This series will (hopefully) answer all of your questions about these dating processes.
NOTE: This is a section undergoing constant research and this article is meant only to provide some of the most direct information about radiodating in general. We have researchers investigating all aspects of it, and their findings will be presented either as a series of articles following this one or as another, more technical article.
First of all, what do we mean when we use the term radiometric dating? What is it?
What is Radiometric Dating
Well, when radiometric dating is concerned, most people mean Carbon 14 dating, which is probably the best known dating system of them all, but there are many, many other kinds of radiometric dating (Potassium-40, uranium 238, Lead-206, Nitrogen-14, etc--each of these will be broken down later in this series)
Anyway, the theory behind radiometric dating is that if a rock contains an unstable element (like any of the above mentioned substances), this makes the rock or mineral radioactive. The radioactive substance (like, for example, uranium 238) will decay, or break down, into more stable daughter products. So, for example, if a rock contains uranium 238, eventually this will break down into Lead 206. Some of these take many steps as the unstable element breaks down into a daughter product which then breaks down into another daughter product until it reaches an inert (stable) state. Some of the unstable elements break directly into the inert daughter state in one go.
What scientists did was find the rate of decay for a given element (like, again, Uranium 238) and then using a uniformatarian mindset, assumes that this decay rate has been stable (unchanging or unvarying) throughout time and can calculate how long that radioactive element would need to break down to its daughter products.
So, for example, one gram of Uranium 238 takes 4.5 billion years to reach the half-way point (half-life) of its decay into its stable daughter product, Lead 206.
What scientists also found was that everything is radioactive to some degree, and will contain one or more of these radioactive elements, which are constantly breaking down.
So in the case of Carbon-14, scientists found that all plant-eaters eat plants (which will become carbon-14) and so always have some carbon-14 in their bodies. They also found that meat-eaters will then eat the plant-eaters, thus absorbing the carbon-14 into their systems. Now when the creature is alive, they ammount of carbon is constantly being replenished and so cannot be calculated, but when the creature dies, the intake of carbon stops and begins to decay, allowing a measurement to the date which the creature died and the carbon began to consistantly decay.
The Unreliability of Radiometric Dating
The thesis of this article is that radiometric dating is entirely unreliable.
This dating process requires at least five unprovable assumptions:
1. We know the starting and ending numbers.
2. The rate has remained the same.
3. The system has remained closed.
4. Each system must initially have contained none of its daughter products.
5. The clock had to start at the beginning, that is, no daughter products were present, only those elements at the top of the radioactive chain were in existence.
I will now deal specifically with all of these assumptions.
1. The way scientists determined the starting numbers is through a mathematical extrapolation based upon the current rate of decay, which is an unreliable assuption and specifically not part of science because the actual decay rate from the creation to this point cannot be observed nor repeatedly demonstrated. No one but God has been everywhere at everywhen in order to reliably determine the actual decay rate, and, as I like to say, He isn't into publishing scientific papers. Surely you can understand the tentitive nature of this assumption.
2. There is much evidence to indicate that the rate has not remained the same. For example, potassium and uranium, both common radiometric parent substances, easily dissolve in water, meaning that they could be leeched out of rocks.
"As much as 80 percent of the potassium in a small sample of an iron meteorite can be removed by distilled water in 4.5 hours."—L.A. Rancitelli and D.E. Fisher, "Potassium-Argon Ages of Iron Meteorites," in Planetary Science Abstracts, 48th Annual Meeting of the American Geophysical Union (1967), p. 167.
Field and laboratory observations and experiments have shown that the resetting and changing in specimen clocks can and does happen. It has been found than any number of enviromental conditions will alter the decay rate of any radioactive mineral through [1] the bombardment of the specimen by high energy particles from space, such as neutrinos, cosmic rays, etc, [2] certain chemicals are brought into contact with the mineral, [3] a nearby radiation-emiting radioactive mineral [4] if physical pressure is employed on the radioactive mineral.
"The deviations [in decay rate] are a function of the environment. . we are each convinced that the thesis of 'decay independence' and the thesis of 'decay constancy' needs considerable revision and reexamination . . at a minimum, an unreliability factor must be incorporated into the age dating calculations. "—J. Anderson and G. Spangler, "Radiometric Dating: Is the 'Decay Constant' Constant?" in Pensee, Fall, 1974, p. 34.
One researcher at Trinity College in Dublin (John Joly) spent many years researching pleochroic halos being emited by radioactive substances. His findings indicated that the decay rates had changed in the past.
"His [Joly's] suggestion of varying rate of disintegration of uranium at various geological periods would, if correct, set aside all possibilities of age calculation by radioactive methods ." —A.F. Kovarik, "Calculating the Age of Minerals from Radioactivity Data and Principles," in Bulletin 80 of the National Research Council, June 1931, p. 107.
Merely one of the four processes mentioned above which could alter decay rates would be enough to contaminate any radioactive substances to the point of it being enough to eliminate radiometric dating as a reliable clock for the past.
Speaking on the possability of atmosphereic change affecting decay rates, J. R. Arnold states: “Cosmic rays, high-energy mesons, neutrons, electrons, protons, and photons enter our atmosphere continually. These are atomic particles traveling at speeds close to that of the speed of light. Some of these rays go several hundred feet underground and 1400 meters [1,530 yards] into the ocean depths. The blanket of air covering our world is equivalent to 34 feet [104 dm] of water, or 1 meter [1.093 yd] thickness of lead. If at some earlier time this blanket was more heavily water-saturated, it would produce a major change—from what the condition is now,—in the atomic clocks within radioactive minerals. Prior to the time of the Flood, there was a much greater amount of water in the air.
"So far there is no proof independent of the method, that the cosmic ray intensity has remained constant, and however reasonable it may be, we must rank this as a pure assumption. "—J.R. Arnold, Nuclear Geology (1954), p. 350.
This goes without mentioning the Van Allen radiation belt which encircles the globe at about 450 miles is highly radioactive and high-altitude tests have revealed that it emits 3-4000 as much radiation as cosmic rays. Even slight effects in this belt would seriously effect radioactive substances.
3. The enviroment is not a closed system, but an open system. In field conditions, there is no such thing as a closed system. A rock cannot be sealed off from other rocks, water, chemicals, and changing radiation from space. All things, animate and inanimate, effect one another and change one-another. Argon is a gas produced by decay from potassium and moves quite readily.
“The two principle problems have been the uncertainties in the radioactive decay constants of potassium and in the ability of minerals to retain the argon produced by this decay."—*G.W. Wetherill, "Radioactivity of Potassium and Geologic Time," in Science, September 20, 1957, p. 545.
"The age of our globe is presently thought to be some 4.5 billion years, based on radio-decay rates of uranium and thorium. Such `confirmation' may be short-lived, as nature is not to be discovered quite so easily. There has been in recent years the horrible realization that radio-decay rates are not as constant as previously thought, nor are they immune to environmental influences. And this could mean that the atomic clocks are reset during some global disaster, and events which brought the Mesozoic [the dinosaur age] to a close may not be 65 million years ago, but rather, within the age and memory of man."—*Fredrick B. Jeaneman, "Secular Catastrophism," in Industrial Research and Development, June 1982, p. 21.
4. There is much evidence to suggest that the radioactive minerals already contained amounts of daughter products initially. For example, one would logically assume (if they ascribed to the radiometric dating methods) that initially there would be only those elements at the top of the radioactive decay chain and the rest would be developed later through the normal decay process. However, this is not what the evidence indicates.
"Countless [radioactive dating] determinations have been made by this method, but it was found that the premises on which the method rests are not valid for most uranium minerals. There is definite evidence of selective uranium leaching by acid waters, and it is now known that most radioactive minerals contained some lead when they were formed."—Henry Faul, Nuclear Geology (1954), p. 282.
Also, we know from Dr. Robert Gentry’s research that that primordial (e.g. the absolutely original, first) polonium was in the granite when that granite came into existance in a solid state. Evolutionists still maintain that polonium is a daughter product of uranium disintegration. See his amazing book, Creation’s Tiny Mystery for all the juicy technical details.
5. The Bible gives much evidence that the radiometric clocks did not start at the beginning (e.g. containing only, for example, uranium 238, which would then decay over the continuing years into its daughter products, like Lead 206), but began decaying in an enviroment which would be fully developed.
But if the original Creation occured—or there was a catastrophic world-wide flood—everything would begin thereafter with an “appearence of age” or “appearence of maturity.” God created a complete and fully-fuctional universe from the first moment. All of the plants and animals were adult, not embryos, and fully functioning as if they had been born and raised. Adam could walk, talk, think, speak, and get married on the first day he was created. The garden of eden did not appear as a patch of dry ground, and bunch of seeds surrounding two babies who would grow into Adam and Eve. It was all fully formed.
Now if this is the case, radioactive minerals would already be part-way through their half-lives, giving them the appearence of greater age than they actually were. This would greatly effect their ages through calculations of radiometric decay.
Conclusion:
Any one of the above mentioned problems with the accuracy of radiometric dating is enough to cause reasonable doubt as to its accuracy, but all of them together (most of which have actually been documented problems with RM-dating as one can see from the citations of quotations from non-creation scientists) put the concept in serious trouble.
These are problems that cannot be solved--at all. Due to the fact that we know nothing of radiometric decay rates all through history, nor what is called Deep Time by old agers. They cannot be solved, giving radiometric dating a lethal blow. It cannot be relied upon to give accurate ages for the earth. It's that simple.
Proceed to "Anomalies in Radiometric Dating"
Written by Adam Ross
