Radioactive dating age earth is ashley leggat and michael seater dating 2016

Applying the reasonable premise that this planet never had a magnetic field as great as that of a magnetic star, one can note from Table 2 that the origin of the earth’s magnetic field had to be more recent than 8000 B. That is to say, the origin of the earth’s magnetic field was less than 10,000 years ago.

Just how much more recent than 10,000 years cannot be determined from present scientific knowledge.

Creationists, however, typically state or imply that the principle of uniformity, as used by scientists, means that the rates of natural processes are always constant.

radioactive dating age earth-23

greek orthodox singles dating - Radioactive dating age earth

In the remainder of this chapter I examine 49 of the “ages” of the Earth advanced by creation “scientists”, using Morris and Parker’s (97) tabulation (Table 10) as a guide.

I will show that all 49 of these ages are invalid and that most are probably best described as silly.

History, human or geological, represents our hypothesis, couched in terms of past events, devised to explain our present-day observations. Fundamentally, they are two: (1) We assume that natural laws are invariant with time (2) We exclude hypotheses of the violation of natural laws by Divine Providence, or other forms of supernaturalism. 31) The principle of uniformity, if it has any meaning at all in modern science, includes no more than these two principles.

Indeed, most modern scholars of the subject have concluded that uniformitarianism today is simply the application of the scientific method to nature and that the term is so confusing it should be abandoned (for example, Gould, 59, p. Thus, in assuming and then condemning constant rates for geologic processes, Morris and Parker (97) and their colleagues have set up a straw man based on an obsolete historical definition of uniformity that no modern geologist would accept.

Thus, it will suffice to summarize briefly the evidence against Barnes’ propositions.

To a first approximation, the Earth’s field is that of a dipole with the lines of flux emerging at the poles.Following an hypothesis he erroneously attributes to Sir Horace Lamb, Barnes claims that the magnetic field has been decaying exponentially since the creation of the Earth and calculates that the half-life of the decay is 1400 years.He then extrapolates the decay of the field backward in time until he arrives at the value for a magnetic star, and uses that time (8000 B.Nevertheless, all things considered, it seems that those ages on the low end of the spectrum are likely to be more accurate than those on the high end.This conclusion follows from the obvious fact that: (1) they are less likely to have been affected by initial concentrations or positions other than “zero”; (2) the assumption that the system was a “closed system” is more likely to be valid for a short time than for a long time; (3) the assumption that the process rate was constant is also more likely to be valid for a short time than for a long time.n spite of conclusive evidence of the Earth’s antiquity, the proponents of “scientific” creationism stubbornly maintain that the Earth is only about 10,000 years old (Table 9). They have no consistent set of data that leads to any definite age for the Earth.

Tags: , ,