Radiometric dating and creation science help updating reflect
Creationists do admit that radioactive decay has occurred, but “it is important to understand the simple, fundamental principle behind all dating methods, and why they are not able to produce objective, absolute dates…The fatal flaw is that all scientific measurements are made in the present, whereas a date relates to a time in the past.We cannot go back into the past to measure all the parameters we need in order to do the dating calculation.Different radiometric dating methods, on the same materials, often give very different results as evidenced by Mt.Ngauruhoe.[xiv] “The Grand Canyon was once dated at 6 million years, but recently scientists revised the date to 17 million years.So geologists research how other geologists have interpreted the other rocks in the area in order to find out what sort of dates they would expect.
“The widespread emanation of C-free volcanogenic carbon dioxide after the Flood would have further inflated the carbon-14 dates of tree rings in a systematic manner in many parts of the world.”[vii] Naturalists have to assume whether wood remains were near volcanic vents or not.
A few weeks later, because of a different radiometric dating method using the phosphate mineral called apatite, scientists concluded that the last of the dinosaurs may have wandered around the canyon 65 million years ago.”[xv] “Rock samples brought back from the moon were tested and dated.
Some were only millions of years old, while others were 28 billion years old.”[xvi] “Conflicting radioactive dating results are reported all the time and, on their own, there is no way of knowing what they mean.
Ngauruhoe, New Zealand, yield a rubidium-strontium “age” of 133 million years, a samarium-neodymium “age” of 197 million years, and a uranium-lead “age” of 3.908 billion years!
”[xiii] So if radiometric dating doesn’t even work on things of known age, is it reliable to determine accurate dates for things of unknown ages?