Reliability of Radiometric Dating

I have read several blog sites in which there is discussion on the age of the earth and inevitably the topic of the dating of rocks and the reliability of this method and it's data is questioned. Radiometric dating relies on the natural decay of radioactive isotopes. It is a reliable and accurate way to determine the ages of rocks. As with all measurement there is uncertainty in that measurement which can however be quantified. Over the last few decades the advancement in the instrumentation (mass spectrometers) has improved precision of measurement, hence reducing the uncertainty of measurement of rock age. Dates determined by one radiometric scheme can often be verified by independantly determining the age by an alternative radiometric scheme. All of this nonsense about not believing that radiometric dating is accurate stems from the proponents of a "Young Earth" and people feeling threatend by the advancement of science.

Radioactive decay is the spontaneous release of energy in the form of radioactive particles or waves. It results in a decrease over time of the original amount of the radioactive material. A quantity is said to be subject to exponentional decay if it decreases at a rate proportional to its value. Symbolically, this can be expressed as a differential equation where N is the quantity and λ is a positive number called the decay constant: ∆N = - λN/∆ t. The number of decays are represented by ∆N
The short time interval that ∆N occurs is represented by ∆t N is the number of nuclei present λ is the decay constant.



How old is planet earth? Our Solar System formed from a vast cloud of gas and dust 4.65 billion years ago. This age of 4.65 billion years is well established from the decay rates of radioactive elements found in meteorites and rocks from the Moon as well an abundance of evidence from chemistry and physics. As Earth is a dynamic planet in which rocks are continuously being recycled by plate tectonics much of the primordial material from the time of the formation of the Earth is no longer around. If there are any of Earth's primordial rocks left in their original state, they have not yet been found. The oldest rocks found to-date on Earth are those of the Nuvvuagittuq greenstone belt and these give an age of 4.3 billion years. It was not until relatively recently that it has been possible to measure the age of rocks. The early ideas of the age of the Earth date to the ancient Greeks and Romans and it was not until the late 1700s that scientists begun to realise that the Earth was indeed ancient. However, it was not until the discovery of radioactivity and the invention of the mass spectrometer that the quantification of isotopes of various radiometric decay schemes could be performed. In recent decades improvements in detector technology and electronics in mass spectrometers has resulted in an improvement in the precision of analytical data which translates to an increased confidence in the radiometric ages. The use of hyphenated analytical techniques such as laser ablation - mass spectrometry has also allowed the analysis of small sample sizes and individual crystals.

The ancient Greeks and Romans realised that long time spans were required to lay down the thick layers of sediments observed and from this they estimated that the Earth was thousands of years old. But it wasn't until the late 1700s that scientific interest in geological age began when Scottish geologist James Hutton (1726-1797), who observed that sediments built up on landscapes were indeed indicative of an old Earth. Before then, the Bible had provided the only estimate for the age of the world. Bishop James Ussher (1581 – 1656) established the time of “creation” to 6000 years. Using the book of Genesis as a history book, Ussher meticulously examined the genealogy of the Bible and concluded that the date of the creation as the night of Sunday, 23 October 4004 BC (McSween, 1997). Today some biblical scholars, as well as a number of literalist evangelical Christians, believe in a literal interpretation of the Bible calling for a 6000-year-old Earth (Barr, 1984). In 1785 Hutton published ‘Theory of the Earth’ in which he concluded that “slow” processes shape the Earth, mountains arise continuously as a balance against erosion and weathering and the physical and chemical laws that govern nature are uniform. Most geological processes are extremely slow, and evidence for slow change was everywhere; rivers eroded rock and rain inexorably wore away the tops of mountains and the slow movement of glaciers carved out entire valleys. Hutton and other contemporary scientists of the time concluded that the single most important factor why the Earth looks like the way is does was due to time, and lots of it. With this Hutton established the ‘Doctrine of Uniformitarianism: "Present is key to the past". Hutton used fossils to establish relative ages of rocks. There was however a need to determine the absolute age of the Earth. In the late 19th Century this question was first addressed by William Thompson (Lord Kelvin) (1824 - 1907). Kelvin assumed that the Earth was originally molten and calculated a date for the age of the Earth using the then young science of thermodynamics. His calculation was based on the cooling of the Earth through conduction and radiation of heat. Kelvin’s age of Earth was calculated to be about 24-40 million years (ref.). The problem with this view is that the Earth has an internal heat source from radioactive decay – a fact not known to Lord Kelvin at the time of his estimation of the Earths age. At around the same time, John Joly (1857 – 1933) calculated the rate of transfer of salt to the ocean as a means to determine the age of the Earth. The age of Earth by this method was calculated to be 90-100 million years. The main problem with this approach was there was no means to account for recycled salt, salt incorporated into clay minerals and salt deposits. Later work by other scientists used the thickness of total sedimentary record, to determine an age of 500 million years. It was not until the discovery of radioactivity by Henri Becquerel in 1896 that geologists had a tool for determining the age of rocks and ultimately the age of the Earth.

Radiometric dating is no mystery .... the truth is out there.

Human Evolution - The Evidence -

There is overwhelming evidence for human evolution. All human beings and all other life forms evolved from ancestral species. The four main lines of evidence for human evolution are:
1. Our relation to living primates;
2. Vestigal organs/structures such as the appendix;
3. The fossil record;
4. Genetics;

Hypothesis Testing

As a scientist and a rational human being, learn to question everything and strive to find answers on your own through research. 'Doubt' is the most sacred thing for a scientist and an adherent of the scientific method. This doubt keeps you on focused when you feel like surrendering or believing in something at face value without adequate scientific research. As scientists, we constantly strive to create a rational and lucid picture of the world by piecing together one fact at a time, through theorising and experimentation (Pilgrim, 2011). A Hypothesis means to “Ask a Question of Nature”. In Science we often need to test our hypothesis. A hypothesis is an educated guess, based on observation. Usually, a hypothesis can be supported or refuted through experimentation or more observation. A hypothesis can be disproven, but cannot be proven to be true (Helmenstine, 2010). To test the hypothesis we create an experiment that will yield one of two answers: Yes or No or True or False. The classical way to make statistical comparisons is to prepare a statement about a fact for which it is possible to calculate its probability of occurrence. This statement is the null hypothesis and its counterpart is the alternative hypothesis (Fraser, 2011). The null hypothesis is traditionally written as H0 and the alternative hypothesis as H1 or Ha. A statistical test measures the experimental strength of evidence against the null hypothesis. A Null Hypothesis is a statement that the difference between two values can be explained by random error. It is retained if the test for significance does not fail (H0). A null hypothesis assumes that the numerical quantities being compared are the same. The probability of the observed differences appearing as a result of random error is then calculated from statistical theory. The alternative hypothesis is therefore a statement that the difference between two values is too great to be explained by random error. The alternate hypothesis is accepted if a test for significance shows that the null hypothesis should be rejected (Ha or H1). Typical tests for significance are the F ratio test and the t-test. If we reject the null hypothesis at say, a 95% confidence level, there is a 5% probability that the null hypothesis was incorrectly rejected. An example of hypothesis testing is:

Let μ1 and μ2 be the means of two samples; If one wants to investigate the likelihood that their means are the same, then the null hypothesis is:
H0: μ1 =μ2
and the alternative hypothesis is:
H1: μ1 ≠μ2
but it could also be:
H1: μ1 >μ2
The first example of H1 is said to be two-sided or two-tailed because includes both μ1 >μ2 and μ1 <μ2; The second is said to be one-sided or one-tailed. The number of sides has implications on how to formulate the test (Fraser 2011).

References:

Fraser A.W., (2011), “Statistical Method Validation for Analytical Methods – a practical approach”
Helmestine A.M., (2010) “Scientific Hypothesis, Theory, Law Definitions” http://chemistry.about.com/od/chemistry101/a/lawtheory.htm (accessed 25 May 2011)
Pilgrim G. (2011) “Hypothesis versus Theory” http://www.buzzle.com/articles/hypothesis-vs-theory.html (accessed 25 May 2011)

Sue the Advertisers

The world did not end, which raises the question: should we sue the advertiser that predicted the Rapture / end-of-the-world for false advertising?

Humans from Monkeys?

I refer to your older article on the Waterberg and human evolution. Do you honestly believe humans come from monkeys? Johan, Pretoria Gem and Mineral Club


Hi Johan,

Well, no. We did not evolve from monkeys. Monkeys are our evolutionary cousins, so to speak. A common ancestor of all humans, apes and monkeys existed around 12 million years ago. This common ancestor gave rise to the Asian apes and the African apes. These species developed along their separate ways. About 6 million years ago, in Africa, what are known as the bipedal woodland apes – species such as the Australopithecines and our Homo Sapiens lineage evolved. Then at about 2.5 million years ago, also in Africa, the chimpanzee and the bonobo became separate lineages. I am certainly no expert on this subject and I would refer you to the literature available on the subject for more detail and accuracy that I can provide.

The Universe – Cause and Effect

The Universe is an unimaginably massive and complex system. Everything we know about the Universe points to it operating by absolute physical laws of cause and effect. The Universe, however, does not look like one in which an independent outside agent is intervening, nor is it a Universe in which miracles happen and physical laws are violated by an entity that is above these laws. The application of Occam's razor deletes the hypothesis of a supernatural origin of the universe. And every attempt to demonstrate the existence of any supernatural force affecting the universe fails through rigorous scientific examination. Cosmology provides explanations for how, out of a singularity and subsequent explosive expansion 13.7 billion years ago, the universe came into being.

Rock of Ages

A sample of the Acasta Gneiss. The Acasta Gneiss is dated at 4.2 billion years old. Specimen size: 5 cm. Specimen and picture: A. Fraser

It is generally accepted that the age of the Earth and the rest of the solar system is about 4.55 billion years (plus or minus about 1%). This value is derived from several different lines of evidence. Unfortunately, the age of the Earth cannot be determined directly from material that is solely from the Earth. Meteorites have been used to date the age of the Earth as these and the other planets were formed at the same time. The Earth is a dynamic planet and the processes of erosion and crustal recycling as a result of plate tectonics have destroyed the entire earliest surface of the Earth. The oldest known exposed rock outcrop found so far is that of the Acasta Gneiss in Canada. The Acasta Gneiss was dated by radiometric means at 4.2 billion years (4.2 Ga) in age (Tsuyoshi, 2007). And, I have a specimen of the Acasta gneiss!