Scientists, using rigorous methods have established a process to eliminate this problem by calibrating radiocarbon dating results to items of a known age.In this way, items of unknown age can be tested and an age determined to a reasonable degree of accuracy. More tomorrow where we explore the concept of isochron dating and how it neatly destroys most of the rest of these ‘issues’. The first is that atoms have always decayed at the same rate.And this isn’t really an assumption as the decay rates have been tested in the laboratory for a hundred years or so, we have an example of a natural nuclear reactor where we can measure the various products and determine the decay rates (and the fine structure constant), and we can observe the past by looking deep into the past of the universe. The sigh isn’t for the effort of writing, it’s for the effort of finding all the references.His work and his report split the scientific community in half, involving strong opinions and discussions for the next fifty years.It was Bradley's independent confirmation of the finite speed of light, published January 1, 1729, which finally ended the opposition.Within a couple of years, one of the creationist organizations had started publishing some of Barry's findings.They were still preliminary, but there was so much more to this than he had thought.
a belief in any significant variability of the constants of nature is fatal to the spirit of science, as science is now understood [emphasis his]." These words, from this man, for whatever reason he wrote them, shut down the debate on the speed of light. Partly in order to quell any further doubts about the constancy of the speed of light, in October 1983 the speed of light was declared a universal constant of nature, defined as 299,792.458 kilometers per second, which is often rounded off to the measurement we are more familiar with in the West as 186,000 miles per second. Just a year later, Barry Setterfield was born in Australia. That year he received a book from a friend, a book on astronomical anomalies." Interestingly enough, every time it was measured over the next few hundred years, it seemed to be a little slower than before.This could be explained away, as the first measurements were unbelievably rough compared to the technical accuracy later. When the same person did the same test using the same equipment at a later period in time, the speed was slower. These results kicked off a series of lively debates in the scientific community during the first half of the 20th century.In the meantime, Lambert Dolphin, the physicist at Stanford who had originally requested the paper, teamed up with professional statistician Alan Montgomery to take the proverbial fine-tooth comb through the Norman-Setterfield paper to check the statistics used.Their defense of the paper and the statistical use of the data was then published in a scientific journal, and Montgomery went on to present a public defense at the 1994 International Creation Conference. Since then, a multitude of papers on cosmology and the speed of light have shown up in journals and on the web.