In their book POTASSIUM ARGON DATNG, PRINCIPLES, TECHNIQUES AND APPLICATIONS TO GEOCHRONOLOGY, Dalrymple and Lanphere sum up the whole circular process of radiometric dating: "If the potassium-argon ages of a group of rocks agree with the stratigraphic sequence determined on the basis of physical relationships of fossil evidence, then the probability is good that radiometric ages are reliable..."(page 197) Was Richard Leaky correct, did they toss out the fossil, or the theories on early man? Million) dates thought to be accurate at the time of their original publication.

abmeldebescheinigung online dating - Skull 1470 dating sites

The skull was originally dated to be almost 3 million years old.

This led Richard Leaky, the son of famed archeologist Louis Leaky to comment, "Either We toss out this skull or we toss out our theories on early man.

It simply fits no previous models of human beginnings." (National Geographic, June 1973 This 2.6 million year old date was verified by many different testing methods.

Eventually, these 2.6 million year date was revised to a more recent date (1.8 million years).

Instead of tossing out the theory, they determined that the dating methods that all agreed on the 2.6 million timeframe must all be in error because the fossil record wasn't in agreement with the dates.

This has led some credence to some creationists arguments that the dating methods aren't accurate.

Then in the late 1970's, a remarkable thing happened.

One by one (with much heated controversy apparent in the papers) the other "independent methods" re-evaluated their work in light of the new radiometric date, and confirmed the new age: I.

E.: One by one all of those former "good" dates were scrapped in favor of a younger date which was more in agreement with the theory of evolution.