Radiometric dating christian perspective
In addition, the RATE team used an overly-simple model for helium diffusion from zircons rather than a more realistic model that takes into account defects in the crystal structure.All of this biased the results in favor of a younger Earth. Hebert stated that radiocarbon dating assumes the same ratio of carbon-14 (radiocarbon) in the atmosphere for thousands of years.
One of these was the study done in the 1990s by Steven Austin of the Institute for Creation Research, in which ICR submitted samples from the 1986 dacite lava dome eruption of Mt. The YEC reasoning on this is that if radiometric dating cannot yield a “common sense” date on a sample of known age, how can scientists trust it for dating any rocks?These early geologists—along with modern geologists—observed a rock record that tells a story.That story includes chapters that speak of processes that require lengthy periods of time, such as the cooling and crystallization of magma to form igneous rocks, weathering of rocks to produce ancient soils (paleosols) and unconformities; growth of fossil reef organisms (as well as other complete fossilized ecosystems), and transformation of rocks by metamorphic processes.There are several obvious problems with this argument: I cannot think of a single geological process that unambiguously points to an Earth that is only 6000 years old.I also cannot think of a single geological process that is inconsistent with an Earth that is many millions of years old.
Search for radiometric dating christian perspective:
Without the various radiometric dating methods, geologists would still believe Earth is ancient.