Dating method for volcanic ash internet dating for teens
Tests by other scientists using paleomagnetism and fission tracks confirmed the lower date.
So by 1980 there was a new, remarkably concordant date for the KBS tuff, and this became the one that was widely accepted.
That said, there is much evicence that non-Christian scientists report that contradict the idea of long ages, althought they would not see it that way.
See for example 101 evidences for a young of the earth and the universe.
"Scientific dating is not a way of measuring but a way of thinking." Science is a way of thinking and of course does require assumptions.
It seems to me that while creation ministries likes to question current scientific assumptions, they put forward no answers that are not subject to the same, if not more, criticism.
Their result of 212–230 million years did not agree with the age of the fossils (elephant, pig, ape and tools) so they rejected the date.I always find it interesting how difficult it is for those of an evolutionary standpoint to even question the dogma they are taught.The evolutionary 'Scientific method' seems to screen out any possible variant facts as irrelevant.They said the sample was contaminated with excess argon.Using new samples of feldspar and pumice they ‘reliably dated’ the tuff at 2.61 million years, which agreed nicely.Later, this date was confirmed by two other dating methods (paleomagnetism and fission tracks), and was widely accepted.