Is radiometric age dating accurate
Given the subjectivity of our observation, sundials are not accurate to the second, so there is some ‘wiggle room’ in their prescribed length of an hour.
The very process of sand grains falling can be very difficult to measure and is somewhat stochastic, just like radioactive decay.
Thirteen grains might fall in one second, but only eleven grains the next, so we are looking for an rate.
In any case, our measurement should improve with better technology.
What if you tried to count sand grains with your naked eye—could you even come close?
Perhaps you might weigh a second’s worth of ‘sandfall’ after collecting it with a spoon—this estimate will be substantially better.
Regardless, even Snelling recognizes that multiple independent methods consistently tell us the Earth is billions— But how precisely do we know these ages?One of the key assumptions in radiometric dating is that we can know how fast the radioactive parent element decays into the radiogenic daughter element.Just like calibrating an hourglass, where sand falls at a constant rate, experimental observers might begin by trying to count directly how much sand falls each second (i.e. If 1 gram of sand falls per second, and the hourglass contains 3.6 kg of sand, then it should take exactly 1 hour (3,600 seconds) for all the sand to drain from top to bottom.Once this rate is observed over a limited period of time, we can test the accuracy of our observation by extrapolation and/or comparing it to other timekeeping methods, such as a sundial.If the observed rate is correct, then the shadow on our sundial should move from 1 PM to 2 PM in the same amount of time it takes for the hourglass to empty.