Home Church Community

Statement of Beliefs

Contact Us

Search Our Site

Bible Study Resource



Printer Friendly Version

Basic Worldview:
103 Science, the Bible,
and Creation



Origins - Section Four:
Relative Dating


Origins - Section One: Introduction and the Basics
Origins - Section Two: Premature Dismissals
Origins - Section Two: Application of the Basics
Origins - Section Three: Creation
Origins - Section Three: Evolution, Origin of Life
Origins - Section Three: Evolution, Environment for Life 1
Origins - Section Three: Evolution, Environment for Life 2
Origins - Section Three: Evolution, Another Planet
Origins - Section Three: Evolution, Origin of Species
Origins - Section Three: Evolution, Speciation Factors
Origins - Section Three: Evolution, Speciation Rates
Origins - Section Four: Time and Age, Redshift
Origins - Section Four: Philosophical Preference
Origins - Section Four: Cosmological Model 1
Origins - Section Four: Cosmological Model 2
Origins - Section Four: Dating Methods, Perceptions, Basics
Origins - Section Four: Global Flood Evidence
Origins - Section Four: Relative Dating
Origins - Section Four: Dating and Circular Reasoning
Origins - Section Four: The Geologic Column
Origins - Section Four: Radiometric Dating Basics
Origins - Section Four: General Radiometric Problems
Origins - Section Four: Carbon-14 Problems
Origins - Section Four: Remaining Methods and Decay Rates
Origins - Section Four: Radiometric Conclusions, Other Methods
Origins - Section Five: Overall Conclusions, Closing Editorial
Origins - Section Five: List of Evidences Table
Origins Debate Figures and Illustrations


Focus on Critical Evidence: Relative Dating

As we begin our examination of relative dating, it is important to identify the basic vocabulary and concepts. The first item to cover is stratification. The rocky surface of the earth is distributed in layers or strata. And, as the following quote simply states, this stratification of rocks into layers is the “essence” of relative dating. Consequently, it is no surprise that the term stratigraphy is commonly used as a synonym for relative dating.

Archaeology, Interpretation, Classification and analysis, DatingStratigraphy is the essence of relative dating.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

"Dating Methods, II DEVELOPMENT OF RELATIVE AND ABSOLUTE METHODS – The relative scale was devised mainly by application of the principles of stratigraphy. An example of these is the law of superposition, which simply states that in an undisturbed succession of strata, the youngest beds are on top and the oldest on bottom (or, the higher beds are younger than the lower).” – "Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

In fact, the stratification of rocks into layers is so crucial to relative dating that relative dating is sometimes refered to as “chronostratigraphic” dating.

Earth, geologic history of, Time scalesThere are, in fact, two geologic time scales. One is relative, or chronostratigraphic, and the other is absolute, or chronometric. The chronostratigraphic scale has evolved since the mid-1800s and concerns the relative order of strata.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

Futhermore, as we will see later on in this study, rock stratification is also indirectly crucial to absolute dating methods due to the fact that absolute dating actually depends on relative dating.

But as we continue with our examination of basic terms, we note that rock stratification simply refers to the primarily horizontal, but at least parallel, layers in which rocks are found.

Geology, V Fields of Geology, B Historical Geology, B1 StratigraphyStratigraphy is the study of the history of the earth's crust, particularly its stratified (layered) rocks. Stratigraphy is concerned with determining age relationships of rocks as well as their distribution in space and time. Rocks may be studied in an outcrop but commonly are studied from drilled cores (samples that have been collected by drilling into the earth). Most of the earth's surface is covered with sediment or layered rocks that record much of geologic history; this is what makes stratigraphy important.” – "Geology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Stratigraphy, II PRINCIPLES OF STRATIGRAPHY – Stratigraphy relies on four simple principles to unveil geologic history. The principle of original horizontality states that the sediments that form sedimentary rocks are usually deposited in approximately horizontal sheets.” – "Stratigraphy," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Geology, The rock disputeNicolaus Steno, a Danish physician, published a key observation in 1669. He discovered that strata (layers) of rock in oceans and lakes are always deposited horizontally. Thus, the oldest layers usually lie on the bottom, and the youngest layers sit on the top. This tendency, called the law of superposition, helps scientists determine the order in which geologic events occurred.” – Worldbook, Contributor: Maria Luisa Crawford, Ph.D., Professor of Geology, Bryn Mawr College.

"Dating Methods, II DEVELOPMENT OF RELATIVE AND ABSOLUTE METHODS – The relative scale was devised mainly by application of the principles of stratigraphy. An example of these is the law of superposition, which simply states that in an undisturbed succession of strata, the youngest beds are on top and the oldest on bottom (or, the higher beds are younger than the lower).” – "Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

As we continue with some basic vocabulary for this segment, the next fundamental term that we come to is an “outcrop.” An outcrop is where bedrock becomes visible at the surface, such as at the side of a cliff. It is at outcrops where the stratification of rocks becomes visible.

OutcropFunction: intransitive verb 1: to project from the surrounding soil (ledges outcropping from the eroded slope) 2: to come to the surface: appear.” – Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary

OutcropFunction: noun 1: a coming out of bedrock or of an unconsolidated deposit to the surface of the ground 2: the part of a rock formation that appears at the surface of the ground.” – Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary

The next important concept to relative dating is the principle known as the “law of superposition.” The law of superposition is the foundation of relative dating and it simply states that the oldest rock layers are lower in rock formations and the youngest rock layers are higher up.

Stratigraphy, II PRINCIPLES OF STRATIGRAPHYStratigraphy relies on four simple principles to unveil geologic historyThe principle of superposition states that, in an undeformed sequence of strata, younger strata lie on top of older strata. Strata are sheets of sedimentary rock that, as a group, are visibly distinct from those above or below (see Bed). This principle results from the simple observation that new sediment settles on top of previously deposited sediment. Consequently, strata are deposited sequentially, sheet after sheet. By using this principle, geologists can reconstruct geologic history as recorded in the sedimentary rocks.” – "Stratigraphy," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Geology, III THE GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE, A Relative TimeGeologists create a relative time scale using rock sequences and the fossils contained within these sequences. The scale they create is based on The Law of Superposition, which states that in a regular series of sedimentary rock strata, or layers, the oldest strata will be at the bottom, and the younger strata will be on top. Danish geologist Nicolaus Steno (also called Niels Stensen) used the idea of uniformity of physical processes. Steno noted that sediment was denser than liquid or air, so it settled until it reached another solid. The newer sediment on the top layer is younger than the layer it settled upon. Since this is what happens in the world today, it should also determine how rock layers formed in the past.” – "Geology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Dating, General considerations, Determination of sequence –The sequence of a layered sedimentary series is easily defined because deposition always proceeds from the bottom to the top. This principle would seem self-evident, but its first enunciation more than 300 years ago by Nicolaus Steno represented an enormous advance in understanding. Known as the principle of superposition, it holds that in a series of sedimentary layers or superposed lava flows the oldest layer is at the bottom, and layers from there upward become progressively younger.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

While the law of superposition indicates which layers formed first at individual sites, superposition cannot connect the layers at one geographic location to the layers at another. To arrange rock layers on a large geographic scale, in effect linking the ages of layers at one site to the layers at another site, evolutionary scientists use the characteristics of the artifacts or fossils found at each site.

Archeology, VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDSRelative dating relies on the principle of superposition. This principle states that deeper layers in a stratified sequence of naturally or humanly deposited earth are older than shallower layers. In other words, the uppermost layer is the most recent, and each deeper layer is somewhat older. Relative chronologies come from two sources: (1) careful stratigraphic excavation in the field, noting the precise location of every artifact and remain within layers of earth; and (2) close study of the characteristics of artifacts themselves.” – "Archaeology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

There are several obstacles that absolutely prevent relative dating from rendering any age or large-scale order of rock layers and fossils. Or, more specifically, while superposition allows for ordering rocks and fossils at an individual site, there are insurmountable problems that prevent constructing any age sequence or order for fossils at different sites or on a global scale. Two of these obstacles will be discussed here and others will be discussed in the next segment on circular reasoning. Consequently, as we will see, all that relative dating can produce is an indication of which fossils were buried first at a particular location. It cannot in any way indicate how long ago they were buried or how long before or after other fossils they were buried. Nor cannot it indicate a sequence in which life forms emerged and evolved throughout earth’s history. The reasons for these conclusions are as follows.

First, relative dating cannot indicate a sequence in which life forms emerged and evolved throughout earth’s history because relative dating is limited into how far back in time it can date rocks or fossils even on a theoretical level. Specifically, because relative dating relies upon fossils for dating, relative dating can only be used to date the most recent 13 percent of earth’s history. The earliest 87 percent of earth’s history did not produce a sufficient amount of fossils necessary for dating through relative dating methods.

Geochronology, Development of radioactive dating methods and their application – Approximately the first 87 percent of Earth history occurred before the evolutionary development of shell-bearing organisms. The result of this mineralogic control on the preservability of organic remains in the rock record is that the geologic time scale—essentially a measure of biologic changes through time—takes in only the last 13 percent of Earth history. Although the span of time preceding the Cambrian period—the Precambrian—is nearly devoid of characteristic fossil remains and coincides with some of the primary rocks of certain early workers, it must, nevertheless, be evaluated in its temporal context.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

The earth is believed by evolutionists to be 4.6 billion years old.

Earth, geologic history of, The pregeologic period – The history of the Earth spans approximately 4.6 billion years…It is widely accepted by both geologists and astronomers that the Earth is roughly 4.6 billion years old.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

Earth [planet]Age of Earth. Scientists think that Earth probably formed at about the same time as the rest of the solar system. They have determined that some chondrite meteorites, the unaltered remains from the formation of the solar system, are up to 4.6 billion years old. Scientists believe that Earth and other planets are probably that old.” – Worldbook, Contributor: Steven I. Dutch, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Wisconsin, Green Bay.

GeologyEarth probably formed about 4 1/2 billion years ago, and it has been changing ever since.” – Worldbook, Contributor: Maria Luisa Crawford, Ph.D., Professor of Geology, Bryn Mawr College.

When we compare the evolutionary age of the earth to the percentage of that time, which relative dating can be applied to, we find the following. 87 percent of 4.6 billion years is about 4.002 billion years. 13 percent of 4.6 billion years is 598 million years. Consequently, fossils only become abundant enough for relative dating to work in about the last 500-600 million years. Incidentally, the inability to perform relative dating without a sufficient quantity and diversity of fossils indicates how much relative dating depends on fossil characteristics in order to assign ages. We will examine this issue in greater detail below.

Geology, V FIELDS OF GEOLOGY, B Historical, B4 Paleontology and Paleobiology – The oldest fossils are older than 3 billion years, although fossils do not become abundant and diverse until about 500 million years ago.” – "Geology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Geology, III THE GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE, B BiostratigraphyIn the field of biostratigraphy geologists study the placement of fossils to determine geologic time. British surveyor William Smith and French anatomist Georges Cuvier both reasoned that in a series of fossil-bearing rocks, the oldest fossils are at the bottom, with successively younger fossils above. They thus extended Steno's Law of Superposition and recognized that fossils could be used to determine geologic time. This principle is called fossil succession. Smith and Cuvier also noted that unique fossils were characteristic of different layers. Biostratigraphy is most useful for determining geologic time during the Phanerozoic Eon (Greek phaneros, "evident"; zoic, "life"), the time of visible and abundant fossil life that has lasted for about the past 570 million years.” – "Geology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

According to the last quote above, sufficient fossils for relative dating do not arrive until around 570 million years ago. These dates of somewhere between 570 to 598 million years ago corresponds roughly to the start of the Cambrian Period, even as indicated on the following chart of the geologic column.

[PHOTO CAPTION: © Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved. "Geologic Time Scale," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.]

The fact that sufficient fossils for relative dating do not arrive until roughly the start of the Cambrian Period is why an earlier quote designated that the Pre-Cambrian Period is largely devoid of indicative fossils. Consequently, the term “Precambrian” refers roughly to the first 4 billion years of earth’s history, a long period in which there is not enough fossils for relative dating.

Geochronology, Development of radioactive dating methods and their application – Approximately the first 87 percent of Earth history occurred before the evolutionary development of shell-bearing organisms. The result of this mineralogic control on the preservability of organic remains in the rock record is that the geologic time scale—essentially a measure of biologic changes through time—takes in only the last 13 percent of Earth history. Although the span of time preceding the Cambrian period—the Precambrian—is nearly devoid of characteristic fossil remains and coincides with some of the primary rocks of certain early workers, it must, nevertheless, be evaluated in its temporal context.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

But, it is also important to note that the existing fossil record we do have contains so many “variations,” “different accumulation rates,” “discontinuities,” “unconformities,” “breaks,” and “large gaps”as to make it “virtually impossible” to date the earth, even for the portion that we have fossils for.

Geochronology, Development of radioactive dating methods and their application, Early attempts at calculating the age of the Earth – Equally novel but similarly flawed was the assumption that, if a cumulative measure of all rock successions were compiled and known rates of sediment accumulation were considered, the amount of time elapsed could be calculated. While representing a reasonable approach to the problem, this procedure did not or could not take into account different accumulation rates associated with different environments or the fact that there are many breaks in the stratigraphic record. Even observations made on faunal succession proved that gaps in the record do occur. How long were these gaps? Do they represent periods of nondeposition or periods of deposition followed by periods of erosion? Clearly sufficient variability in a given stratigraphic record exists such that it may be virtually impossible to even come to an approximate estimate of the Earth's age based on this technique. Nevertheless, many attempts using this approach were made.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

Notice that the quote above states that despite the “virtual impossibility” of constructing a time scheme from the fossil record, “nevertheless, many attempts” to do so “were made. This is important because, as we will see a little later on, many methods for dating the earth are still based upon this flawed approach. But most importantly, the fact that the nature of the fossil record is such that it cannot be used to construct an estimate of the earth’s age also inherently means that it is impossible to use the fossil record to construct an age sequence for the stratification and fossils in rock layers.

In summary concerning this first problem, relative dating can only be used for developing a time scale for the most recent 13 percent of earth’s history, but it is also “virtually impossible” to do even that because of all the variations and discontinuities in the record. Consequently, relative dating alone cannot construct a time scale for earth’s history but requires absolute dating to do. We will discuss the need for absolute dating a little later on.

Second, relative dating cannot indicate how long ago fossils were buried, how long before other fossils they were buried, or a sequence in which life forms emerged and evolved throughout earth’s history because relative dating can only provide an order, not a rate, a duration of intervals, or an age. Near the beginning of this segment, we examined the following 3 quotes, which described the law of superposition. As we noted, the law of superposition simply asserts that lower rock layers are “older and higher rock layers are “younger.”

Stratigraphy, II PRINCIPLES OF STRATIGRAPHYStratigraphy relies on four simple principles to unveil geologic historyThe principle of superposition states that, in an undeformed sequence of strata, younger strata lie on top of older strata. Strata are sheets of sedimentary rock that, as a group, are visibly distinct from those above or below (see Bed). This principle results from the simple observation that new sediment settles on top of previously deposited sediment. Consequently, strata are deposited sequentially, sheet after sheet. By using this principle, geologists can reconstruct geologic history as recorded in the sedimentary rocks.” – "Stratigraphy," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Geology, III THE GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE, A Relative TimeGeologists create a relative time scale using rock sequences and the fossils contained within these sequences. The scale they create is based on The Law of Superposition, which states that in a regular series of sedimentary rock strata, or layers, the oldest strata will be at the bottom, and the younger strata will be on top. Danish geologist Nicolaus Steno (also called Niels Stensen) used the idea of uniformity of physical processes. Steno noted that sediment was denser than liquid or air, so it settled until it reached another solid. The newer sediment on the top layer is younger than the layer it settled upon. Since this is what happens in the world today, it should also determine how rock layers formed in the past.” – "Geology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Dating, General considerations, Determination of sequence –The sequence of a layered sedimentary series is easily defined because deposition always proceeds from the bottom to the top. This principle would seem self-evident, but its first enunciation more than 300 years ago by Nicolaus Steno represented an enormous advance in understanding. Known as the principle of superposition, it holds that in a series of sedimentary layers or superposed lava flows the oldest layer is at the bottom, and layers from there upward become progressively younger.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

Notice that all three of the quotes above explicitly use the terms “older” and “younger” regarding the law of superposition and the age of rock layers. The use of these terms gives rise to a misportrayal of the evidence, or at least it has the potential to do so.

It is undeniable that unless some natural process has flipped the rock formation over or sideways, the lower layers are typically laid down first and higher layers are laid down last. In this sense, the adjective “older” simply denotes the layers that were laid down first while the adjective “younger” denotes the layers that were laid down later. And that is all that the evidence itself, the observation that some rock layers are lower than others, can tell us. It cannot tell us “how old” they are or when they were laid down, whether that was a long time ago or recently. And it cannot tell us how much time past between the laying down of one layer and the laying down of the next.

However, statements like those in the quotes above equivocate on the terms “older” and “younger.” With phrases like “By using this principle, geologists can reconstruct geologic history,” “how rock layers formed in the past” and even “layers from there upward become progressively younger,” suddenly “older” no longer simply designates which layer was laid down first. Now “older” means “much older” and “very old,” old enough to “reconstruct history” and old enough to be categorized as part of “the past,” even earth’s distant past. Consequently, the discussion starts off by establishing “older” and “younger” in terms of a very agreeable fact that lower layers were laid down before higher layers, and then somewhere in the midst of the discussion the meaning of the terms get switched as if the simple fact that some layers are lower somehow indicates great age and a formation long ago.

This equivocation can be illustrated as follows. When people here the term “twins,” they think of siblings that are born at the same time. In reality, twins are not born at the same time. They are born minutes apart. Because this is the case, the first twin to be born is “older” than the second in the same sense that lower rock layers are “older” than those above them. However, despite the fact that one twin is born first and is therefore “older,” we don’t think of the twins as having different ages. We think of them as being basically the same age. While it is a simple and agreed-upon fact that one twin is born first and consequently is “older,” this fact alone does not indicate “how much older” the first twin is, nor does it indicate exactly how many years old either twin is. The same is true with rock layers. The simple fact that one is lower does indicate that it was formed first and is therefore older. But this simple fact does not indicate “how much older” one rock layer is than another or that the lower rock layer is “really old.” And it doesn’t tell us the age of either rock layer.

The evidence is that one layer is formed before another. It is an assumption and a speculation that the rocks are very old. And it is a clear case of equivocation to start out using the term “older” to refer to the first and then to assume or assert that this necessarily implies the second.

The simple facts are these. Order does not indicate rate. Stratification only indicates which layers were laid down first. Stratification does not and cannot indicate how much time elapsed between the laying down of individual rock layers. The fact that one layer was laid down before another does not provide any information or indication about the rate at which individual rock layers formed or the duration of time between the formaton of each layer. Whether or not the rocks formed extremely quickly or extremely slowly and whether or not there were extremely long or extremely short intervals between the formation of each layer is simply not indicated by the mere fact that some rock layers are lower than others.

Furthermore, the fact that relative dating only provides relative order, not time, rate, interval duration, or actual age is admitted by evolutionists, as the numerous quotes below all plainly state.

Geologic Time, III DATING METHODS – In order to determine the relative age of rock layers, scientists use three simple principles…By matching the fossil content of rock sequences, even across widespread geographic regions, paleontologists believe that certain sequences are probably about the same age. All of these methods facilitate the relative dating of rock sequences, but do not provide absolute ages for the rocks. Geologists have several methods for determining the actual age of a rock layer. The most important is radiometric dating, which uses the steady decay of radioactive elements (seeRadioactivity) in the rock to provide a measure of age.” – "Geologic Time," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Archaeology, Interpretation, Dating – Absolute man-made chronology based on king lists and records in Egypt and Mesopotamia goes back only 5,000 years. For a long time archaeologists searched for an absolute chronology that went beyond this and could turn their relative chronologies into absolute dates.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

Fossil, Studying fossils, Dating fossils  When a fossil species is first discovered, it is usually found along with other species. If paleontologists know the position of the other species in the history of life, they can determine the position of the new species. This type of dating only indicates whether one fossil is older or younger than another fossil. It does not provide a fossil's age in years. Paleontologists determine how old a fossil is by measuring the radioactive isotopes in the rocks that contain the fossil.” – Contributor: Steven M. Stanley, Ph.D., Professor of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Johns Hopkins University.

Index Fossil, IV USE OF INDEX FOSSILSUsing index fossils and the principle of faunal and floral succession, scientists can determine a relative chronology, or a sequence of events. Yet, absolute age, or the number of years that have passed since a rock layer formed, cannot be determined using fossils alone. Absolute age must be derived from dating methods such as radiometric dating.” – "Index Fossil," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Dating, General considerations, Distinctions between relative-age and absolute-age measurements – Precise isotopic ages are called absolute ages, since they date the timing of events not relative to each other but as the time elapsed between a rock-forming event and the present.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

“Archeology, VIII DETERMINING THE AGE OF FINDS – Accurately dating an archaeological site requires the application of two distinct methods of dating: relative and absolute. Relative dating establishes the date of archaeological finds in relation to one another. Absolute dating is the often more difficult task of determining the year in which an artifact, remain, or geological layer was deposited.” – "Archaeology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

“Stratigraphy, I INTRODUCTIONStratigraphy, in geology, the study of rock layers, or strata, particularly their ages, compositions, and relationships to other rock layers. Stratigraphy provides geologists with clues about the earth's past…II PRINCIPLES OF STRATIGRAPHYStratigraphy relies on four simple principles to unveil geologic history…III RELATIVE  VERSUS ABSOLUTE AGESThe above example gives only the sequence of geologic events for a particular place; it provides no information as to how long ago the events occurred. The example illustrates the use of relative ages by showing the occurrence of events with respect to each other. In contrast, absolute ages specify, in years, when a rock formed.” – "Stratigraphy," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Archaeology, How archaeologists interpret findings – Relative dating gives information about the age of an object in relation to other objects. Thus, relative dating methods produce only comparisons, not actual dates...Absolute dating determines the age of an object in years.” – Contributor: Thomas R. Hester, Ph.D., Professor of Anthropology, University of Texas, Austin.

Fossil, Dating fossils – Through many years of research, paleontologists have come to understand the order in which most kinds of fossils occur in the geological record. When a fossil species is first discovered, it is usually found along with other species. If paleontologists know the position of the other species in the history of life, they can determine the position of the new species. This type of dating only indicates whether one fossil is older or younger than another fossil. It does not provide a fossil's age in years. Paleontologists determine how old a fossil is by measuring the radioactive isotopes in the rocks that contain the fossil.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

Geology, III THE GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE, D Radiometric Dating – Another fundamental goal of geochronology is to determine numerical ages of rocks and to assign numbers to the geologic time scale. The primary tool for this task is radiometric dating, in which the decay of radioactive elements is used to date rocks and minerals…Using dated rocks, geologists have been able to assign numbers to the geologic time scale.” – "Geology," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Dating Methods, II DEVELOPMENT OF RELATIVE AND ABSOLUTE METHODSWith the methods then available, 19th-century geologists could only construct a relative time scale. Thus, the actual age of the earth and the duration, in millions of years, of the units of the time scale remained unknown until the dawn of the 20th century. After radioactivity was discovered, radiometric dating methods were quickly developed. With these new methods geologists could calibrate the relative scale of geologic time, thereby creating an absolute one.” – "Dating Methods," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

“Dating, General considerations, Distinctions between relative-age and absolute-age measurements – In fact, even in younger rocks, absolute dating is the only way that the fossil record can be calibrated. Without absolute ages, investigators could only determine which fossil organisms lived at the same time and the relative order of their appearance in the correlated sedimentary rock record.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

Earth, geologic history of, Time scales – There are, in fact, two geologic time scales. One is relative, or chronostratigraphic, and the other is absolute, or chronometric. The chronostratigraphic scale has evolved since the mid-1800s and concerns the relative order of strataThe chronometric scale is based on specific units of duration and on the numerical ages that are assigned to the aforementioned chronostratigraphic boundaries.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

Geochronology, Development of radioactive dating methods and their application, An absolute age framework for the stratigraphic time scale – In 1905 Strutt succeeded in analyzing the helium content of aradium-containing rock and determined its age to be 2 billion yearsAlthough faced with problems of helium loss and therefore not quite accurate results, a major scientific breakthrough had been accomplished. Also in 1905 the American chemist Bertram B. Boltwood, working with the more stable uranium–lead system, calculated the numerical ages of 43 minerals. His results, with a range of 400 million to 2.2 billion years, were an order of magnitude greater than those of the other “quantitative” techniques of the day that made use of heat flow or sedimentation rates to estimate time. Acceptance of these new ages was slow in coming. Perhaps much to their relief, paleontologists now had sufficient time in which to accommodate faunal change. Researchers in other fields, however, were still conservatively sticking with ages on the order of several hundred million, but were revising their assumed sedimentation rates downward in order to make room for expanded time concepts. In a brilliant contribution to resolving the controversy over the age of the Earth, Arthur Holmes, a student of Strutt, compared the relative (paleontologically determined) stratigraphic ages of certain specimens with their numerical ages as determined in the laboratory…As a result of this work, the relative geologic time scale, which had taken nearly 200 years to evolve, could be numerically quantified. No longer did it have merely superpositional significance, it now had absolute temporal significance as well.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

In summary, we have seen that relative dating is faced with the following 2 obstacles. First, relative dating cannot indicate a sequence in which life forms emerged and evolved throughout earth’s history because the fossil record is only sufficient for dating the last 13 percent of earth’s history and has so many gaps and breaks that even constructing a history from that portion is “virtually impossible.” And second, relative dating cannot indicate how long ago fossils were buried, how long before other fossils they were buried, or a sequence in which life forms emerged and evolved throughout earth’s history because relative dating can only provide an order of burial, not a rate, a duration of intervals, or an age.

Given these facts, we arrive at some contradictions concerning the current status of determining the earth’s age and biological history using relative dating. As we noted earlier, the condition of the fossil record with all of its breaks, gaps, and discontinuities, makes “coming to an approximate estimate of the Earth’s age” “virtually impossible” using stratigraphy, which is another term for relative dating.

Geochronology, Development of radioactive dating methods and their application, Early attempts at calculating the age of the Earth – Equally novel but similarly flawed was the assumption that, if a cumulative measure of all rock successions were compiled and known rates of sediment accumulation were considered, the amount of time elapsed could be calculated. While representing a reasonable approach to the problem, this procedure did not or could not take into account different accumulation rates associated with different environments or the fact that there are many breaks in the stratigraphic record. Even observations made on faunal succession proved that gaps in the record do occur. How long were these gaps? Do they represent periods of nondeposition or periods of deposition followed by periods of erosion? Clearly sufficient variability in a given stratigraphic record exists such that it may be virtually impossible to even come to an approximate estimate of the Earth's age based on this technique. Nevertheless, many attempts using this approach were made.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

As we can see, the quote concludes that despite the “impossibility” of the task, “many attempts were made” to calculate the age of the earth based solely on relative dating methods. Although, as we have seen, it is now fully acknowledged that relative dating is inherently incapable of producing an age for the earth, many sources still cite relative dating and stratigraphy as proof that the earth is billions of years old rather than the 6,000 year age asserted in the Judeo-Christian scripture.

Stratigraphy, IV HISTORIC IMPORTANCE OF STRATIGRAPHYPrior to the advent of stratigraphy, the earth was generally considered to be significantly younger than a million years. In fact, the dominant estimate, by Irish Archbishop James Ussher in the 17th century, held that the earth was younger than 6000 years. Ussher's estimate was based on his chronology of the Old Testament. Stratigraphy developed in England during the early 1800s with the work of a land surveyor named William Smith. Using stratigraphic concepts, 19th-century geologists clearly demonstrated that the earth was far older than a million years.” – "Stratigraphy," Microsoft® Encarta® Encyclopedia 99. © 1993-1998 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Dating, General considerations, Correlation, Principles and techniques – Correlation is, as mentioned earlier, the technique of piecing together the informational content of separated outcrops…To this day, fossils are useful as correlation tools to geologists specializing in stratigraphyGeologic column and its associated time scaleThe end product of correlation is a mental abstraction called the geologic column. It is the result of integrating all the world's individual rock sequences into a single sequence. In order to communicate the fine structure of this so-called column, it has been subdivided into smaller units. Lines are drawn on the basis of either significant changes in fossil forms or discontinuities in the rock record (i.e., unconformities, or large gaps in the sedimentary sequence); the basic subdivisions of rock are called systems, and the corresponding time intervals are termed periods…The geologic column and the relative geologic time scale are sufficiently defined to fulfill the use originally envisioned for them—providing a framework within which to tell the story of Earth history…In all these happenings the geologic column and its associated time scale spell the difference between an unordered series of isolated events and the unfolding story of a changing Earth.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition

The first quote above plainly states that, “Using stratigraphic concepts, 19th-century geologists clearly demonstrated that the earth was far older than a million years.” Likewise, the second quote states that, “The geologic column and the relative geologic time scale are sufficiently defined to fulfill the use originally envisioned for them.” The second quote goes on to describe that “originally envisioned use” for stratigraphy as “providing a framework within which to tell the story of Earth history…In all these happenings the geologic column and its associated time scale spell the difference between an unordered series of isolated events and the unfolding story of a changing Earth.” However, as we have seen, relative dating is utterly incapable of accomplishing any of these things. Yet, despite its failings, the impression is still widely reported that the age of the earth and the sequence of its biological history have been accomplished by relative dating and, subsequently, relative dating is believed to have disproved creation theory even though it is inherently incapable of doing so. How could relative dating and the geologic column prove that the earth is older than the estimated Biblical amount of 6,000 years if neither of these methods indicates actual amounts of time? Since it does not provide any actual ages or dates, how do we know that even the relative sequencing (or burial order) provided by relative dating and the geologic column doesn’t fit within the Biblically allotted 6,000 years?

The fact that relative dating has not and cannot provide any indications of the earth’s age or of an evolutionary sequence for life is further demonstrated by the fact that an absolute dating method was sought expressly because relative dating could not accomplish these tasks.

“Dating, General considerations, Distinctions between relative-age and absolute-age measurements – In fact, even in younger rocks, absolute dating is the only way that the fossil record can be calibrated. Without absolute ages, investigators could only determine which fossil organisms lived at the same time and the relative order of their appearance in the correlated sedimentary rock record.” – Encyclopaedia Britannica 2004 Deluxe Edition


Related Images



Gene Pool
(Figures 1-6)




Defining the
Boundaries of Kinds



Gaps in the
Fossil Record




Britannica
Geologic Column



Misperceptions of
Dating Methods
(Figures 1-8)




Dating Facts



Dating Procedures
(Figures 1-13)




Isotope Dating Chart



Cosmology
Figure 1



Cosmology
Figure 2 (a-d)



Cosmology
Figure 3 (a-f)