Hovind - Radiometric Dating

atheistHigh Level Moderator
ex-minister's picture
Posts: 1711
Joined: 2010-01-29
User is offlineOffline
Hovind - Radiometric Dating

What is scientifically wrong here? I can usually see thru his bible bs, but I don't understand science enough to get where he is misleading this discussion.

Religion Kills !!!

Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.


latincanuck's picture
Posts: 2038
Joined: 2007-06-01
User is offlineOffline
look there is lots wrong

look there is lots wrong with this video, first and foremost that I can see is the whole magnetic field, it decreases and increases throughout time, as per the studies of the paleomagnetic record have shown, and in fact our present magnetic field strength is twice as much as it was over a million years ago. He doesn't mention this at all, because it would knock his point out. He also says that the magnetic fields if they were stronger would have interference with the formation of carbon dioxide.....but no evidence shows that the magnetic field prevents the formation of carbon dioxide. Even worse is the fact evidence suggests that the formation of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is pretty consistent, although there are dip and bumps (of course there is the man made ones from 1955 to 1980's due to nuclear testing). However calibrations curves can help out in estimating the age of a sample.

Then there is the fossil part....I mean really the hat, a simple and quick research explains that, the hat is not fossilized at all, it is concreation, not fossilized....which is caused by water, mineral water to be more specific. Which is not the same as fossils that have been found in the earth....yeah so he doesn't have much to go on. He just speaks fast and tries to sound like he knows what he is talking about, but a bit a research can show you all that is wrong with this video.

here is the video regarding the "fossilized hat" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qj0s4-v0bPE

High Level DonorRational VIP!ScientistWebsite Admin
BobSpence's picture
Posts: 5939
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Carbon-14 dating has been

Carbon-14 dating has been and continues to be calibrated against other dating techniques, including other radiometric techniques where the time scale is close enough, as well as tree-rings, which can be used back to around 11000 years.

Other radiometric dating techniques are much more reliable than C14, using more than one isotope, allowing checking and often based on ratios between amounts of different isotopes currently present, which are not a function of the initial amounts of one isotope present. These other techniques are applicable to much longer time-scales than Carbon-14.

The time-scale  is NOT worked out by simply measuring the amount lost after a short time period. Measuring the intensity of radioactivity for a known total number of decaying atoms allows the rate of decay to be estimated quite accurately, especially if a large number of atoms are used.

Many independent studies of radioactivity confirm it does not seem to be affected by external conditions, so it should be essentially constant over time.

There is also fission-track dating and thermoluminescence dating, which are not significantly affected by the issues raised by Hovind.

Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality

"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris

The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me

From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology