Most people think that radioactive dating has proven the earth is billions of years old.
After all, textbooks, media, and museums glibly present ages of millions of years as fact.
However, none of the criticisms of young earth creationists have any scientific merit.
Radiometric dating remains a reliable scientific method.
The straightforward reading of Scripture reveals that the days of creation () were literal days and that the earth is just thousands of years old and not billions.
There appears to be a fundamental conflict between the Bible and the reported ages given by radioisotope dating.
The three main assumptions that affect the results of radiometric dating are: 1) the rate of decay has always been constant, 2) there has been no contamination (no movement of elements into or out of the object over time), and 3) we can determine how much daughter element there was to begin with.[ii] There are many test results that make the reliability of these dating techniques very questionable.[iii] Naturalists try to explain these questionable results, but still can’t adequately explain them from their worldview.[iv] Evidence from “as far back as 1971” may show “that high pressure could increase decay rates very slightly for at least 14 isotopes.”[v] Naturalists even admit that radiocarbon dating does not work on living mussels because of the lack of new carbon in that environment.
Though they are very tiny, polonium radiohalos have a huge message that cannot be ignored.
This apparent consistency in textbooks and the media has convinced many Christians to accept an old earth (4.6 billion years old).
Radioisotope dating (also referred to as radiometric dating) is the process of estimating the age of rocks from the decay of their radioactive elements.
Most people, even the experts in the field, forget the assumptions on which radiometric dating is based.
Radioactive Dating There are basically two different kinds of radioactive dating methods.