Browse Search Feedback Other Links Home Home The Talk.Origins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy

Index to Creationist Claims,   edited by Mark Isaak,     Copyright © 2004

Previous Claim: CD004   |   List of Claims   |   Next Claim: CD011


주장 CD010:

방사성 연대측정은 신뢰할 수 없는 결과를 내놓는다.
Radiometric dating gives unreliable results.

Source:

Brown, Walt, 1995. In the Beginning: Compelling evidence for creation and the Flood. Phoenix, AZ: Center for Scientific Creation, p. 24.

답변:

  1. 서로 다르고, 독립적인 방사성 연대측정을 이용해서,  상호 독립적인 측정을 실시한 결과 일치된 결과가 나왔다[Meert 2000 Dalrymple 2000 Lindsay 1999]. 이러한 결과는 우연이나, 붕괴률이 일정하다는 가정에 포함되었다는 측정방법의 구조적 오류로는 설명될 수 없다.

    Independent measurements, using different and independent radiometric techniques, give consistent results [Meert 2000 Dalrymple 2000 Lindsay 1999]. Such results cannot be explained either by chance or by a systematic error in decay rate assumptions.

  2. 방사성 동위원소 연대 측정은 몇가지 비방사성 연대측정 방법과 일치된 결과를 내놓는다.

    Radiometric dates are consistent with several non-radiometric dating methods.


  3. 창조론자들이 주장하는 방사성 연대측정이 서로 일치하지 않는다는 것은 아주 적은 사례에 근거를 두고 있는 것이다. 그들은 엄청난 양의 방사성 동위원소의 연대측정 결과가 서로 일관성을 보이고 있다는 것을 무시한다[e.g. Harland et al. 1990].

    The creationist claim that radiometric dates are inconsistent rest on only a few examples. They ignore the vast majority of radiometric dates showing consistent results [e.g. Harland et al. 1990].

Links:

Thompson, Tim, 2003. A radiometric dating resource list. http://www.tim-thompson.com/radiometric.html

Wiens, Roger C., 1994, 2002. Radiometric dating: A Christian perspective. http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

References:

  1. Dalrymple, G. Brent, 2000. Radiometric dating does work! Some examples and a critique of a failed creationist strategy. Reports of the National Center for Science Education 20(3): 14-17. http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rncse_content/vol20/6061_radiometeric_dating_does_work_12_30_1899.asp
  2. Harland, W. B., R. L. Armstrong, A. V. Cox, L. E. Craig, A. G. Smith, and D. G. Smith, 1990. A Geologic Time Scale 1989. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  3. Hilgen, F. J., W. Krijgsman, C. G. Langereis, and L. J. Lourens, 1997. Breakthrough made in dating of the geological record. EOS 78(28): 285,288-289. http://www.agu.org/sci_soc/eos96336.html
  4. Lindsay, Don, 1999. Are radioactive dating methods consistent with each other? http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/crater_chain.html
  5. Lindsay, Don, 2000. Are radioactive dating methods consistent with the deeper-is-older rule? http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/confirm.html
  6. Meert, Joe, 2000. Consistent radiometric dates. http://gondwanaresearch.com/radiomet.htm
  7. Rubin, Ken, 2001. The formation of the Hawaiian Islands. http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/GG/HCV/haw_formation.html
  8. Thompson, Tim, n.d. Luminescence and radiometric dating. http://www.tim-thompson.com/luminescence.html
  9. Thorne, A. et al., 1999. Australia's oldest human remains: Age of the Lake Mungo 3 skeleton. Journal of Human Evolution 36(6): 591-612.

Previous Claim: CD004   |   List of Claims   |   Next Claim: CD011

created 2001-2-18