By Creation Ministries International
"The accepted ages for the oldest rocks are wrong," so claimed a report in New Scientist on problems with radioactive dating methods. That's because the estimated time for half of radioactive samarium-146 to decay (its half-life) was found to be 33% in error. Samarium-146 is used to calculate the 'ages' of events in the early solar system.
Previously taken as 103 million years, plus or minus 5 million, Michael Paul of the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, along with his colleagues, recently published a half-life figure of 68 million years. Their method is more reliable, they say. So much for the precision earlier claimed of plus-or-minus 5 million years.
All the 'dates' previously calculated using the incorrect half-life for events in the early solar system are thus wrong, some by as much as 80 million years. If numbers that can actually be measured in the present turn out to be so askew, what are we to think about numbers that are impossible to measure, such as the original amount of samarium-146 in the sample when it formed in the past?
Actually, the maximum possible age for the nominated 'oldest' rocks is only about 6,000 years. That date has been obtained by the only method that can yield reliable dates—the historical method. That is how we know the date for the Gettysburg Address and the Battle of Trafalgar, for example—i.e. the dates are based on eyewitness records of what happened and when. The Bible is an eyewitness record of what really happened in the past—from the very beginning of time. The 'millions of years' have never been observed, but are only imagined in the minds of those who believe in them.
? Ages of oldest rocks are off by millions of years, New Scientist 214(2859):9, 7 April 2012.