Dating fossils and rocks mike riddle
From the data above, obviously that is not the case.
And the differences can be quite dramatic: Basalt – a type of volcanic rock – dated by K-Ar to 45 million years old, while unfossilized wood entombed in the basalt is dated to 45 thousand years old by Carbon14 dating. Or the indisputable example of rock formed during the Mt Saint Helens eruption in 1980.
For take off, a pilot needs to know things like: wind direction and speed, runway direction and length, aircraft weight, air temperature and altitude above sea level, runway condition (wet, dry, snow covered, etc.). And as noted above, those guess have been shown to be consistently wrong.
Given all the needed factors (and pilots are required to know them and plan for them before every flight) a pilot can accurately predict the performance of his aircraft so he can determine whether he can safely take off and conduct the flight. Age is not a quantity that can be directly measured.
It’s science and many believe “science” to be synonymous with “always true” and therefore don’t question the data given, even when it contradicts the Bible – which also claims to be always true in information that it affirms.
So when the two contradict – as they do with the age of the universe and the earth – many abandon the faith and reject the Genesis account because current science tells them that the universe and the earth is billions of years old, and disregard the biblical account – which indicates an age of about 6,000 years.
In fact you may have already noticed a number of dead give aways in the above description of the hard science parameter specifications of aircraft performance above.
Those give aways are words like: Precisely quantifying aircraft performance is all about knowing conditions and circumstances.
All you need to do is compare the methodology of radiometric dating with that of predicting aircraft performance and the answer becomes perfectly obvious.We know the age of those rocks because humans were there to observe the formation. Why this cavalier attitude toward the inaccuracy of all radiometric dating methods?But when dated by the K-Ar method, did they get an age of a few years old? The K-Ar method showed the age of the newly formed rocks as between 0.35 and 2.8 million years old. Clearly incorrect. Simply because they have a story to protect, namely that “the earth is billions of years old.” Because if the true age of the earth and universe were determined, the secular religious stories of evolution and the Big Bang would be demolished, having been clearly demonstrated to be false.Or consider the statement of an evolutionist who didn’t agree with the radiometric dating (using five different radiometric techniques) of Australia’s “Mungo Man”, thinking it placed humans in Australia too early.He stated: So here’s another evolutionist who refused to accept the results given from radiometric dating.
Search for dating fossils and rocks mike riddle:
That there are different methods of determining weight is irrelevant to the fact that your weight is a single number, not a different number based on the method used.