Samples of internet dating profiles
However, even uncertainties of only 1% in the half-lives lead to very significant discrepancies in the derived radioisotope ages.
The recognition of an urgent need to improve the situation is not new (for example, Min et al. It continues to be mentioned, at one time or another, by every group active in geo- or cosmochronology (Boehnke and Harrison 2014; Schmitz 2012).
There is thus no impediment to accepting and using the Bible’s account of Creation and the Flood as a reliable framework for unravelling the history of the earth and the Pb isotopes found in its minerals and rocks.
Radioisotope dating of minerals, rocks and meteorites is perhaps the most potent claimed proof for the supposed old age of the earth and the solar system.
Zircon (Zr Si O) in particular has been the focus of thousands of geochronological studies, because of its ubiquity in felsic igneous rocks and its claimed extreme resistance to isotopic resetting (Begemann et al. However, accurate radioisotopic age determinations require that the decay constants or half-lives of the respective parent radionuclides be accurately known and constant in time.
Nevertheless, the ultimate foundation of this U-Pb dating methodology is the assumption that the earth formed from the solar nebula.2001; Steiger and Jäger 1977), in spite of ongoing attempts (Miller 2012).The uncertainties associated with direct half-life determinations are, in most cases, still at the 1% level, which is still significantly better than any radioisotope method for determining the ages of rock formations.The stunning improvements in the performance of mass spectrometers during the past four or so decades, starting with the landmark paper by Wasserburg et al.
(1969), have not been accompanied by any comparable improvement in the accuracy of the decay constants (Begemann et al.However, problems remain in the interpretation of the measured Pb isotopic ratios to transform them into ages.