We are made to believe in the name of science that the rocks have been precisely dated by radioactive methods. The truth is otherwise. According to one authority, out of the hundreds and hundreds of radioactive measurements of the rocks, if we discard those that are unreliable or contradictory, we are left with three that are the basis of the modern time scale. The others are derived from these three, by reasoned guesses and presuppositions. And of these precious three, only one, the Cambrian shales of Sweden, squares with palaoentology. Even this one is open to severe doubt, according to Knoff, and Henry Faell.

It has been authoritatively stated that at present, no coherent picture of the earth could be built on the basis of radioactive dating. There are rocks that were formed in historic times; rocks whose exact age are known and it is interesting to see what happened when radioactive dating was applied to them.

Volcanoes make rocks - basalt rocks. In the sea at Hawaii there are basalt rocks formed by volcanoes less than two hundred years ago. These new rocks were dated using potassium-argon dating and ages of twenty million years, one hundred and sixty million years, and even three billion years were calculated.

When rock from Sweden, which incidentally contained fossils, was analysed using the uranium dating methods, ages ranging from 380 to 800 million years were calculated.

From Norway, France, Germany and Russia reports continually show that the uranium method and the potassium/argon method are giving ages of millions and millions of years for rocks that are known to be only a few hundred years old. Rocks of known age have exposed this delusive aspect, which is inherent in radioactive dating.

Twenty-two volcanic rocks formed over the past 200 years, from different parts of the world, gave ages of 100 million to 10,000 million years !

Scientists assert that our planet is 4.5 billion years old using the methods of dating outlined above, and evolution depends on these time spans (evolution really depends on in perpetuity time spans).

Surely, the question of these ages must be called into question, owing to the unreliability of the methods used. If an engineer makes a measurement of a bicycle wheel and calculates values ranging from 2m to 200,000 miles then it is blatantly obvious that his methodology and technique of measurement are clearly wrong. It is scientifically doubtful that the true age can be determined, and more so when the methodology rests upon nonsensical assumptions.

Why are we never told of the countless mishaps of radioactive dating? Perhaps we can draw or own conclusions...

Return