I heard that fossils are dated by the layers they are found in,but the layers are dated by the fossils found in them;if this is true isn't it circular reasoning??
Can you help clear this up for me?
thanks for your answers
2007-12-20 11:44:51 · 23 answers · asked by Wonderwall 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Thanks for the links Zen
2007-12-20 12:17:18 · update #1
Fossils don't come buried with their birth certificates.I care what science believes not what atheism dictates.Darwinism/atheism is based on embryology not on fossil findings.Darwin new too well that his theory would not stand a chance if he based it on fossil findings.
2007-12-20 15:55:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 8⤋
I'm not an atheist, nor an evolutionist. I did however study archaeology at university.
The fossils are dated by the stratigraphic layer that they are in. The layers are not dated by the fossils. The basic method of dating stratigraphical layers is that the deeper the layer the older it is. The same way as if every day I added a new newspaper to the top of a pile the newspapers at the bottom would be older than the ones on the top.
To arrive at a precise date for a stratum containing a fossil then mineral analysis or radioactivity readings are the most common methods used.
2007-12-20 11:58:52 · answer #2 · answered by monkeymanelvis 7 · 6⤊ 0⤋
There are a number of methods by which the rocks are dated, such as radiometric dating, (carbon dating is only good for about 50,000 years but there are other isotopes that can be used)
There are certain global events that can be used to level set different global locations - such as the iridium layer at the K-T boundary from a major asteroid hit.
If the rocks were part of a river flood basin then you can count the layers of rocks at one layer a year, from the annual flooding.
Once you have independently established the age of a particular layer of rocks, and you always find the same fossils in there you can then apply the principal in reverse, but only after the rock layers have been properly dated from other sites.
2007-12-20 12:11:00 · answer #3 · answered by Simon T 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well not originally. Fossils come sorted in layers. It establishes the relative order life appeared. The rocks were dated by various radiometric means and that established the actual (rather than relative) age. This is called the Law of Fossil Succession.
Geologist now use that in the reverse. Species were known to exist for certain time so if you see a fossil it is a quick method to determine the approximate age.
2007-12-20 11:51:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 8⤊ 0⤋
Take the grand canyon for example, the layers that make that are dated from the bottom to the top- this is logical, as it is how rocks settle. Human remains are found nearer the top, after dinosaur remains(which follows the scientific fact and logic of time(from carbon dating)- that man came after the dinosaurs- which when carbon dated proves this. The layers are rock formations, not signs of life, like fossils, but can also be dated by carbon dating, some being of the same age as the fossils within them or older or younger, depending on rock movement. (basic geography on sedimentary rock and rock formation). Also allow for movement of tides and water.
2007-12-20 11:58:09 · answer #5 · answered by brainlady 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Isn't this question more appropriate in the Science section? Why are atheists who happen to be in R&S supposed to be experts in all things science? You don't have to know everything about science to conclude you don't find the God hypothesis reasonable. At any rate there are several ways scientists can date the age of something. Radioactive decay is one, there are several different elements used for this which some are better at certain conditions or ages than others. There is also Magnetostratigraphic dating, I'll post a link. Other techniques are discussed at sites below as well if you are interested.
You are welcome. =) I hope they help, I just pulled them after a quick search though. There are lots of good books on the subject too.
2007-12-20 12:05:19 · answer #6 · answered by Zen Pirate 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Its a bit like algebra... You have 2 unknowns in an equation to find the age of a fossil/layer. If you know the age of one, you know the age of the other...
Its like saying you can determine a tree by the leaves it drops, just like you can determine a leaf by the tree it falls from.
And for the person who said that evolution is an unproven theory... there is so much evidence for evolution that it can no longer be forgotten about for the sake of saving religion... As an atheist with an open mind (so kinda agnostic, or however you spell it), there is no reason why god couldnt have created evolution.
2007-12-20 11:56:44 · answer #7 · answered by Sean 3 · 6⤊ 0⤋
It does not exactly work that way, but in a more complex way than you outline it can.
If certain types of pollen and microfossils can be found consistently in rock that can be dated by lead isotopes... then the presence of those fossils can help date similar strata elsewhere, even if lead dating is not available there.
Picture it this way - if you, as a forensic pathologist, are able to determine (through various confessions, DNA tests, and/or witnesses) that certain kinds of crime always leave certain kinds of traces, you can use this knowledge as evidence down the road of what happened, even if these other kinds of evidence are absent or unreliable in these later cases.
2007-12-20 11:54:27 · answer #8 · answered by evolver 6 · 5⤊ 0⤋
This question is partially true on both counts, but not entirely true on either. There are a variety of techniques for aging layers, rocks, fossils, etc. What they're looking for is consistency of dates using as many techniques as are appropriate. In so doing, they are more certain of their results (or they can question the results when the findings are inconsistent).
I suggest you go to the Biology section or the Geology section to ask this question from experts in the field. Most of us in R&S were humanities majors, not science majors.
If you have a question about biblical literature and critical assessment, this is the place, though.
^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^
2007-12-20 11:50:05 · answer #9 · answered by NHBaritone 7 · 12⤊ 0⤋
Okay, but I'm not ever typing all this again...
When an animal died, thousands or millions of years ago... they fell down on the earth. They got buried under soil that blows, drifts or is washed over them (just like today). Over time, the minerals in the earth around the bones replace the bone... that's how we have things like fossils. It happens to plants, too. That's where the "Petrified Forest" in Arizona came from.
When the bones or plants decay and minerals seep in, the minerals are like little "bits" of the earth. They decay (like a human body) at a predictable rate. (We learn that today at the "Body Farm" in Louisiana).
We measure the rate of decay by the state of the carbon molecules in the fossil... that is one of the ways we are able to date fossils, the bits of the earth around them, and fairly accurately pinpoint their age... or get an idea of a minimum age.
There is no circular logic or reasoning. The science used is what you watch on CSI or any other crime show on TV (but without all the drama).
I hope this made sense... it's late here and I'm getting tired...
2007-12-20 11:58:50 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
actually they use carbon dating. they also test the soil for any fossilized plants... and organisms since they will be able to determine a timeline based on known organisms that lived then as well. and can aid in the timeline.
not fool proof for sure.. but a good tool to give a rough idea how old something is.
2007-12-20 11:51:39 · answer #11 · answered by pencilnbrush 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋