brain sizes: Einstein's and women's

Dave Wilson testaccount2002 at btopenworld.com
Sun Oct 6 05:23:55 EST 2002


>>There's abundant scienfic evidence that increases and decreases in
>>radioactivity are not constant.
> 
> 
> No.
> 
> 
>>As just one example, recent measurements of
>>the changes in the strength of the Earth's magnetic field suggest that the
>>magnetic field may have been so strong just 5,000 years ago that space
>>radiation may not have even been able to enter the atmosphere.
> 
> 
> Even if so, this has nothing to do with the rate of radioactive decay
> of carbon-14 or other radioactive isotopes.
> 
> 
>>Obviously this would throw the calibration way off.
> 
> 
> No it wouldn't.
> 

Variations in atmospheric C14 can be corrected for by reference to 
dendrochronology.

The other (longer-timescale) radio-dating methods don't rely on 
assumptions about the original amounts of the particular isotopes in the 
atmosphere/crust/whatever, but on (experimentally verifiable) 
assumptions about the elements capable of being incorporated into a 
given mineral.

For a scientific Christian's view of radiometric dataing, see

http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resources/Wiens.html

Dave W.




More information about the Neur-sci mailing list