Nuclear Chemistry & Radioactive Decay: Help and Review - Videos & Lessons | comfort-dom.info
This illustrates the whole problem with the radioactive dating of geological events . .. I am commencing (well now second guessing) a geology degree. in the way' of positive collaboration of reviewing and revising on methods, so called facts, The Bible answers those questions, of course, but is it true?. below on your worksheet or on a numbered sheet of paper. • Write an A if you .. Radioactive decay occurs when an unstable atomic nucleus changes into. REVIEW AND REINFORCE. Radioactive Dating. Understanding Main Ideas. Use the figure below to answer the questions 1–3. Write your answers on a.
If you do not have access to these, a class discussion, read aloud from an appropriate selection of textor other video review would be appropriate. Be sure to define the following words with the class: Discuss the possible uses of radioactive material in science.
BBC Bitesize goes on to explain radioactive dating in the following sectionthough it is only text and images, without an interactive video. Introduce the MEA lesson concept: Your students' help has been requested by the Natural History Foundation in order to help them select the proper elemental isotopes to use in their radioactive dating process. The students must decide which elemental isotope is best suited for determining the absolute age of one of three ancient discoveries.
In other words, there is a good case that the biblical record of historical events is vastly more reliable than the speculations of modern academics who were not there to see what happened and whose conclusions are driven by their secular ideology. Glauron October 22, I think ANDROLOMA was challenging the premise that the entire Bible is based on eyewitness accounts and to support the statement, points out there was no eye witness to the creation itself, which is completely valid.
Radioactive Dating: Half-Life & Geologic Time
Tradition would dictate that the creation account was revealed to Moses by God. An eye-witness acocunt of a historical event, such as the battlefield conditions at the Battle of Hastings, would carry more weight than a historians conjecture based on circumstantial evidence.
I appreciate your patience and gracious replies to some of the posts here. What I can offer is my own experience as it relates to the accuracy of the Bible.
The truth found there transformed my life from one of confusion, selfishness, and uncertainty to one of peace, purpose and understanding. When I realized that Jesus died on a cross because of people like me or more specifically for me, I chose in that moment to surrender my life to Him.
From that moment I was filled with peace in knowing that regardless of where the path would lead, as long as God was in control, it mattered very little which direction it took. Only that if God was leading it would be right and good. Well, 24 years later I can say that has been true and so has the Bible. Yes, believing in a young earth sometimes takes faith but not near as much faith as it takes to believe in evolution. I think one has to work hard to believe that the intelligent design behind even the simplest organism is due to random formations of the elements around us.
Since I have a personal and intimate relationship with the One who gave me new life, and since His Word the Bible has proven itself true over and over in spiritual things, I feel the other facts found there pertaining to creation etc.
My prayer for them is that the God of all creation will have mercy on them and open their eyes to the glorious truth revealed in Jesus Chist, that they might find peace and eternal life with the One who is love.
November 27, Glauron got me right.Radioactive Dating
Their admissions of no eyewitnesses are enough to lead one to presume that these stories have been embellished. The Torah is the Hebrew name for the five Books of Moses.
If you walk up to me and Tiger Woods, and we both start talking about golfing techniques, who are you going to believe first? The same should apply to dating…listen to those who are playing the game, not those who are on the sidelines. However, at least we are playing the game. The authors mention John Woodmorappe, who did a critique of radiometric dating, and provided samples of bad dates.
However, several real scientists have disproved his reasoning. Even without this, think about this…there have been many thousands of radiometric dates done.
Bad Dates Page 81 The authors claim that when bad dates surface, researchers quickly form excuses for discarding them. Nothing could be farther from the truth. Given the expense involved in dating, every attempt is made to make sense of the dates before they are non-chalantly discarded. However, since the young-earth theorist considers any date older than 6, years to be inaccurate, they non-chalantly discard them…thus it is the young-earth proponents that actually ignore First, the authors give the Australopithicus example, where the scientists apparently threw out 9 dates which did not fit the expected age.
There is an inherent problem with Argon dating, which involves excess Argon in recent age rocks. Due to this problem, geologists and other scientists know that they must look at recent radiometric dates with great scrutiny.
The key is to know when to disregard them, and when to accept them. Again, at least the old-earth scientists are playing the game, whereas the young-earth theorists completely refuse to play.
Radioactive decay | Physics | Pinterest | Physics, Chemistry and Science
At the bottom of page 82, the authors appeal to Job I love it when they do this. However, the same question can be asked the young earth creation science believers. They were not present either! At least the old-earth creationists play in this game. At this point it is appropriate to state this…when considering ages for the earth, always look at the references for the material.
If the reference work was accomplished in or by a young-earth theorist, it must be ignored.
- The Answers Book, Chapter 4
- 84 Other related Resources
- Who's it for?
What Dates Would You Like? Page 83 The authors mention the fact that dating labs have you estimate the age of the material to be dated.
The fatal flaw with radioactive dating methods
If I put down 40 million years, and it dates to million years, the lab will tell me Ma. Are the authors implying that the lab would test it to Ma, but because it is only expected to be 40 million years old, so the lab will disregard the Ma date and will tell you something around the date you expected.
Methods Should Work Reliably…. Page 83 Yes, in a perfect world this would be a nice thing. Fortunately, geologists know when to accept dates, and when to reject dates. In other words, they know the limitations of the dating methods, and take them into account.
The examples they give are for young lava flows. Geologists have known for years about the excess argon problem which throws off the dates. Look at the date chart at the top of page The dates range from 10, years to 2, million years.