Radiometric dating debate

This age is computed under the assumption that the parent substance (say, uranium) gradually decays to the daughter substance (say, lead), so the higher the ratio of lead to uranium, the older the rock must be.Of course, there are many problems with such dating methods, such as parent or daughter substances entering or leaving the rock, as well as daughter product being present at the beginning.Repeated recalibrations and retests, using ever more sophisticated techniques and equipment, cannot shift that date. With modern, extremely precise, methods, error bars are often only 1% or so.The fossil record is fundamental to an understanding of evolution.Biologists actually have at their disposal several independent ways of looking at the history of life - not only from the order of fossils in the rocks, but also through phylogenetic trees. Relative dating is done by observing fossils, as described above, and recording which fossil is younger, which is older.

Today, innovative techniques provide further confirmation and understanding of the history of life.If the fossils, or the dating of the fossils, could be shown to be inaccurate, all such information would have to be rejected as unsafe.Geologists and paleontologists are highly self-critical, and they have worried for decades about these issues. D., is a vertebrate paleontologist with particular interests in dinosaur origins and fossil history.This belief in long ages for the earth and the existence of life is derived largely from radiometric dating.These long time periods are computed by measuring the ratio of daughter to parent substance in a rock and inferring an age based on this ratio.

Search for radiometric dating debate:

radiometric dating debate-31radiometric dating debate-4

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

One thought on “radiometric dating debate”