Home / Science VS Evolution / PDF /Encyclopedia  /Pathlights Home / Bookstore


Here are 16 basic reasons why radioactive dating methods are notoriously unreliable. This is science vs. evolution—a Creation-Evolution Encyclopedia, brought to you by Creation Science Facts.

This material is excerpted from the book, DATING OF TIME IN EVOLUTION. An asterisk ( * ) by a name indicates that person is not known to be a creationist. Of over 4,000 quotations in the books this Encyclopedia is based on, only 164 statements are by creationists.
You will have a better understanding of the following statements by scientists if you will also read the web page,
Dating of Time in Evolution.

Not dating methods, but a study in confusion:

1: No rock in the world is a closed system. They all can be, and probably have been, contaminated

2: Decay rates could have been different in the past. Under varying conditions, we have already found evidence of change in the present—and Joly found changes in the past

3: Daughter products could easily have been present in the beginning. An original intermingling of such products would nullify present attempts to date by daughter products

4: Unknown changes in our past environment could ruin the narrowly drawn assumptions. There is no way of knowing exactly what each local past environment was like

5: High energy particles, nearby radioactive minerals or contact with certain chemicals could earlier have significantly altered decay rates

6: Earlier changes in the atmosphere would have greatly affected decay rates. No one knows whether the earlier atmosphere was identically like our present one

7: The decay clocks did not have to start at the beginning of their chains. Daughter products could have been present in the beginning

8: Lead could originally have been mixed in with the uranium or thorium. It is only an assumption that all the lead could only be an end-product

9: Common Lead 9 (PB-209) could have been mixed in. This would also seriously affect the dating

10: Leaching could easily have occurred in past time. Passing solutions could have carried away portions of daughter products

11: Comparisons of lead ratios could be inaccurately made. This could damage test results in five ways

12: Any earlier change in the Van Allen belt would have decidedly affected decay rates. —And we have only known of this high-atmospheric belt since 1959

13: Free neutrons could be captured from neighboring lead 206. Most radiogenic lead on earth could have been produced by neutron capture

14: If the earth had originally been molten, this would have resulted in wide variations of rock settings. Intense heat damages radiodating clock settings

15: Uranium dates, thorium dates, and all the other dating methods always disagree with one another. This itself is strong evidence of the unreliability of the various methods

16: Some of the daughter products (such as argon) are gases which easily migrate out of the rocks. Why then are these daughter products relied on for dating purposes?


Forward to the next topic in this series: PALEORADIONICS CLASS DISCUSSION by a university student with his professor.