentation deposited in bodies of water and
during geologic events. Given the role of bodies of water
and geologic events in varve formation, varve dating is going
to be severely affected by the cataclysmic global flood.
Second
as also indicated by the last quote above, like ice core dating,
varve analysis is based upon the presumption that each bed
is deposited annually, “within a year’s time.”
However, once again, this “annual” assumption
is not valid. The cause for varve formation is simply the
alternation between rapid and calmer runoff. The idea that
these changes in runoff can only or do only occur in spring
and winter is simply an unfounded assumption.
“Geologic
Time, III DATING METHODS – Varves
are layers of sediment deposited yearly in glacial lakes.
A thick layer of coarse sediment deposited during the spring
by glacial runoff and a thinner layer of fine sediment that
settles out during the calmer winter make up each varve. Earth
scientists extract cores of sediment from these glacial lakes
and can count back the number of years since
a certain geologic event took place.” – "Geologic
Time," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Like
paleomagnetism and ice core dating, varve analysis simply
does not work and does not produce any empirical data supporting
long ages of time.
The
fourth method that we will discuss is hydration dating. This
dating method involves the thickness of hydration layers (rinds
or rims) produced by “water vapor slowly diffusing”
into “freshly chipped surfaces” of obsidian artifacts.
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS, C Obsidian Hydration
Dating – Also
referred to as hydration rind dating or obsidian dating,
this method is used
to calculate ages in years by determining the thickness of
rims (hydration rinds) produced by water vapor slowly diffusing
into freshly chipped surfaces on artifacts made of obsidian,
or recent volcanic, glass. The method is applicable to
glasses 200 to 200,000 years old.” – "Dating
Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Geochronology,
Nonradiometric dating, Geologic processes as absolute chronometers,
Weathering processes – Only
one weathering chronometer is employed widely at the present
time. Its record of time is the thin hydration layer at the
surface of obsidian artifacts. Although no hydration layer
appears on artifacts of the more common flint and chalcedony,
obsidian is sufficiently widespread that the method has broad
application. In a specific environment the process of obsidian
hydration is theoretically described by the equation D = Kt
1/2, in which D is thickness of the hydration rim, K is a
constant characteristic of the environment, and t is the time
since the surface examined was freshly exposed.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
One
problem with supporting the evolutionary timescale from hydration
dating stems from the fact that hydration dating is extremely
limited and is used simply to provide ages for artifacts made
from obsidian.
“Obsidian
– Obsidian was used by American Indians and many other
primitive peoples for weapons,
implements, tools, and ornaments and by the ancient Aztecs
and Greeks for mirrors. Because of its conchoidal fracture
(smooth curved surfaces and sharp edges), the sharpest stone artifacts were fashioned from obsidian; some of these,
mostly arrow heads,
have been dated
by means of the hydration rinds that form on their exposed
surfaces through time.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
“Geochronology,
Nonradiometric dating, Geologic processes as absolute chronometers,
Weathering processes – Only one weathering chronometer
is employed widely at the present time. Its
record of time is the thin hydration layer at the surface
of obsidian artifacts.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica
2004 Deluxe Edition
In
addition, this dating method suffers from complications and
the assumption of factors, which are not known. These complications
are described in the quote below.
“Geochronology,
Nonradiometric dating, Geologic processes as absolute chronometers,
Weathering processes – In
a specific environment the process of obsidian hydration
is theoretically described by the equation D = Kt 1/2, in
which D is thickness of the hydration rim, K
is a constant characteristic of the environment, and t
is the time since the surface examined was freshly exposed.
Practical experience
indicates that the constant K is almost totally dependent
on temperature and that humidity is apparently of no significance.
Whether in a dry Egyptian tomb or buried in wet tropical soil,
a piece of obsidian seemingly has a surface that is saturated
with a molecular film of water. Consequently, the key to absolute dating
of obsidian is to evaluate K for different temperatures. Ages
follow from the above equation provided there is accurate
knowledge of a sample's temperature history. Even without
such knowledge, hydration rims are useful for relative dating
within a region of uniform climate. Like most absolute chronometers, obsidian dating has its problems and
limitations. Specimens that have been exposed to fire or to
severe abrasion must be avoided. Furthermore, artifacts
reused repeatedly do not give ages corresponding to the culture
layer in which they were found but instead to an earlier time,
when they were fashioned. Finally, there is the problem that layers may flake off beyond 40 micrometres
(0.004 centimetre, or 0.002 inch) of thickness—i.e.,
more than 50,000 years in age. Measuring several slices
from the same specimen is wise in this regard, and such a
procedure is recommended regardless of age.” –
Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
The
quote above actually acknowledges that not only hydration
dating (or obsidian dating), but all absolute dating methods,
“have their problems and limitations.” Specifically,
in order for hydration dating to work, the artifact’s
environment, specifically the temperature, must have been
constant or the temperature history of the object must be
known. Artifacts subjected to fire (which affects temperature)
or severe abrasion (which would affect the layers) will not
yield accurate dates. Furthermore, layers more than “0.004
centimeters” or “0.002 inches” might flake
off affecting dating. This factor alone generally limits this
method to dating objects less than 50,000 years, which severely
undermines the ability of this process to corroborate the
long ages of time necessary for evolution to occur.
Given
the amount of “unknowns” particularly in terms
of the need for a “constant temperature,” it is
no wonder that in the introductory paragraph for this type
of dating, Britannica cites the general problem that dating
methods involve such processes, which are not “known”
and are “not at all certain” to have had uniform
rates throughout the past
Like
so many of the other absolute dating methods, hydration dating
involves artifacts that have been subjected to processes that
can affect the dating. And while these factors must be known
in order for dating to occur, these factors are not known
but instead have to be assumed. Consequently, this dating
method is not based upon actual observed evidence but merely
on assumption.
The
fifth method that we will discuss is TL dating. “TL”
stands for “thermoluminescence” and the process
of TL dating centers on the concept that free electrons trapped
in a mineral escape when heated to a certain temperature.
It is assumed that thermoluminscent electrons are produced
at a constant rate by natural radiation. Consequently, by
measuring the amount of thermoluminescent electrons that escape
when a mineral is heated in the present, scientists can determine
how long the mineral has been building up thermoluminescent
electrons and, therefore, how long it that mineral has been
exposed to that constant rate of natural radiation. Thus,
it can be determined how much time has passed since the last
major heating event. Notice from the second quote below that
the time frame for TL dating is “several hundred thousand
years.”
“Dating
Methods, III ABSOLUTE DATING METHODS, D Thermoluminescence
(TL) Dating – This method is based
on the phenomenon of natural ionizing radiation inducing free
electrons in a mineral that can be trapped in defects of the
mineral's crystal lattice structure. These trapped electrons
escape as TL when heated to a temperature below incandescence,
so that by recording the TL of a mineral such as quartz and
assuming a constant
natural radiation level, the last drainage of the trapped
electrons can be dated back to several hundred thousand
years. In TL dating of pottery, for example, the specimen
is heated until it glows with energy stored since it was fired.”
– "Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Thermoluminescence
– The light energy
released is derived from electron displacements within the
crystal lattice of such a substance caused by previous exposure
to high-energy radiation. Heating the substance at temperatures
of about 450° C (842° F) and higher enables the trapped electrons
to return to their normal positions, resulting in the release
of energy. The intensity of the emission can be correlated
to the length of time that a given substance was exposed to
radiation; the longer the time allowed for the radiation to
build up an inventory of trapped electrons, the greater the
energy released. Because of this feature, thermoluminescence has been exploited as a
means of dating various minerals and archaeological artifacts.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
However,
as noted above, TL dating relies on the assumption of a constant
natural radiation level. If uniformitarianism is not true
and the radiation level is not constant, then this process
doesn’t work and its dates are not reliable. And not
only have we already seen that uniformitarianism is not true,
but the problematic nature of assuming the uniform rate of
TL production is further highlighted by the fact that solar
and volcanic heat are the 2 types of “natural radiation”
that produce TL.
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS, B Absolute Dating, B5 Other
Methods of Absolute Dating – Thermoluminescence
is a technique that measures electron emissions from once-heated
materials, such as pottery or rocks that
were once exposed to solar or volcanic heat.” –
"Archaeology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
In
short, TL dating requires the assumption that exposure to
solar and volcanic heat has been uniform and has not varied
for “several hundred thousand years,” which is
the timeframe covered by TL dating. This assumption is clearly
not reliable. In conclusion, even, as a result of these issues,
even Microsoft Encarta notes that “thermoluminescence”
dating is “unreliable” and in need of refinement.
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS, B Absolute Dating, B5 Other
Methods of Absolute Dating – Many thermoluminescence
tests have produced unreliable results. Archaeologists
are attempting to refine the technique.”
– "Archaeology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
Consequently,
TL dating does not work and does not provide any absolute
ages or support for the evolutionary age of the earth.
The
sixth method that we will discuss is dendrochronology, also
known as tree-ring dating. As indicated by the quotes below,
this method was originally developed in the southwestern United States.
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS, B Absolute Dating, 2 Tree-Ring
Dating – Dendrochronology,
or tree-ring dating, was originally developed in the Southwest
United States using the annual growth rings on
long-lived trees, such as bristlecone pine.” –
"Archaeology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia
99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
“Geologic
Time, III DATING METHODS – Dendrochronology
is a technique that uses the annual rings of trees in temperate
climates to estimate a tree's age.” – "Geologic
Time," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
The
basis of dendrochronology is the fact that trees generally
produce rings as they grow new wood around their trunk. Trees
that are in a “Temperate Zone”
of climate produce new wood twice a year, once in the spring
and once in the summer. As indicated by the quote below, these
rings are visible because “in most trees” the
spring wood is lighter in color than the summer wood. Thus,
it is the alternation of lighter and darker rings that displays
the growth of the wood.
“Wood,
II GRAIN AND STRUCTURE – Many woods have prominent
annual rings. The trunk of a tree does not grow in length, except at its tip,
but does grow in width.
The only portion of the trunk that is engaged in active
growth is the cambium, a thin layer entirely surrounding the trunk. In trees of
the Temperate Zone, the cambium
lays down new wood during the spring and summer, and in most
trees the early wood is more porous and therefore lighter
in color than the wood produced later in the season. The
trunk of a tree is thus surrounded each year by a new pair
of concentric sheaths, one darker than the other. Although
the thin layer of cambium is the only part of the trunk that
is alive in the sense that it is engaged in active growth,
living cells are also interspersed among the xylem cells of
the sapwood. As the tree grows older, however, the central
portion of the trunk dies completely; the ducts become plugged
with gums or resins, or merely air (see Gum). This central
part of the trunk is called heartwood. The internal changes
are accompanied by changes in color typical of the species
of trees, so that the heartwood is usually darker than the
sapwood.” – "Wood," Microsoft® Encarta®
Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights
reserved.
Consequently,
since the rings are usually produced annually, if you count
the number of rings, you know how many years the tree has
lived.
“Growth
ring – In
temperate or cold climates the age of a tree may be determined
by counting the number of annual rings at the base of
the trunk or, if the trunk is hollow, at the base of a large
root.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe
Edition
But
it is important to notice the qualifiers in these quotes.
As stated by the second to last quote above, only “most
trees” in “temperate zones” produce rings
that are discernable because the spring and summer wood are
different in color. Why are these qualifiers present, particularly
the “temperate zone”?
To
answer this question, we need to understand what a temperate
zone is. The climates of the earth were originally divided
up into 5 zones by the Greeks in the 5th century BC according
to lines of latitude.
“Zone
– Zone, in geography, any of the five divisions of the
surface of the earth, characterized by similar temperature
and sunshine distribution. An ancient concept, the zone system
roughly corresponds to modern systems of climatic classification.
An ancient concept, the zone system roughly corresponds to
modern systems of climatic classification. The
zone system originated with the ancient Greeks, who observed
that temperatures and angles of the sun's rays differed at
different locations. In the 5th century BC, the Greek philosopher
Parmenides proposed the division of the world into five zones,
separated by lines of latitude. These divisions included a
torrid zone between the tropic of Cancer [about 23 degrees
North] and the tropic of Capricorn [about 23 degrees South];
the north and south temperate zones between the tropics and
the polar circles [66 degrees North and South]; and the north
and south frigid zones, which lie between the polar circles
and the poles. This
system excluded other factors relevant to climate, such as
differences in elevation, the proximity of oceans, levels
of precipitation, and movement of air masses.” –
"Zone," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
As
outlined by the quote above, these five zones included a torrid
zone around the equator spanning from the Tropic of Cancer
to the Tropic of Capricorn, a frigid zone around the north
pole and the Arctic circle, a frigid zone around the south
pole in the Antarctic circle, a northern temperate zone between
the tropic of Cancer and the polar zone, and a southern temperate
zone between the tropic of Capricorn and the polar zone. However,
due to the fact that the “zone” system did not
accurately represent actual climates because it did not take
into consideration things like “levels of precipitation,”
this ancient climate system was replaced by “a more
comprehensive system” that took these critical factors
into account. This new system was put forward by Wladimir
Peter Koppen “in the late 19th and 20th centuries.”
“Zone
– The distribution of climate and biomes, or ecological communities such as deserts or rain forests, is therefore
considerably more complex than these five zones suggest. In
the late 19th and 20th centuries, German meteorologist Wladimir
Peter Köppen developed a more comprehensive system of climatic
mapping, based on temperature and precipitation variations,
that has formed the basis for subsequent systems of classification.
Köppen's system recognizes five major climate types: tropical moist climates, dry climates, moist mid-latitude climates
with mild winters, moist mid-latitude climates with severe
winters, and polar climates.” – "Zone,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
This
new system also had 5 major climates, including tropical moist
climates, dry climates, moist mid-latitude climates with mild
winters, moist mid-latitude climates with severe winters,
and polar climates. Microsoft Encarta provides a map of this
modern climate system.

“Climate
and Terrestrial Biomes [IMAGE CAPTION] – Regional climates may be described in terms of five different types
of biomes. A biome is characterized by the particular
combination of temperature, humidity, vegetation, and
associated animal life in an area. This map shows the distribution
of the world's major biomes: [1] rain forest
and savanna, [2] mixed forest and grasslands, [3] needle-leaf
and mixed forests, [4] steppe
and desert, and [5] tundra and icecaps. © Microsoft Corporation.
All Rights Reserved.” – "Climate and Terrestrial
Biomes," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998
Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.
As
we can see, this map does not correspond to the “zone”
system (including the “temperate zones”) developed
by the Greeks according to simple lines of latitude. In fact,
if you look at the southwestern United
States on the map, you will see that
the Great Basin is in the
arid, dry, desert climate classification (the darker yellow
color). Furthermore, Britannica qualifies the Great
Basin as “an arid expanse” and as
a desert.
“Great
Basin – also called Great Basin
Desert – distinctive natural feature of
western North America that
is equally divided into rugged, north-south–trending
mountain blocks and broad intervening valleys. It
covers an arid expanse of about 190,000 square miles (492,000
square km) and is bordered by the Sierra Nevada range on the
west, the Wasatch
Mountains on the
east, the Columbia Plateau on the north, and the Mojave
Desert on the south. With
the Sonoran, Chihuahuan, and Mojave deserts, the Great Basin
forms one of four divisions of the North
American Desert.”
– Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
This
is relevant for 2 reasons. First, as we have seen in earlier
quotes, the basis for tree-ring dating is the idea that “most
trees” in “a temperate zone” produce visible
rings annually.
“Wood,
II GRAIN AND STRUCTURE – In
trees of the Temperate Zone, the cambium lays down new
wood during the spring and summer, and
in most trees the early wood is more porous and therefore
lighter in color than the wood produced later in the season.
The trunk of a tree
is thus surrounded each year by a new pair of concentric sheaths,
one darker than the other.” – "Wood,"
Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft
Corporation. All rights reserved.
However,
this fundamental basis for tree-ring dating is not really
applicable to the oldest trees in the world, which are not
found in temperate zones at all but in the arid, desert climate
of the Great Basin, as indicated by the following quote.
“Great
Basin Bristlecone Pine [PHOTO CAPTION] – The Great Basin bristlecone pine can live over 4000 years and is believed
to be one of the oldest living trees on the planet.”
– Rod Planck/Photo Researchers, Inc., "Great
Basin Bristlecone Pine," Microsoft® Encarta®
Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights
reserved.
Second,
under extreme conditions and environmental or climate fluctuations,
“such as drought” sometimes no ring forms at all,
or more importantly, sometimes more than one ring forms.
“Angiosperm,
Structure and function, Tissue systems, Vascular tissue, Organization
of the vascular tissue – Growth
rings in the secondary xylem of temperate woody angiosperms
are usually annual, but under environmental
fluctuations, such as drought, more than one can form, or
none at all.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004
Deluxe Edition
“Growth
ring – in a cross section of the stem of a woody
plant, the increment of wood added during a single
growth period. In
temperate regions the growth period is usually one year, in
which case the growth ring may be called an “annual
ring.” In tropical regions growth rings may not be discernible
or are not annual. Even in temperate regions growth rings
are occasionally missing, or a second, or “false,”
ring may be deposited during a single year, for example,
following insect defoliation.” – Encyclopaedia
Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition
In
addition, in tropical climates the rings are either not discernable
(visible) or are not annual at all. In othe words, in tropical
climates, tree rings form more frequently due to the fact
that the climate is favorable for growth year round, not just
growth in spring and summer. Consequently, such rings are
more properly regarded as denoting “a single growth
period” rather than “a year.” In fact, for
this reason, Worldbook stipulates that the rings are “annual
rings” only “In regions where trees make a new
layer of wood once a year.”
“Tree,
Tree/How a tree grows – In
regions where trees make a new layer of wood once a year,
the layers form a series of annual
rings.” – Contributor: Richard H. Waring,
Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Forest Ecology, Oregon
State University.
Because
there can often be either extra rings or missing rings from
year to year, the ages determined by this could be higher
or lower than they should be. Since it is a dry, arid, desert
climate, this factor is heightened in the Great
Basin where the oldest trees in the world are
located. Morevoer, this factor is also heightened in tropical
climates. And as we explained in depth during our segment
entitled, “Focus on Critical Evidence: Evidence for
a Global Flood,” creationism proposes that before the
flood the climate was tropical worldwide. As a result, trees
found in archeological sites dating from before the flood,
such as those cited in the quote below, would not necessarily
reflect the true age of the tree or the site.
“Archeology,
VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS, B Absolute Dating, 2 Tree-Ring
Dating – In recent years, researchers have applied
dendrochronology to European oaks and a variety of Mediterranean
trees. Dendrochronologists have established tree-ring chronologies that extend
to as early as 6600
BC in Germany.
Using these tree-ring
chronologies, archaeologists have been able to date
the earliest farming in central Europe
to between 6000 and 5000 BC. Tree-ring dating has also
allowed scientists to date drought cycles that may have been
important in the rise and fall of cultures in the Mediterranean
and Aegean regions. At
the site of one of the world's earliest farming villages,
Çatal Hüyük in Turkey, British archaeologist Ian
Hodder used a tree-ring sequence to date individual houses
within the settlement that existed in about 7000
BC.” – "Archaeology," Microsoft®
Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved.
In
conclusion concerning dendrochronology, we can see that tree-rings
are not necessarily annual depending on climate fluctuations
and droughts. Some years might not produce any rings. Other
years might produce more than one. Furthermore, tree-ring
dating only goes back until the time of the flood, about 4,000-4,500
years, a fact which itself provides evidence that there was
such a flood. After all, if there was no flood, we should
have trees that are older than 4 thousand years. Furthermore,
these trees come from deserts where climate fluctuations and
droughts are common. Consequently, even in cases where those
living trees have a few more rings than the number of years
since the flood, that wouldn’t disprove the flood. In
a life that is 4,000 years old, those extra rings could just
as easily be the product of inclimate weather. And finally,
tree-ring dating would not be accurate for dating any trees
from before the flood, since the pre-flood climate is believed
to be tropical, in which case the climate is more favorable
to growth and rings are not annual.
This
completes our segment on the non-radiometric forms of absolute
dating. As we can see, none of the 6 forms of non-radiometric
absolute dating are reliable or based upon actual observed,
empirical evidence. Instead, they are based upon either unsubstantiated
or invalid assumptions. Consequently, non-radiometric dating
methods provide no support for the evolutionary age of the
earth and no means of identifying absolute ages or dates.