Is carbon dating a myth coventry dating in
That is, you can see if the sample comes from rocks that have been disturbed (or contaminated) or not just by looking at the results.
Now, creationists will claim that scientists are just somehow assuming that if samples show an age that does not fit their preconceptions, the sample must be contaminated or leaky. To see why, we need to look deeper into radiometric dating methods.
Let us critically examine each of these claims and see if they hold up against the science.
While doing so, we will have to learn about how radiometric dating works.
Not only that, different radioactive isotopes decay differently and it is enormously improbable that a postulated difference in decay rates would affect all of them in the same way, yet as we have seen, different radiometric dating methods converge on the same date (within margins of error).A very important tool in radiometric dating is the so called isochron diagram and it holds the key to refuting the central creationist claims about radiometric dating.One of the most beneficial things about it is that it can check itself for accuracy; the method tells you how well the rocks have been closed systems.So far from rejecting samples because they do not fit a preconceived notion of what the age be, scientists reject samples because there is ample evidence that it has been disturbed: the data points do not lie on the isochron lines.Scientists do not assume that rocks have been closed systems; it is a well-supported conclusion from experiments.
This means that the while different rocks contain different absolute amounts of the two isotopes, the is same.