RE: Age of the Earth

Pim van Meurs (entheta@eskimo.com)
Tue, 25 Aug 1998 07:31:39 -0700

Vernon: <<Concerning the questionable use of 'radiometric clocks' in estimating
the Earth's age, I came across the following interesting analogy:
"We can compare radioactive dating methods to the melting of an ice
cube. If we know how fast ice cubes melt and we are presented with a
tray of water that is alleged to have been derived from the ice, we
could calculate how large the original ice cube was and how long it took
to melt. But what if we don't know if all the water we are presented
with has come from the ice?>>

Perhaps you should check out the 'isochron' method. This allows one to detect exactly such occurrences.

<< What if water was already present in the pan before the cube was put there to begin melting?>>

Same thing here. The isochron method will detect this initial 'water'.

VErnon:
<<"... Until the assumptions in a dating method are known and scrutinized,
the calculated data cannot be given serious consideration."(R.L.Wysong).>>

And for radiometric dating these assumptions are very well known and from a theoretical as well as experimental perscpective there is no reason to doubt the constancy of the decay rates. Initial presence of daughter isotopes, or later contamination can also be detected using isochron methods.


Vernon: <<Do you consider this a fair analogy? If so, perhaps you will admit that
the 'old earth' scenario stands on shaky ground. If not, perhaps you
would care to identify the divergencies.>>

It is fair IF the methods could not deal with the problems but they can.


Vernon: In your last posting to me you asked for evidences of a 'young earth'.
But the fact that you so aggressively challenge as you do suggests that
you are widely read and au fait with both sides of the argument. Surely,
therefore, you must be aware of a few examples. However, in case not,
here are some: oil gushers, atmospheric helium, ocean concentrations,
ocean sediments, comet decay, etc, etc. >>

I was hoping that you had some arguments which had not yet been explained in literature.
Atmospheric helium, ocean concentrations and sediment, comet decay all have perfectly good explanations in science.

Darn, and I really hoped for some real evidence.