RADIOMETRIC DATING

OUTLINE DRAFT

I. INTRODUCTION
A. Radiometric dating, which is also known as radioactive dating, is a
technique used to date materials such as rocks.
B. The technique was first published by Bertram Boltwood
(http://en.wikipedia.org) in 1907.
C. It has become the main source of information to find out the age of
rocks and other geological features.
D. It can also be used to deduce the age of fossils and rate of
evolutionary change.
E. There are many methods of radiometric dating and although these
methods have helped to prove the reliability of radiometric dating in
gauging the age of Earth, the accuracy of the technique is still
debatable.

II. BODY
A. There are many methods of radiometric dating but the three best-
known techniques are radiocarbon dating, potassium-argon dating and
uranium-lead dating.
1. Radiocarbon dating
a. The instrument
b. The function

2. Potassium-argon dating.
a. The instrument
b. The function

3. Uranium-lead dating.
a. The instrument
b. The function

B. Radiometric dating is acknowledged for its accuracy in determining the

age of materials.
1. There are several reasons which justify the accuracy of radiometric
dating (http://www.debate.org/debates/Radiometric-Dating-is-
Accurate/3/, 2010).
a. The technique depends on radioactive decay.
1. The decay is known to be extremely stable.
2. The decay is not influenced by chemical process.
b. The dates obtained by the technique are verified by independent
methods.
1. The independent methods include dendrochronology (tree
rings), varve chronology (sediment layers) and fission track
dating.
c. The dates obtained by different radiometric isotope pairs can be
cross-checked with each other.
C. Although radiometric dating is helpful in determining date of rocks,
issues arose on the accuracy of the technique.
1. Radiometric dating results are open to different interpretations
(Walker, 2013) http://creation.com/the-way-it-really-is-little-known-
facts-about-radiometric-dating.
a. Geologists can change their assumptions on the history of the
rock in order to give plausible explanations to radiometric
results.

2. The dates obtained by radiometric dating heavily rely on earlier

established measurement (Walker, 2013) http://creation.com/the-
way-it-really-is-little-known-facts-about-radiometric-dating
a. Radiometric dating results are unreliable if tested on rocks of
known age (Swenson, ) http://creation.com/radio-dating-in-
rubble
3. Solar radiation is claimed to affect the rate at which radioactive
elements decay (Stober, 2010)
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2010/august/sun-082310.html.
a. Researchers from Stanford and Purdue Universities
hypothesized that solar neutrinos, which are produced by
nuclear reactions at the core of the sun, can fluctuate the
decay rate of materials on earth.
i. Solar neutrinos are weightless particles that fly at the
speed of light through the physical world such as
humans, rocks, oceans or planets.
ii. The researchers found disagreement in the measured
decay rates of specific isotopes which are supposed to
be constant.
iii. Upon further observation, it was found that the decay
rate was a little faster in the winter compared to the
summer.
iv. In 2006, Jenkins, a nuclear engineer at Purdue
University, noticed a decline in the decay rate of
manganese-54 during a solar flare in the sun.
v. Therefore, the dates produced by radiometric dating
by measuring the decay rates may be disputed for its
accuracy.
b. Nevertheless, other experiments have found no effect of
solar radiation on decay rates.
i. Scientists such as Marie and Pierre Curie and Ernest
Rutherford have tried to influence the rate of
radioactive decay by drastically changing the pressure,
temperature, magnetic field, acceleration or radiation
environment of the source, but as to date, no
experiments have recorded any change in the decay
rates
(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100915
171534.htm, 2010).
ii. Scientists from National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST), Purdue University, the University of
Tennessee, Oak Ridge National Laboratory and Wabash
College have tested the hypothesis but found no effect
 in decay rates
(http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100915
171534.htm, 2010).
a. They contribute the variation found in other
experiments to environmental interferences on the
measuring instruments.

III. CONCLUSION