New methods of dating archaeology

Evolutionists assume that the rate of cosmic bombardment of the atmosphere has always remained constant and that the rate of decay has remained constant.

Scientists place great faith in this dating method, and yet more than 50% of radiocarbon dates from geological and archaeological samples of northeastern North America have been deemed unacceptable after investigation.

You can help Amazing Discoveries reduce costs by upgrading or replacing your internet browser with one of the options below.

We thank you in advance for partnering with us in this small but significant way. All methods of radioactive dating rely on three assumptions that may not necessarily be true: It is assumed that the rate of decay has remained constant over time.

A further example from a lava flow off the coast of Hawaii shows similar discrepancies.

If dated with the carbon-14 method, the flow appears to be less than 17,000 years old, but dating with the potassium argon method gives dates of 160,000 to 43 million years.

They will argue that the clock was not reset if the age is too old, or that isotopes were selectively removed if the age turns out to be too young.

Volcanic ejecta of Mount Rangitoto (Auckland, New Zealand) was found to have a potassium-40 age of 485,000 years, yet trees buried within the volcanic material were dated with the carbon-14 method to be less than 300 years old.

A rock sample from Nigeria was dated at 95 million years by the potassium-argon method, 750 million years by the uranium-helium method, and less than 30 million years by the fission-track method.

If the clock is not set to zero when a deposit forms, then there can be no starting point from which to calculate the age of a deposit.

It is assumed that we are dealing with a closed system—no loss of either parent or daughter elements has occurred since the study material formed.

No scientist can guarantee that any sample can be considered a closed system unless it was isolated from its environment when it was formed.


Leave a Reply