| Allfreedom99 said: Just a question to this. How do we KNOW for certain that the rate of radioactive decay has always been the same? Scientists obviously haven't been around long enough to test or observe this. Its possible to have changes in these factors. Radiometric dating may be the best we got, but its not ultimately reliable because assumptions still have to be made in order to calculate a date. Any test which entail even the slightest measure of assumptions cannot be taken at 100% certainty. Original number of unstable atoms in a rock cannot be known, only stable and unstable atoms that remain in the rock today. Again its currently the best solution scientists use today but I dont see that it can be determined a fool proof measurement. |
How do we know the Earth will continue to orbit the Sun? How do we know reality isn't simply a product of the matrix?
These types of criticisms are the epitome of lazy and fatuous rebuttals.
Nothing in science is a certainty. It's always the best possible answer at that particular time until we have information to modify, enhance, or cast it aside. It's completely asinine to suggest we simply take nothing for the morrow, especially when these same principles brought about modern medicine, technology, etc.
It works. The methodology is demonstrably true and if a specific established principle is incorrect, you need only wait. That's the beauty of science - it isn't dogma. It adapts to conform to reality, unlike religion.
What is your attack on the methodology? Assumptions? The radiometric dating methodologies have checks, as in naturalistic phenomenon like tree rings and coral growth. Using these independently confirms the validity.
