Radiometric Dating and a Young Earth - Dr. Andrew Snelling

How does radiometric dating work? What assumptions are behind it? Does it prove the earth is old? Is their scientific evidence for a young earth?

Andrew A. Snelling, B.Sc. (Hons), Ph.D.

Director of Research, AiG-US
Biography
Andrew A. Snelling is a geologist, research scientist and technical editor. He completed a Bachelor of Science degree in Applied Geology at the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, graduating with First Class Honors in 1975. His Doctor of Philosophy (in geology) was awarded by The University of Sydney, Australia in 1982 for his research thesis entitled "A geochemical study of the Koongarra uranium deposit, Northern Territory, Australia".

Education
B.Sc. Applied Geology, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia, First Class Honours
Ph.D. Geology, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Associations
Geological Society of Australia
Geological Society of America
Geological Association of Canada
Mineralogical Society of America
Society of Economic Geologists
Society for Geology Applied to Mineral Deposits
Creation Research Society

Video copyrighted by Answers in Genesis - http://www.AnswersInGenesis.org

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• Radiometric
• Dating
• Young
• Earth
• Andrew
• Snelling
• Answers in Genesis
• science
• geology
• Bible
• creation
• evolution
• darwin
• God
• young earth
• old earth
• creationism
• Australia
• Jesus
• Christian
• design
• intelligent
• helium
• zircon
• crystal
• Gentry
• rock
• halos
• radioactive
• time
• rate
• age
• RATE
• radioisotope
• dawkins

[Avensadora]

Dating methods are only used for accurate measurements. Proving that one technique doesn't work in a certain way does not mean anything more than that. I advise you to look at some other forms of radiometric dating. You will find that there are methods that work well in some areas and not so well in others.

[7BroncoBoy]

@Avensadora All the radiometric dating methods are based on the same basic and assumptions and are horribly innaccurate in cases where we already know the age of the rock.

[carmenvljn]

@CSStein So much for fighting the good fight, eh. The heavens declares the glory of God, and the firmament shows His handiwork. People are rejecting the gospel because they think evolution has explained Him away. Surely you understand this? What is harder to believe: the incarnate Christ died for our sins, was resurrected and sits at God's right hand - or that the earth was made in 6 days? It's Christ they're attacking...

[CSStein]

I am a Christian and I am also an Archaeologist. RCD is limited, but not as flawed as people with vendettas would tell you. How about taking on Thermoluminescence Dating, soil micromorhology and Pole Shift indicators in ferromagnetic metals in various layers (It happens every 700,00 year or so.) There are so many dating techniques now. Find them and try the same false tricks to render them moot. It will be an epic fail. God an evolution are not mutually exclusive!!!!

[ClimbBoardBike]

"And that we believe occurred during the flood" - very scientific. /sarcasm

[kleenex3000]

test

[OneWayandThatWayOnly]

Great video and thank you for the upload once again!

[M3PanoS]

@IloveYOUviruses What I mean by Game Over is that I see no forseeable rescuing hypotheses other worldviews would be able to come up with for why the world is so aligned with Biblical teachings. It would be an irreconcilable admission on the part of competing worldviews. That's it. The end. Finito. They would either HAVE to become Christians or be ousted as liars.

[IloveYOUviruses]

@M3PanoS That would be like saying that Christ can beat all his enemies don't you think? You know that eventually this world will get it's Game Over :o