Re: Dating Old Rocks (was Dennett's bad word ...)

From: Joel Duff (joelduff@nls.net)
Date: Thu Mar 23 2000 - 15:03:02 EST

  • Next message: Tedd Hadley: "Re: Disbelieving Darwin and Feeling No Shame, by William Dembski"

    Just a quick comment on the below. I think the YEC response might be that
    there might have been different decay rates in the past such that accross
    the board radioactive decay occurred at higher rates in the past. If this
    were so then the fact that the isotope ratios we see today seemt to suggest
    a 770 Ma to 7 BY age would not be a coincidence. I agree though, that if
    one assumes constancy or even near constancy of decay rates then the
    isotopic ratios we would suggest an old earth. Just throwing out a
    possible response you might get from a YEC in case you had not been aware.
    Regards,
    Joel

    >From the table of data that I gave and using 10 half-lifes as a rule of
    >thumb, the range of possible limits for the creation of elements found in
    >our solar system would fall between a lower limit of 700 M.Y. and an upper
    >limit of 7 B.Y.
    >In my original post, I rounded that lower limit a little to let the last
    >atom decay.
    >
    >As you noted, the current estimate of the Earth's age is about 4.5 B.Y.
    >Last time I heard, the age of the solar system is estimated at about 5 B.Y.
    >Those numbers fall between the 0.7 & 7 B.Y. range predicted by the spread of
    >naturally occurring isotopes. Amazing coincidence, isn't it?
    >>
    >>Have I missed something?
    >>
    >Just clarity in my original post.
    >
    >Steve

    *******************************************
    Dr. R. Joel Duff, Assistant Professor
    Dept. of Biology, ASEC 185
    Campus Mail 3908
    University of Akron
    Akron, OH 44325-3908
    Office: 330-972-6077
    e-mail: rjduff@uakron.edu
    *******************************************



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Mar 23 2000 - 15:03:33 EST