| − | '''Radiometric dating''' is a method of determining the age of an artifact by measuring the amount of radioactive decay that has occurred.<ref>[http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/radiometric.html Radiometric Time Scale] USGS</ref> Radiometric dating is mostly used to determine the age of rocks, though a particular form of radiometric dating—called [[Radiocarbon dating]]—can date wood, cloth, skeletons, and other organic material. | + | '''Radiometric dating''' is a method of determining the age of an artifact by assuming that decay rates have been constant (see below for the flaws in that assumption) and measuring the amount of radioactive decay that has occurred.<ref>[http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/radiometric.html Radiometric Time Scale] USGS</ref> Radiometric dating is mostly used to determine the age of rocks, though a particular form of radiometric dating—called [[Radiocarbon dating]]—can date wood, cloth, skeletons, and other organic material. |
| − | Although radiometric dating methods are widely used and their results widely quoted, they are not necessarily reliable and scientists using them often do not accept their accuracy.For instance radioactive dating says the earth is 4.6 billion years old<ref>hypertextbook.com/facts/1997/MollyMoran.shtml></ref> while the bible(the infallible word of God<ref>www.believers.org/believe/bel191.htm</ref>) quotes the world to be around 6-10 thousand years old.<ref>www.independencebaptist.org/6,000%20year%20old%20earth/6,000_year_old_earth.htm</ref> | + | Although radiometric dating methods are widely quoted by [[atheists]], they are inappropriate for aging the entire universe due to likely variations in decay rates. [[Atheistic]] scientists insist that Earth is 4.6 billion years old<ref>hypertextbook.com/facts/1997/MollyMoran.shtml></ref> while the Bible (the infallible word of God<ref>www.believers.org/believe/bel191.htm</ref>) suggests that the world to be around 6-10 thousand years old.<ref>www.independencebaptist.org/6,000%20year%20old%20earth/6,000_year_old_earth.htm</ref> |
| | {{QuoteBox|C14 dating was being discussed at a symposium on the prehistory of the Nile Valley. A famous American colleague, Professor Brew, briefly summarized a common attitude among archaeologists towards it, as follows:<br />"If a C14 date supports our theories, we put it in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put it in a footnote. And if it is completely 'out of date', we just drop it."<br />Few archaeologists who have concerned themselves with absolute chronology are innocent of having sometimes applied this method...<ref>T. Säve-Söderbergh and I. U. Olsson, ‘C14 dating and Egyptian chronology’, in ''Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology'', Proceedings of the Twelfth Nobel Symposium, Ingrid U. Olsson (editor), Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm, and John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, p. 35, 1970. Quoted in Lamb, 2007.</ref>}} | | {{QuoteBox|C14 dating was being discussed at a symposium on the prehistory of the Nile Valley. A famous American colleague, Professor Brew, briefly summarized a common attitude among archaeologists towards it, as follows:<br />"If a C14 date supports our theories, we put it in the main text. If it does not entirely contradict them, we put it in a footnote. And if it is completely 'out of date', we just drop it."<br />Few archaeologists who have concerned themselves with absolute chronology are innocent of having sometimes applied this method...<ref>T. Säve-Söderbergh and I. U. Olsson, ‘C14 dating and Egyptian chronology’, in ''Radiocarbon Variations and Absolute Chronology'', Proceedings of the Twelfth Nobel Symposium, Ingrid U. Olsson (editor), Almqvist & Wiksell, Stockholm, and John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, p. 35, 1970. Quoted in Lamb, 2007.</ref>}} |