Is radiometric age dating accurate
Anyone questioning the accuracy of radiometric methods is obliged to explain why the cross-checks to sediments, coral growth, tree rings, and other isotope pairs all have the same errors.
Why would an error in radiometric dating correspond to errors in the other methods so that they all track?
Every few years, new geologic time scales are published, providing the latest dates for major time lines.
Older dates may change by a few million years up and down, but younger dates are stable.
In fact, they track because radiometric data is accurate.
When the carbon dioxide, containing C14 as well as stable C12 and C13, is taken in by plants it is no longer exposed to the intense cosmic ray bombardment in the upper atmosphere, so the carbon 14 isotope decays without being replenished.Argon/argon dating works using only the ratio of the concentration of the argon isotopes. For the purposes of this debate, "accurate" means that 95% of the dating errors are within 10% of the measured date, within the time span for which the isotope pair is utilized.Since carbon dating depends upon variable cosmic ray intensity, a calibration curve is assumed to be applied to account for that.other isotope pairs cover intermediate time periods between the spans for carbon 14 and uranium.
Some radiometric dating methods depend upon knowing the initial amount of the isotope subject to decay.For dating back to about 35,000 years, sediment layers are precise. Sediments include different types of pollen depending upon the season.