Assumptions behind radiometric dating
So the so-called absolute radiometric dating methods themselves are not absolute.
It is a misleading term which is much used by evolutionists in order to seemingly prove the unobservable old age of the earth.
by Tas Walker A geologist works out the relative age of a rock by carefully studying where the rock is found in the field.
The field relationships, as they are called, are of primary importance and all radiometric dates are evaluated against them.
21) “There has been in recent years the horrible realization that radio decay rates are not as constant as previously thought, nor are they immune to environmental influences.
And this could mean that the atomic clocks are reset during some global disaster, and events that brought the Mesozoic to a close may not be 65 million years old but, rather, within the age and memory of man.” If atomic clocks could be reset as this and other scientists admit, than the first assumption supporting this dating method is shown to be false.
My aim in the following brief discussion is simply to hit the high spots.A second, independent, astronomical method is to use standard techniques to measure some parameters of stars (mass, luminosity, compositor, and surface temperature), from which a well-confirmed theory of the life histories of stars enables physicists to compute their. Finally, considerations of radioactive decay make it possible to calculate the time at which certain heavy elements were formed.These techniques are somewhat similar to the radiometric methods of dating rocks, which I shad consider in a little more detail.Special emphasis is on demonstrating that discrepant results are not the exception, but the rule, and that arguments used to justify so-called good dates are, when closely examined, arbitrary and without foundation. But the reality of the day is that any method based on assumptions can never offer absolute results.