Evolutionary dating how accurate
It furnishes some good evidences that creationists often use.
But we won't discuss the C-14 method in this article.
In 1907, Bertram Boltwood published an article describing a novel, radiometric method for determining the age of minerals - a method he used to date a rock sample at more than 2 billion years: to search the CAS databases for additional information about radiometric dating and evolution.
If your organization is enabled to use the web version of Sci Finder, you can click the links in this article to directly access details of the cited references.
So in order to date most older fossils, scientists look for layers of igneous rock or volcanic ash above and below the fossil.
Nearly 50 years after Darwin published , research on radioactive elements in rocks provided the first reliable evidence that the earth was old enough to accommodate the evolution of complex organisms.But it is not the fact that many people, even scientists, believe a theory that shows it to be correct, but rather that it passes reasonable and unbiased tests of verification.I have seen many papers by evolutionary biologists presenting evidence and arguing about various mechanisms of evolution, but I have not seen a single paper in a scientific journal seriously considering the question of whether evolution is true and attempting to answer it by putting the theory to an unbiased test.Certainly the majority of scientists accept radiometric dating.And yet, there is really no scientific reason proving that radiometric dating is correct, and a number of evidences showing that it doesn't work. We'll find that faith in materialism, and rejection of any supernatural activity, is the foundation stone of radiometric analysis, even before any measurements are made.