Does radiometric dating always involve carbon

Until the 18th century, this question was principally in the hands of theologians, who based their calculations on biblical chronology.Bishop James Ussher, a 17th-century Irish cleric, for example, calculated that creation occurred in 4004 B. There were many other such estimates, but they invariably resulted in an Earth only a few thousand years old.By the mid- to late 1800s, geologists, physicists, and chemists were searching for ways to quantify the age of the Earth.Lord Kelvin and Clarence King calculated the length of time required for the Earth to cool from a white-hot liquid state; they eventually settled on 24 million years.About 240 mya the Super Continent Pangea began to separate into the Continents we see now.Some of the separation-seams have expanded into the oceans of today.

he question of the ages of the Earth and its rock formations and features has fascinated philosophers, theologians, and scientists for centuries, primarily because the answers put our lives in temporal perspective.YECs have suggested that Radiometric dating is not reliable because the radiation rate may have been different in the past which would give the appearance of great age.However, this would involve a change in the atomic nuclear Strong-Force and we know this has never happened in the indefinite past.By the late 18th century, some naturalists had begun to look closely at the ancient rocks of the Earth.They observed that every rock formation, no matter how ancient, appeared to be formed from still older rocks.

Leave a Reply