Arguments against radioactive dating
Here is one example of an isochron, based on measurements of basaltic meteorites (in this case the resulting date is 4.4 billion years) [Basaltic1981, pg. Skeptics of old-earth geology make great hay of these examples.
For example, creationist writer Henry Morris [Morris2000, pg.
A swimming race illustrates the simple principles involved in measuring time.
This swimmer is competing in a 1,500 metre race and we have an accurate, calibrated wristwatch.
When I have asked an audience this question they have looked at me incredulously and said, “Starting time?
” You cannot know how long the swimmer took unless you knew the time on the wristwatch when the race started.
As a scientific skeptics, we ask ourselves: is this really the case?
Most scientists today believe that life has existed on the earth for billions of years.
This belief in long ages for the earth and the existence of life is derived largely from radiometric dating.
A very common claim of young earth creationists in trying to reject the evidence for an old earth is to loudly proclaim that radiometric dating methods “makes assumptions” and that these “assumptions” are somehow fatally flawed or not supported by evidence.
These claims generally land in three different categories: (1) radiometric dating assumes that initial conditions (concentrations of mother and daughter nuclei) are known, (2) radiometric dating assumes that rocks are closed systems and (3) radiometric dating assumes that decay rates are constant.